19 ms·
More than 1/3 of all access to Google is now over IPv6
- tthebst 6y agoWhy are is there such a difference between countries?
- hestefisk 6y agoCould be ISP adoption. Some ISPs have been more progressive in ipv6 than others.
- theduality 6y agoMy ISP in the Netherlands (Ziggo) provides me with native IPv6 if I use their supplied router, but forces me onto IPv4 when I use theirs in bridge mode in conjunction with my own router. Still not sure why they do that.
- dhsysusbsjsi 6y agoIn Australia I get a /56 block
- lbotos 6y agoI'd assume it's because they expect that if you are using your own equipment it could be older and by just forcing v4 it reduces support costs. 100% pure speculation.
- majewsky 6y agoI have the same situation with Vodafone Cable in Germany. I was told it is because of 6-to-4 bridging. A customer on IPv6 must be able to bridge to IPv4 to reach IPv4-only servers, but a customer on IPv4 will probably never encounter IPv6-only servers (except when using an IPv6 testing tool). I'm not a networking expert, but AFAIK there's nothing stopping them from making their 6-to-4 bridging available to customers with a custom router. However, getting that stuff up and running correctly can be tricky, so it would involve a lot of support burden on the ISP's side. Hence why they don't offer that, they just drop those customers down to a configuration where the customer gets to use well-known protocols only (IPv4 and DHCPv4 over Ethernet).
- buro9 6y agoThese ISPs are using DS-Lite, Dual-Stack Lite. https://www.juniper.net/documentation/en_US/junos/topics/topic-map/security-ipv6-dual-stack-lite.html https://www.juniper.net/documentation/en_US/junos/topics/top... (this isn't a purely Juniper thing, but they have nice diagrams on their documentation) It's a kind of carrier grade NAT with 4over6 baked in. Depending on the version of this they are relying on your modem to perform encap/decap of 4to6, hence when you switch to modem mode or your own router you fall back to what the network truly is... v4. This is what the knuckle draggers at Virgin Media are contemplating apparently. In the UK the best option for IPv6 is https://www.aa.net.uk/ https://www.aa.net.uk/ but unfortunately for me the DSL speed in my area is pretty bad due to being a few KMs from the exchange. The alternatives to all of this is to run your own Wireguard instance elsewhere on a v6 network, and tunnel the entire home network to it.
- tialaramex 6y ago> unfortunately for me the DSL speed in my area is pretty bad due to being a few KMs from the exchange. For VDSL the distance to an exchange shouldn't matter. The copper runs to a green box in the street, then another newer-looking green box nearby (or in some cases attached) with fibre in it takes the VDSL signal - and only old-school voice line conversations go to the exchange. So definitely if previous ADSL speeds were poor it's time to check again. If you just meant that as shorthand then no worries, but I've run into way too many people who have the idea that all DSL is the same.
- oarsinsync 6y agoBT and Hyperoptic both also provide native IPv6 in the UK Hyperoptic will give you a globally unique IPv4 address for an extra £5/month, and otherwise will stick you behind their CGN.
- Dagger2 6y agoDS-lite gives you a v6-only internet connection. v4 is provisioned as a service over the top of that, using a tunnel between your router and a server inside the ISP. The underlying network is v6, so a router without DS-lite support will only get v6 (which will generate support calls because "your router must support DS-lite" is too complicated for many people to understand). My guess is that turning on bridge mode also migrates you from the ISP's newer DS-lite service to their older v4-only one. This is unfortunately common in DS-lite deployments; ideally the old service would also have v6 so that you aren't forced to choose between v6 and non-CGNATed v4.
- eloisant 6y agoIt's funny, I would have expected the countries who got the lion's share of IPv4 addresses to lag behind in IPv6 adoption, but it's the other way around.
- _-___________-_ 6y agoI think it's often out of necessity, when you have rapidly increasing numbers of devices (smartphones, IoT) and a large population. This could explain why IPv6 deployment is widespread in Asia. At some point maintaining huge CG-NAT deployments gets more expensive than implementing IPv6...
- deleted 6y ago[deleted]
- syncsynchalt 6y agoA large chunk of the US adoption will have been driven by Comcast. They were early adopters and innovators, not least because they have more CPE (cable modems) than are addressable with RFC1918 addresses.
- jakeogh 6y agoIt's a perquisite for tagging individuals. IPv4 not having enough addresses is a good thing. With IPv6 identification (and therefore control) can be down to the person globally, but IPv4 forces NAT's. The inability to label all the things is a feature. NAT's are borders; they prevent fine grained censorship without larger consequences. $ zcat /proc/config.gz | grep -i ipv6 # CONFIG_IPV6 is not set
- dogma1138 6y agoNot just tagging many ISPs especially FTTH/P don’t randomize IPv6 addresses so all the IP addresses in your town, neighborhood and even building share the same prefixes and they are hierarchical so by just knowing your IP address one could figure out where you live.
- lrem 6y agoNetwork-wise this is a feature. Having the address space reflect network layout allows for vastly simpler, thus more efficient, routing tables.
- jakeogh 6y agoOh the poor SRAM on those ASIC's.
- lrem 6y ago> Apple tells app devs to use IPv6 as it's 1.4 times faster than IPv4 Do you have better insight than Apple?
- jakeogh 6y agoThe faster excuse. yawn Bandwidth (aka time waiting) is like a gas, it expands to fill all available human tolerance. It's also always there to pretend the major corps care about (insert 15s ad here) it. If you really measure response time, frame by frame, Windows 3.1 is faster than Windows Billion. Process improvements in hardware obviate any trivial 40% benchmark. 400%, maybe, lets talk about it. It's utterly irrelevant compared to what being to tag every item every person ever comes into contact with and the interactions of those items with other items; iterated as many times as desired.
- barbegal 6y agoThe graph is interesting when you zoom in, much more IPv6 use over the holiday period and also recently during the period of lockdown measures. I would guess the majority of IPv6 traffic comes from devices on 4G networks. More devices are on 4G when visiting family and friends over the Christmas period and when working remotely.
- Faaak 6y agoIPv6 is much less common on enterprise networks (old firewall which don't support v6 still).
- wtallis 6y agoIt's not just 4G. It's consumer networking in general, which isn't held back by legacy enterprise networking equipment. When your residential ISP turns on IPv6 for their network, they also tend to turn on IPv6 for the modem+router combo devices they lease to run your LAN. Or if you're the kind of power user that buys your own router, it's almost certainly new enough to support IPv6.
- neals 6y agoJust checked. Mine does support it. Should I turn it on?
- jl6 6y agoDoes IPv6 on an internal network offer any benefit to enterprises (not talking about ISPs here), who may view NAT as a form of defence in depth?
- treysis 6y agoYes. It offers better scalability! E.g. at my university, our institute has its own IPv4 /24. That means a maximum of ~253 or so devices. We have exhausted that number and for every new client, an old one has to go. Now with a /64 this would be no problem at all. To mitigate this the IT department is currently using VLAN-tagging for some of the devices. But it gets convoluted. And the more convoluted it gets, the higher is the chance for misconfiguration, errors, and security issues. Yet, they don't want to make the switch to IPv6 already.
- scaglio 6y agoI think it depends on ISP adoption AND the IoT devices spread.
- Yeri 6y agoSad that some IoT frameworks (ie Particle) do not (yet) support IPv6.
- hansjorg 6y agoChina is aiming for 100% in 2025 according to APNIC, so they've got some ways to go from the 0.53% seen by Google. Is the great firewall ipv4 only perhaps?
- BadBadJellyBean 6y agoGoogle is blocked in China. So I guess not a lot of traffic is coming from Chinese IPs.
- skissane 6y agoWhere is the Chinese traffic Google is seeing coming from then? I wonder if anyone is exempt from the Great Firewall? What about senior officials including Xi himself? I’m sure if he asked for unfiltered Internet he’d get it.
- _-___________-_ 6y agoSome Google properties work in China, and some blocked properties do work very occasionally.
- hansjorg 6y agoGoogle has a lot of services and landing pages though, is everything completely blocked?
- _-___________-_ 6y agoNo.
- Dagger2 6y agoThat would just lower the number of samples though. For the blocking to drive the v6 percentage down, it would have to happen more often on v6 than on v4. ...which is certainly possible, but just "Google is blocked" alone doesn't cover it.
- deleted 6y ago
- Bnshsysjab 6y agoCan someone let AWS know? I was annoyed to find out that lightsail does not support IPv6, in 2020...
- mkj 6y agoAnd Google's own cloud servers
- jasonvorhe 6y agoComing in 2021 though.
- tambre 6y agoSource? That would be great news, but I can't find anything.
- jiggawatts 6y agoDon't hold your breath. Azure officially has IPv6 support, but like every other cloud vendor, they are 100% native IPv4 with IPv6 bolted on as an afterthought. For example, it's impossible to create an IPv6-only Azure vNet. The metadata API endpoint is IPv4-only (169.254.169.254). So on, and so forth...
- p_l 6y agoInterestingly enough, you can now access Google services over v6 from inside GCP, but only them for now.
- lma21 6y agoExcuse my ignorance, on what layer do we need IPv6 when deploying our apps/systems/whatever on AWS? Is IPv4 becoming a severe problem for such things?
- Bnshsysjab 6y agoGmail blocks my mailserver, I recently discovered it’s the lack of ipv6 that causes it.
- Proven 6y agoGood - if they continue like that soon fixed IPv4 addresses could become easier to come by
- dijit 6y agoAnd yet, when I beg my google cloud rep for IPv6 addresses on instances (or on anything that isn’t the load balancer) I get told that it is not on the immediate roadmap. The cloud providers have pushed back ipv6 adoption so hard imo. At least native ipv6 access. I know they’ve thrown in some token support and you /can/ make something work; but compared to VPS providers which consistently deliver machines with IPv6 addresses by default- it’s a huge barrier to adoption. You have to really /want/ it, and most people don’t see the value. Unless it’s a backend for an iOS App. It really frustrates me.
- ilogik 6y agoall of google's internal architecture was built with only IPv4. Take a look at kubernetes, which is based on google's Borg. It's only now, slowly getting IPv6 support
- justincormack 6y agoI don't think thats true, I think internally Google uses ipv6, see for example https://www.usenix.org/legacy/events/lisa11/tech/full_papers/Babiker.pdf https://www.usenix.org/legacy/events/lisa11/tech/full_papers... about end users, but I believe the data centers are also ipv6 internally.
- Yeri 6y agoGoogle definitely uses IPv6 internally (ie office WiFi is now using IPv6 only (with the router doing translations to IPv4 if the site doesn’t support IPv6) and afaik most of the servers in the datacenter/clusters are IPv6 only now as they ran out of IPv4 LAN IPs for their clusters. I just think that there’s little demand on cloud (and tons of other high prior work)
- jiggawatts 6y agoThere's little demand for half-baked support. There would be a lot of demand if IPv6 wasn't an "also ran", a "tack on", some checkbox to tick. Think about how much network complexity would simply vanish if everything used only public routable IPv6 ranges. No more split DNS. No more NAT gateways. No need for a separate "public IP" and "private IP". No need to carefully "carve up" the 10.x.x.x range to carefully avoid overlaps... even with future business partners. No need to worry about the "size" of subnets or accidentally running out of addresses in the cramped /24 subnets most people allocate. It goes on and on. And on. But none of that is possible in the public cloud, because it is IPv4 first, and 99% IPv4 by default, and if there's IPv6 support, it's broken, or incomplete, or half-arsed.
- walton_simons 6y agoMy ISP supports IPv6, and while I can understand why a large organisation would want to use it (especially given the increasing cost and scarcity of IPv4 blocks), I'm still yet to be persuaded of its benefits for home users. I admit that I only have a very cursory understanding of how it works, and perhaps I'm just stuck in my ways, but the scale and complexity seems so extreme compared to IPv4, with no compensating advantages that I can see. So all my devices become globally routable. And? I can already do everything I want and need to do with a single IPv4 address and NAT. Even just working out what IPv6 devices are on my network and who they're communicating with seems very difficult given the giant address space. I'm slightly ashamed to admit this (feels very anti progress!), but I've blocked all the IPv6 traffic on my home LAN. Devices can still talk to each other, but no IPv6 packets are allowed out to the internet. Everything still works fine. My firewall blocks a few hundred MB per day of IPv6 traffic, and I have no idea what any of it is. Very happy to be told why I shouldn't do this though.
- gvjddbnvdrbv 6y agoI'm certainly going to be dropping all incoming IPv6 packets when my ISP foists IPv6 on us.
- throwaway2048 6y agoThe advantage of ipv6 for consumers is that many ISPs (especially non american ISPs) don't and can't hand out public IPv4 addresses, due to the lack of remaining IPv4 addresses for them to allocate. The choice isn't between every device being globally routable (which is easily solved by a firewall WITHOUT NAT) and a single routable address, the choice is between zero public routable addresses, and as many as you need.
- tialaramex 6y ago[The parent edited their post to render my comment wrong]
- throwaway2048 6y ago
- Legogris 6y agoIn Japan, consumer Internet is generally IPv6 first since years. For my ISP, I get IPv6 directly but have to configure a provided ipip6 tunnel (or set up my own) to get external IPv4 connectivity.
- LUmBULtERA 6y agoMeanwhile, Verizon FIOS here still doesn't offer IPv6.
- zenexer 6y agoComing soon! https://www.verizon.com/support/residential/internet/getting-started/learn-about-ipv6 https://www.verizon.com/support/residential/internet/getting... How long have they been saying that now? Five years? Ten years? Probably about ten years.
- theandrewbailey 6y agoThey've been saying that since I signed up for FIOS, around 2011. I've heard that some FIOS deployments/cities have IPv6, but I don't know which, and it's not mine (Pittsburgh).
- kokx 6y agoA large part of the problem with IPv6 is that most developers and SA's don't have a lot of knowledge about it. This is why everything new is still built with IPv4 in mind, instead of thinking forward to IPv6. I think we could easily blame lack of IPv6 support at cloud providers to lack of knowledge with the developers and SA's they attract. If more developers and SA's would have access to IPv6 at home, the practical knowledge of how to work with IPv6 would build up more quickly. I would experiment with it more, and build up more knowledge. Unfortunately, my ISP does not support IPv6. This severely limits experimentation with it, since all experimentation is locked behind my home network.
- mshroyer 6y ago> Unfortunately, my ISP does not support IPv6. This severely limits experimentation with it, since all experimentation is locked behind my home network. You probably know about this already, but there are free IPv6 tunnel brokers you can use to experiment. I previously used Hurricane Electric's tunnel, back before Comcast had native IPv6 support: https://www.tunnelbroker.net/ https://www.tunnelbroker.net/
- Decade 6y agoI previously used Hurricane Electric, too, but Netflix blocked it. A more practical challenge, Hurricane Electric is a 6in4 tunnel, not layered over TCP nor UDP. Some ISP-provided residential gateway devices (AT&T) don’t support 6in4, not even if you configure your device as a “DMZ” with a public IP address. Also, I frequently find myself in situations with IPv4 NAT and no public IPv4 addresses at all. The only free IPv6 tunnel service that supported UDP was SixXS, which shut down in 2017. Nowadays, AT&T supports IPv6 natively, and I went through an annoying amount of effort to bypass their gateway device and control the entire /60 instead of being limited to a /64 and being limited by their NAT. https://github.com/jaysoffian/eap_proxy https://github.com/jaysoffian/eap_proxy
- MayeulC 6y agoI host some services at home, mainly targeted at friends and family. Some are IPv6-only, because it's much easier to manage from my side. I whish I could add an A record for these that pointed to a reserved IP address that would inform clients the service is IPv6-only. For now, I just don't put any, and browsers just display a generic error. Since some DNS don't answer with IPv6 addresses, the browser couldn't even provide a meaningful error message if it tried to. Would that be worth an RFC? What IP address should be used?
- growse 6y agoIsn't the presence of an AAAA record but the lack of an A record already a sufficient indicator that the service is IPv6 only?
- MayeulC 6y agoIt should, but: * I don't know any browser or app that display a special, informative message in that specific case. * You need a DNS server that answers AAAA record to detect this. Some ISPs do not provide IPv6 connectivity, nor do their DNS servers provide AAAA records. In most places I know, especially when talking about individuals, people use their ISP-provided DNS servers.
- dxld 6y agoYou might be interested in this service: https://no-ipv4-here.ungleich.ch/ https://no-ipv4-here.ungleich.ch/
- MayeulC 6y agoAh, thank you, that's quite close to what I wanted. Ideally, it would be ran by a CA to work flawlessly with web browsers. Even better if web browsers could display a message of their own, recognizing this IP address.
- Decade 6y agoFor web services, one sad way to handle it is to proxy through Cloudflare. IPv4, IPv6, DNSSEC, TLS at the cost of selling your users out to a budding monopoly.
- alex_young 6y agoOn a phone this graph looks really great until you see the scale is 10 years. At this rate we should see full adoption sometime in 2040. Swell.
- Animats 6y agoIt took decades to reach 5% in 2015, but now we're moving. 50% looks to be 2 years away. It's surprising that China doesn't show as dark green on the world map. China was into IPv6 early; the address space was needed.
- thekyle 6y agoI believe that all of Google's services are blocked in China, so they wouldn't have that data.
- azurezyq 6y agoGoogle's data is biased since the service virtually doesn't exist there. This one better describes the situation: https://blog.apnic.net/2019/01/03/ipv6-in-china/ https://blog.apnic.net/2019/01/03/ipv6-in-china/
- pkaye 6y agoWhy so low an adoption in China? Is it because Google in not widely used there so it not captured by Google data?
- willhk 6y agoPure conjecture as I don't know how they're collecting the location data, but I imagine all Google traffic from China is going through a VPN. So maybe the vast majority of VPNs used by Chinese users are IPv4 only?
- myself248 6y agoJust turn off ipv4 for one minute every day. Next month, increase it to 2 minutes. A minor inconvenience, but a major motivator.
- ed25519FUUU 6y agoPunish people that don't care and have no control over whether or not their ISP supports IPv6? IPv6 affects everyday internet users exactly 0%. It's rational for them not to care about it.
- bspammer 6y agoTo me that's more of an argument for GP's idea. Make it rational for them to care about it. Display a big "You can't visit this website because <ISP name> won't let you. Here's their email:" Obviously it's not worth it for any website that matters to actually do this, but it's fun to think about.
- jiggawatts 6y agoIt's more like the carbon tax. The companies with lazy network admins are "externalising" the cost of their outdated networking on the larger Internet ecosystem.
- jagger27 6y agoStill waiting on Bell Canada to let me be part of the next third.
- ksec 6y agoI often wonder if we improve the usability of IPv6, like a subset of Ipv6, would it help adoption? Things like using only numbers and not issuing address with letters. We would still get larger than 64bit of address space, but we dont have to work with the gibberish address.
- Decade 6y agoNo. There’s no way around IPv6 addresses being 4 times as long as IPv4 addresses. I mean, Google DNS is 2001:4860:4860::8888, and in the IPv4 style it would have been: 32.1.72.96.72.96.0.0.0.0.0.0.0.0.136.136 I’m sure if IPv6 were formatted like IPv4, Google would have formatted the address differently, like, 32.1.72.96.72.96.0.0.0.0.0.0.8.8.8.8 The point is there is no way around the address being uncomfortably long, and doing it in a new style with hexadecimal allows both easier manual calculation of the address and an opportunity to truncate all those 0s in manually allocated addresses.
- ksec 6y ago>2001:4860:4860::8888 That is exactly what I meant. Instead of 20FA:FF00 etc.... the sets should use Numbers only. It is still within IPv6 spec, we just dont user letters ( Yet )