5 ms·

IPv6 keeps being a running joke. At least some people still have some sense of humour about it.

deleted 10y ago
[deleted]
toast0 10y ago
IPv6 is silently gaining a lot of steam lately. Akamai reports[1] close to 50% from comcast and att over ipv6, and 80% from verizon, 72% from t-mobile. Reliance Jio, a new mobile carrier in India is doing 47%. [1] https://www.akamai.com/us/en/our-thinking/state-of-the-internet-report/state-of-the-internet-ipv6-adoption-visualization.jsp https://www.akamai.com/us/en/our-thinking/state-of-the-inter... (click 'networks')
- geodel 10y ago
  Thanks, very interesting data set. Shocking to see India went from 1% Ipv6 to 22% in just a period of 6 months or so due to Reliance Network.
  - deleted 10y ago
    [deleted]
djsumdog 10y ago
IPv6 needed to happen a decade ago. We have exhausted the IPv4 space. I feel IPv6 suffered from huge usability issues, although it can be worked around with good provisioning systems that automatically setup DNS entries. We're going to get to the point where spinning up a VPS with an IPv4 address is going to get increasingly more and more expensive, unless we make some huge strides in moving to IPv6.
- nabaffyub 10y ago
  We need to 1) force owners of legacy /8s to give up on them, and 2) make sure all mobile ISPs worldwide and residential connections in developing countries have their customers behind a CGNAT 2) would also help a lot with the upcoming IoT security shitstorm
  - rroriz 10y ago
    CGNAT prevents users from hosting personal services - its a PitA.
    - tlrobinson 10y ago
      Yeah, I just discovered my ISP (WebPass) has exhausted their IPv4 allocation [1] and is transitioning residential customers to private IPv4 addresses, and I'm not really sure how to set up a VPN on IPv4 now. I guess I need to set up a tunnel over IPv6 somehow? 1. https://webpass.net/blog/ipv4-exhausted https://webpass.net/blog/ipv4-exhausted
    - syncsynchalt 10y ago
      I (hope to) see CGNAT as the stick - with v6 being the carrot that allows point-to-point apps and personal hosting to work reliably again. That requires the ISP to offer v6, of course. I'm on Comcast which, say what you will about them, has been years ahead of everyone else for carrier-grade v6 support.
  - dsl 10y ago
    You do realize most of the legacy /8 owners are actively using them, right?
    - api_or_ipa 10y ago
      I'm sure Apple, Ford and the US postal service are all using all 16 million addresses. The fact is that most intra-network traffic doesn't need an IPv4 address since it'll be NAT'd anyways. So even if Apple has 16 million IoT devices around campus, it doesn't actually need 16 million addresses. Fun fact, Stanford used to have an /8 but returned it since it wasn't using all it's addresses.
  - X-Istence 10y ago
    Forcing owners of legacy /8's to give them up is hugely cost prohibitive for them. Various orgs with their own /8's might not announce them, but use them extensively internally. Also, it wouldn't really help stave off the amount of IP's required, and we'd still be out in months.
- jburgess777 10y ago
  RFC1833 "Internet Protocol, Version 6 (IPv6) Specification"[1] was published in Dec 1995, over 20 years ago. I think the transition took a lot longer than anyone anticipated, not least because so many people considered IPv4 was good enough to be getting on with. Only after the IPv4 address exhaustion occurred did many people finally understand that IPv6 was a necessity and not just something they could avoid by deploying another layer of NAT. The ISP I use was an early adopter of IPv6[2] and the first time I got an IPv6 address I remember wondering what all the fuss was about. For me as a consumer having an IPv6 address made almost no difference to my on-line experience. While that might sounds negative, it is actually a good thing, even several years ago IPv6 "just worked" for consumers. Today we see many ISPs deploying IPv6 on consumer connections. The Google statistics[3] show just how rapid the growth of IPv6 has been in the past few years. If you zoom in you can see the positive spikes which occur at weekends. These show that home and mobile connections tend to have a higher IPv6 penetration than office networks. 1: https://tools.ietf.org/html/rfc1883 https://tools.ietf.org/html/rfc1883 2: http://aa.net.uk/kb-broadband-ipv6.html http://aa.net.uk/kb-broadband-ipv6.html 3: https://www.google.com/intl/en/ipv6/statistics.html https://www.google.com/intl/en/ipv6/statistics.html

deleted 10y ago

[deleted]

IPv6 is silently gaining a lot of steam lately. Akamai reports[1] close to 50% from comcast and att over ipv6, and 80% from verizon, 72% from t-mobile. Reliance Jio, a new mobile carrier in India is doing 47%. [1] https://www.akamai.com/us/en/our-thinking/state-of-the-internet-report/state-of-the-internet-ipv6-adoption-visualization.jsp https://www.akamai.com/us/en/our-thinking/state-of-the-inter... (click 'networks')

geodel 10y ago
Thanks, very interesting data set. Shocking to see India went from 1% Ipv6 to 22% in just a period of 6 months or so due to Reliance Network.
- deleted 10y ago
  [deleted]

djsumdog 10y ago

IPv6 needed to happen a decade ago. We have exhausted the IPv4 space. I feel IPv6 suffered from huge usability issues, although it can be worked around with good provisioning systems that automatically setup DNS entries. We're going to get to the point where spinning up a VPS with an IPv4 address is going to get increasingly more and more expensive, unless we make some huge strides in moving to IPv6.

nabaffyub 10y ago
We need to 1) force owners of legacy /8s to give up on them, and 2) make sure all mobile ISPs worldwide and residential connections in developing countries have their customers behind a CGNAT 2) would also help a lot with the upcoming IoT security shitstorm
- rroriz 10y ago
  CGNAT prevents users from hosting personal services - its a PitA.
  - tlrobinson 10y ago
    Yeah, I just discovered my ISP (WebPass) has exhausted their IPv4 allocation [1] and is transitioning residential customers to private IPv4 addresses, and I'm not really sure how to set up a VPN on IPv4 now. I guess I need to set up a tunnel over IPv6 somehow? 1. https://webpass.net/blog/ipv4-exhausted https://webpass.net/blog/ipv4-exhausted
  - syncsynchalt 10y ago
    I (hope to) see CGNAT as the stick - with v6 being the carrot that allows point-to-point apps and personal hosting to work reliably again. That requires the ISP to offer v6, of course. I'm on Comcast which, say what you will about them, has been years ahead of everyone else for carrier-grade v6 support.
- dsl 10y ago
  You do realize most of the legacy /8 owners are actively using them, right?
  - api_or_ipa 10y ago
    I'm sure Apple, Ford and the US postal service are all using all 16 million addresses. The fact is that most intra-network traffic doesn't need an IPv4 address since it'll be NAT'd anyways. So even if Apple has 16 million IoT devices around campus, it doesn't actually need 16 million addresses. Fun fact, Stanford used to have an /8 but returned it since it wasn't using all it's addresses.
- X-Istence 10y ago
  Forcing owners of legacy /8's to give them up is hugely cost prohibitive for them. Various orgs with their own /8's might not announce them, but use them extensively internally. Also, it wouldn't really help stave off the amount of IP's required, and we'd still be out in months.
jburgess777 10y ago
RFC1833 "Internet Protocol, Version 6 (IPv6) Specification"[1] was published in Dec 1995, over 20 years ago. I think the transition took a lot longer than anyone anticipated, not least because so many people considered IPv4 was good enough to be getting on with. Only after the IPv4 address exhaustion occurred did many people finally understand that IPv6 was a necessity and not just something they could avoid by deploying another layer of NAT. The ISP I use was an early adopter of IPv6[2] and the first time I got an IPv6 address I remember wondering what all the fuss was about. For me as a consumer having an IPv6 address made almost no difference to my on-line experience. While that might sounds negative, it is actually a good thing, even several years ago IPv6 "just worked" for consumers. Today we see many ISPs deploying IPv6 on consumer connections. The Google statistics[3] show just how rapid the growth of IPv6 has been in the past few years. If you zoom in you can see the positive spikes which occur at weekends. These show that home and mobile connections tend to have a higher IPv6 penetration than office networks. 1: https://tools.ietf.org/html/rfc1883 https://tools.ietf.org/html/rfc1883 2: http://aa.net.uk/kb-broadband-ipv6.html http://aa.net.uk/kb-broadband-ipv6.html 3: https://www.google.com/intl/en/ipv6/statistics.html https://www.google.com/intl/en/ipv6/statistics.html