6 ms·

5% of Google's traffic is now IPv6

155 points by AndrewDucker 12y ago

Strom 12y ago
See previous discussion on this https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=8680652 https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=8680652
thomasfoster96 12y ago
The one thing I gather from that graph is that over weekends, IPv6 use spikes. I assume that this means that networks or devices at companies and schools are lagging behind at using IPv6?
- matthewarkin 12y ago
  Yea, there could be a number of reasons for this. Companies may not see a need to upgrade to IPv6 just yet, all their internal machines have nat-ed addresses and they have enough public ip addresses. They use some legacy software / hardware X that doesn't support IPv6 (hey, some companies are still paying Microsoft to support XP).
  - skrause 12y ago
    Or when I look at the company I work for it's just that nobody bothers because not having IPv6 hasn't caused a single problem so far.
    - Arnt 12y ago
      Until quite recently I haven't heard of anyone having a problem with supporting v4 only. But that time is ending; the first problem I've heard of is a VoIP provider who has problems with customers on DS-Lite. In about three years it's quite possible that IPv4 has the sort of occasional tunnel/reliability issues that IPv6 had five years ago. "Google works, so it's not my connection at fault, it must be your site that's broken." The big reason to support IPv6 now is IMO that (all else being equal) it's better to add v6 support when you roll something out than to introduce it later.
    - atomt 12y ago
      At work (a larger enterprise in Europe) we already see quite a bit of pain with IPv4. B2B connections are increasingly not using globally unique addressing anymore, so we often need to use prefix NAT and application level proxies to bridge clashing address space. This in turn is a support nightmare and is hurting reliability. Our network guys seems to love the extra complexity, though.
      - Someone1234 12y ago
        I hate VPN-ing into other people's networks, it is such a pain-point. As you say, you have address/space clashes, and all kinds of other (sometimes even security) problems. It sounds easier than it is, the main issue is scaling. Need to connect to one other person for B2B? Trivial. Two? A little harder. Ten, twenty, fifty, ouch...
- sargun 12y ago
  Corporate IT tends to lag in these sorts of things. Given that most people have ISP provided CPE, and that's the only device in their homes, it allows the ISP to have a much easier time migrating that user to IPv6. The rollout mechanisms have been well studied. On the other hand, corporations tend not to have the same level of skill, and focus in terms of networking as an ISP, like a Comcast, or an AT&T. Additionally, they're not as incentivized to move everyone to IPv6, because often times, it's easier, cheaper, and more realistic to buy some IPs. Moving to IPv6 at the office is a difficult project for most, as there is still a ton of enterprise gear that's IPv6-less. Even at that, enabling enterprise applications with IPv6 tends to be a massive nightmare. Lastly, the security implications of IPv6 are not well understood by most people in the corporate environment.
- organsnyder 12y ago
  In the United States, Comcast is one of the largest ISPs that has deployed IPv6, and they've (purportedly) rolled it out to 100% of their residential customers (with supported CPE). However, they're still working on their IPv6 deployment for business customers (still in trial, availability "any day now"). This could account for a lot of it, especially in the US.
mtrimpe 12y ago
I hope everyone is aware that IPv6 is the perfect way to bypass rate-limiting for systems that analyse Google results (for SEO ea.) There's a good chance a lot of this traffic consists of those bots testing Google's results ....
- skrause 12y ago
  Rate-limiting is still easy with IPv6, you just limit whole subnets (e.g. a /64) instead of single IP addresses. I guess Google has figured that out as well. I actually do believe that this is real traffic. Here in Germany the number of connections with native IPv6 is rising constantly. At home all my devices are always using IPv6 when connecting to Google services because I also have native IPv6. Those 12.26% for Germany look pretty believable.
  - DieBuche 12y ago
    In Germany anyone on the telekom network who has a new contract or changed an exisiting contract in the last 16 months or so has IPv6.
    - padelt 12y ago
      Also everyone on Unitymedia. Dual stack if you're a lucky older customer, DS lite (CPE has routable IPv6 and NATed IPv4) if you are new or get something changed.
    - TillE 12y ago
      I just noticed that a few weeks ago, with no change in contract. I have a resold Telekom VDSL line, and I was quite pleased to find that I now have a native IPv6 connection with a /56 assigned. I'd tried some IPv6 settings in my router last year, and 6to4 worked pretty well at that point.
    - danieldk 12y ago
      As said in another comment, Kabel BW too. IPv6 with IPv4 tunnelling over DS-Lite.
- 12y ago
NKCSS 12y ago
Cool to see Belgium at almost 30%... we can learn something from our neighbours (only 2.5% here in .nl)
deleted 12y ago
[deleted]
sargun 12y ago
I wonder if this will lead to Docker finally acknowledging IPv6: ° https://github.com/docker/docker/issues/2174 https://github.com/docker/docker/issues/2174 ° https://github.com/docker/docker/pull/8947 https://github.com/docker/docker/pull/8947 ° https://github.com/docker/docker/issues/3609 https://github.com/docker/docker/issues/3609 etc... https://github.com/docker/docker/search?q=ipv6&type=Issues&utf8=%E2%9C%93 https://github.com/docker/docker/search?q=ipv6&type=Issues&u...
AndrewDucker 12y ago
Worth noting that the traffic is more than doubling every 12 months. 2.5% in December 2013 1% in December 2012 0.4% in December 2011 0.2% in December 2010 If that carries on then it's 10% in 2015, 20% in 2016, and 40% in 2017, with everyone switched over somewhere in 2018/19.
- richmarr 12y ago
  80% in 2018 160% in 2019 Apologies for being flippant. Just making the point that you're extrapolating without spending time on the likely shape of that adoption. It seems more likely that this is an S-curve, and that we'll continue to see IPv4 traffic for the next decade, maybe longer.
  - AndrewDucker 12y ago
    I think it pretty likely that once we reach 50% it will switch from "That thing that techies care about" to "Something people assume everyone has", and that any remaining ISPs that don't provide IPv6 will rush to get it done. I'm sure that IPv4 support will continue for a fair while though.
    - richmarr 12y ago
      What's the mechanism that makes that first company drop support for IPv4? Cost? It feels like it'd need to be a dramatic cost saving in order to kick in at 50% adoption.
      - kalleboo 12y ago
        Look further down in this thread and there are already users in Germany being signed up on DS-Lite. Their only IPv4 access is behind carrier-grade NAT. Anything that wants to make a direct inbound connection and doesn't want to proxy (VOIP, games etc) will need to support IPv6
      - mgbmtl 12y ago
        As with https, moving forward has a cost, but at some point, the cost of staying compatible with old protocols is higher. Before the switch, you have to deal with training staff for the new tech. Once the switch starts happening, you need to train the staff to deal with the risks of keeping the old tech. For example, I find it easier to have an https-only web infrastructure. Too bad for old deprecated browsers who cannot support proper encryption (and therefore become a security risk for me, and a waste of time to support). Dual protocols (v4 and v6) take more time and money to manage. Initial training can be harsh. Some first-gen hardware was terrible. However, now that it's done, I can't wait to switch off IPv4.
tazjin 12y ago
In the meantime Google Compute Engine does not support IPv6.
- kawsper 12y ago
  I am also waiting on IPv6 support from MaxCDN.
- kalleboo 12y ago
  Same with Amazon EC2 - they only support it on their load balancers
- theandrewbailey 12y ago
  Many residential ISPs don't. I'm stuck on Verizon to enable IPv6 on FIOS.
  - tazjin 12y ago
    My ISP at home (Bahnhof) actually offers IPv6, I haven't asked them to activate it yet though.
  - dan1234 12y ago
    Non of the major UK ISPs seem to be passed the planning stage and my mobile network seems to be using carrier grade NAT.
  - danieldk 12y ago
    I am on IPv6-only (Kabel BW, Germany), IPv4 goes over DS-Lite.
  - 2bluesc 12y ago
    Comcast in San Francisco supports native IPv6 on residential accounts. Even did it (almost) right and include a /60 prefix delegation.
    - theandrewbailey 12y ago
      For all the complaints against Comcast's network, they are really on it with IPv6.
liveoneggs 12y ago
I think the US is mostly mobile
- zaphoyd 12y ago
  Comcast and Time Warner Cable both have larged wired IPv6 footprints (28% and 12% of their quite sizable customer bases respectively), as do a number of universities.
  - atomt 12y ago
    And AT&T with their huge 6rd deployment for DSL.
kibwen 12y ago
Can anyone explain what "latency / impact" means on the per-country graph? I can't quite make sense of it: United Kingdom: 0ms latency, 0.02% impact Romania: -10ms latency, 0.01% impact Bulgaria: 10ms latency, 0.03% impact Japan: 20ms latency, 0.03% impact All that I can divine so far is that 20ms appears to be the threshold at which your country will receive a red tint regardless of your adoption percentage.
- icebraining 12y ago
  I believe the latency is the difference vis-a-vis IPv4.
skywhopper 12y ago
Two comments about the presentation itself: 1. The color selections on the "Per-country IPv6 Adoption" tab are abysmal for those of us with poor color perception. 2. Since we're talking about replacing outdated technology, why use a Flash-based graph on the "IPv6 Adoption" tab?
- dhm 12y ago
  The graphic in the "Per-Country IPv6 adoption" tab appears to be implemented with scalable vector graphics.
  - deleted 12y ago
    [deleted]
zacwest 12y ago
My ISP here in SF, Webpass, has begun deploying their customers behind an IPv4 NAT with an IPv6 /64 prefix. I think this trend is going to be more common with consumer ISPs. I mind a little bit, since VPN access is impossible on IPv4, but with mobile carriers deploying IPv6 I think I will care less as time goes on. It is noticeably faster to use IPv6 with Google, something like 4ms vs. 30ms connection times. I'm not sure if it's a more efficient route, or underutilized routers handling the traffic.
pwr22 12y ago
UK is still abysmal :(
smcl 12y ago
Has anyone got any idea what the (relatively) big spike on October 4th 2014 was? A quick google revealed it's not some "World IPV6 day" or something (though there was something like that on 2011 which had a next-to-zero impact). Was there maybe a new phone or console (or an OS update released to either) released?
- Caketh 12y ago
  I would hazard a guess that that was when global routing table hit 512K routes and crashed a few hundred ISP routers worldwide? That might have been earlier in the year though.
IvyMike 12y ago
This seems like a good place to ask--I'm on Time Warner. I have an ipv6 address, and can get to ipv6.google.com, so it seems like everything is in place. But all my web browsing (chrome or ff, Windows 7) defaults to use ipv4 everywhere. Is there something I need to change on my end? I've got pretty vanilla settings. Thanks!
- organsnyder 12y ago
  There are a few potential factors in play: 1. What kind of IPv6 connectivity do you have? If it's not a native deployment, it could be 6rd or 6to4. I believe that some applications/OSes will prefer IPv4 over non-native IPv6 when they have the choice, since the latter will be running through a proxy (and therefore will probably be slower). 2. It could be an OS setting. I think that most recent OSes will prefer IPv6 by default, but I could be mistaken. 3. Application settings could also be in play. I installed a Chrome extension named "IPvFoo" that adds an indicator in the address bar to tell me whether I'm connecting over IPv4 or IPv6. When I'm at home (Comcast residential, native dual-stack), it shows me connecting over IPv6 a lot of the time, especially when I'm connected to larger sites; in fact, the majority of sites connect over IPv6 at least partially, since many popular services (Google Analytics, Google Fonts, some common CDNs for Javascript libraries) are available over v6. Perhaps this will help you figure out what's going on: http://test-ipv6.comcast.net/ http://test-ipv6.comcast.net/
  - IvyMike 12y ago
    I spent some time checking into things, and here's what appears to be happening: 1. I do get an IPv6 address from Time-Warner... and it appears to be legit. (It's not the link-local address; it starts with 2605:e000, which is in the Time-Warner block) 2. But... it appears to be non-routable from the general internet. I think this is Time-Warner's fault. But maybe it's my router. I am not sure. Traceroute from http://4or6.com/traceroute?l=en http://4or6.com/traceroute?l=en gives me this. (I attempted to obfuscate my real address with XXXX) #traceroute 2605:e000:xxxx traceroute to 2605:e000:xxxx (2605:e000:xxxx), 30 hops max, 80 byte packets 1 2607:f2f8:1600::1 (2607:f2f8:1600::1) 1.653 ms 1.597 ms 1.583 ms 2 2001:504:13::1a (2001:504:13::1a) 11.753 ms 11.746 ms 11.732 ms 3 twcable-backbone-as7843.10gigabitethernet17.switch2.lax2.he.net (2001:470:0:2bf::2) 2.618 ms 2.610 ms 2.599 ms 4 2001:1998:0:4::11d (2001:1998:0:4::11d) 3.956 ms 2001:1998:0:4::11b (2001:1998:0:4::11b) 3.477 ms 2001:1998:0:4::11d (2001:1998:0:4::11d) 5.512 ms 5 2001:1998:0:8::83 (2001:1998:0:8::83) 4.090 ms 5.784 ms 2001:1998:0:8::87 (2001:1998:0:8::87) 6.542 ms 6 2605:e000:0:4::41 (2605:e000:0:4::41) 6.753 ms 5.032 ms 5.011 ms 7 2605:e000:0:4::5:7f (2605:e000:0:4::5:7f) 6.859 ms 7.042 ms 7.128 ms 8 * * * 3. Since a recent firmware upgrade, my router detects this problem, and sometimes (but not always) decides to set up a 6to4 tunnel. I am not sure how this works, exactly. 4a. If the router does set up the 6to4 tunnel, I do have IPv6, but as organsnyder says, since 6to4 tunnels suck, the OS prefers to use ipv4. 4b. If the router does not set up the 6to4 tunnel, I have a completely non-functional IPv6. Oh well, maybe next year.
X-Istence 12y ago
This is only going to grow as ISP's start running out of IPv4 space and deploy IPv6 with IPv4 over CGN or some other solution!
dzhiurgis 12y ago
Are there any VPS providers in UK that support IPv6? The idea would be to set up personal VPN that would exit thru IPv6 and/or get anonymomized on a public IPV4 NAT. Would that make sense?
- blfr 12y ago
  Digital Ocean supports IPv6 in their London DC. But if you just want a tunnel, it's much easier to get one from HE[1], or SixXS[2] than set up your own VPN. It's not anonymous though. [1] Their London PoP is not accepting new users right now https://tunnelbroker.net/new_tunnel.php https://tunnelbroker.net/new_tunnel.php [2] Two PoPs in London https://www.sixxs.net/pops/ https://www.sixxs.net/pops/
- organsnyder 12y ago
  Why go through all the trouble? Just get a free tunnel from Hurricane Electric (https://tunnelbroker.net/ https://tunnelbroker.net/). Their site mentions that they have servers in London. If anonymity is your goal, then a VPS probably wouldn't be much help—you'd be traced right back to your VPS provider, so you'd still be hoping that they wouldn't divulge your information. Since a VPS is normally on a static IP, it'd be slightly worse than a typical dynamic IP from a residential ISP.
jleahy 12y ago
Although they're still using Adobe Flash Player for the graph.
guyht 12y ago
29% in Belgium, any idea why they are so far ahead of everyone else?

155 points by AndrewDucker 12y ago

Strom 12y ago

See previous discussion on this https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=8680652 https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=8680652

thomasfoster96 12y ago

The one thing I gather from that graph is that over weekends, IPv6 use spikes. I assume that this means that networks or devices at companies and schools are lagging behind at using IPv6?

matthewarkin 12y ago
Yea, there could be a number of reasons for this. Companies may not see a need to upgrade to IPv6 just yet, all their internal machines have nat-ed addresses and they have enough public ip addresses. They use some legacy software / hardware X that doesn't support IPv6 (hey, some companies are still paying Microsoft to support XP).
- skrause 12y ago
  Or when I look at the company I work for it's just that nobody bothers because not having IPv6 hasn't caused a single problem so far.
  - Arnt 12y ago
    Until quite recently I haven't heard of anyone having a problem with supporting v4 only. But that time is ending; the first problem I've heard of is a VoIP provider who has problems with customers on DS-Lite. In about three years it's quite possible that IPv4 has the sort of occasional tunnel/reliability issues that IPv6 had five years ago. "Google works, so it's not my connection at fault, it must be your site that's broken." The big reason to support IPv6 now is IMO that (all else being equal) it's better to add v6 support when you roll something out than to introduce it later.
  - atomt 12y ago
    At work (a larger enterprise in Europe) we already see quite a bit of pain with IPv4. B2B connections are increasingly not using globally unique addressing anymore, so we often need to use prefix NAT and application level proxies to bridge clashing address space. This in turn is a support nightmare and is hurting reliability. Our network guys seems to love the extra complexity, though.
    - Someone1234 12y ago
      I hate VPN-ing into other people's networks, it is such a pain-point. As you say, you have address/space clashes, and all kinds of other (sometimes even security) problems. It sounds easier than it is, the main issue is scaling. Need to connect to one other person for B2B? Trivial. Two? A little harder. Ten, twenty, fifty, ouch...
sargun 12y ago
Corporate IT tends to lag in these sorts of things. Given that most people have ISP provided CPE, and that's the only device in their homes, it allows the ISP to have a much easier time migrating that user to IPv6. The rollout mechanisms have been well studied. On the other hand, corporations tend not to have the same level of skill, and focus in terms of networking as an ISP, like a Comcast, or an AT&T. Additionally, they're not as incentivized to move everyone to IPv6, because often times, it's easier, cheaper, and more realistic to buy some IPs. Moving to IPv6 at the office is a difficult project for most, as there is still a ton of enterprise gear that's IPv6-less. Even at that, enabling enterprise applications with IPv6 tends to be a massive nightmare. Lastly, the security implications of IPv6 are not well understood by most people in the corporate environment.
organsnyder 12y ago
In the United States, Comcast is one of the largest ISPs that has deployed IPv6, and they've (purportedly) rolled it out to 100% of their residential customers (with supported CPE). However, they're still working on their IPv6 deployment for business customers (still in trial, availability "any day now"). This could account for a lot of it, especially in the US.

mtrimpe 12y ago

I hope everyone is aware that IPv6 is the perfect way to bypass rate-limiting for systems that analyse Google results (for SEO ea.) There's a good chance a lot of this traffic consists of those bots testing Google's results ....

skrause 12y ago
Rate-limiting is still easy with IPv6, you just limit whole subnets (e.g. a /64) instead of single IP addresses. I guess Google has figured that out as well. I actually do believe that this is real traffic. Here in Germany the number of connections with native IPv6 is rising constantly. At home all my devices are always using IPv6 when connecting to Google services because I also have native IPv6. Those 12.26% for Germany look pretty believable.
- DieBuche 12y ago
  In Germany anyone on the telekom network who has a new contract or changed an exisiting contract in the last 16 months or so has IPv6.
  - padelt 12y ago
    Also everyone on Unitymedia. Dual stack if you're a lucky older customer, DS lite (CPE has routable IPv6 and NATed IPv4) if you are new or get something changed.
  - TillE 12y ago
    I just noticed that a few weeks ago, with no change in contract. I have a resold Telekom VDSL line, and I was quite pleased to find that I now have a native IPv6 connection with a /56 assigned. I'd tried some IPv6 settings in my router last year, and 6to4 worked pretty well at that point.
  - danieldk 12y ago
    As said in another comment, Kabel BW too. IPv6 with IPv4 tunnelling over DS-Lite.
12y ago

NKCSS 12y ago

Cool to see Belgium at almost 30%... we can learn something from our neighbours (only 2.5% here in .nl)

deleted 12y ago

[deleted]

sargun 12y ago

I wonder if this will lead to Docker finally acknowledging IPv6: ° https://github.com/docker/docker/issues/2174 https://github.com/docker/docker/issues/2174 ° https://github.com/docker/docker/pull/8947 https://github.com/docker/docker/pull/8947 ° https://github.com/docker/docker/issues/3609 https://github.com/docker/docker/issues/3609 etc... https://github.com/docker/docker/search?q=ipv6&type=Issues&utf8=%E2%9C%93 https://github.com/docker/docker/search?q=ipv6&type=Issues&u...

AndrewDucker 12y ago

Worth noting that the traffic is more than doubling every 12 months. 2.5% in December 2013 1% in December 2012 0.4% in December 2011 0.2% in December 2010 If that carries on then it's 10% in 2015, 20% in 2016, and 40% in 2017, with everyone switched over somewhere in 2018/19.

richmarr 12y ago
80% in 2018 160% in 2019 Apologies for being flippant. Just making the point that you're extrapolating without spending time on the likely shape of that adoption. It seems more likely that this is an S-curve, and that we'll continue to see IPv4 traffic for the next decade, maybe longer.
- AndrewDucker 12y ago
  I think it pretty likely that once we reach 50% it will switch from "That thing that techies care about" to "Something people assume everyone has", and that any remaining ISPs that don't provide IPv6 will rush to get it done. I'm sure that IPv4 support will continue for a fair while though.
  - richmarr 12y ago
    What's the mechanism that makes that first company drop support for IPv4? Cost? It feels like it'd need to be a dramatic cost saving in order to kick in at 50% adoption.
    - kalleboo 12y ago
      Look further down in this thread and there are already users in Germany being signed up on DS-Lite. Their only IPv4 access is behind carrier-grade NAT. Anything that wants to make a direct inbound connection and doesn't want to proxy (VOIP, games etc) will need to support IPv6
    - mgbmtl 12y ago
      As with https, moving forward has a cost, but at some point, the cost of staying compatible with old protocols is higher. Before the switch, you have to deal with training staff for the new tech. Once the switch starts happening, you need to train the staff to deal with the risks of keeping the old tech. For example, I find it easier to have an https-only web infrastructure. Too bad for old deprecated browsers who cannot support proper encryption (and therefore become a security risk for me, and a waste of time to support). Dual protocols (v4 and v6) take more time and money to manage. Initial training can be harsh. Some first-gen hardware was terrible. However, now that it's done, I can't wait to switch off IPv4.

tazjin 12y ago

In the meantime Google Compute Engine does not support IPv6.

kawsper 12y ago
I am also waiting on IPv6 support from MaxCDN.
kalleboo 12y ago
Same with Amazon EC2 - they only support it on their load balancers
theandrewbailey 12y ago
Many residential ISPs don't. I'm stuck on Verizon to enable IPv6 on FIOS.
- tazjin 12y ago
  My ISP at home (Bahnhof) actually offers IPv6, I haven't asked them to activate it yet though.
- dan1234 12y ago
  Non of the major UK ISPs seem to be passed the planning stage and my mobile network seems to be using carrier grade NAT.
- danieldk 12y ago
  I am on IPv6-only (Kabel BW, Germany), IPv4 goes over DS-Lite.
- 2bluesc 12y ago
  Comcast in San Francisco supports native IPv6 on residential accounts. Even did it (almost) right and include a /60 prefix delegation.
  - theandrewbailey 12y ago
    For all the complaints against Comcast's network, they are really on it with IPv6.

liveoneggs 12y ago

I think the US is mostly mobile

zaphoyd 12y ago
Comcast and Time Warner Cable both have larged wired IPv6 footprints (28% and 12% of their quite sizable customer bases respectively), as do a number of universities.
- atomt 12y ago
  And AT&T with their huge 6rd deployment for DSL.

kibwen 12y ago

Can anyone explain what "latency / impact" means on the per-country graph? I can't quite make sense of it: United Kingdom: 0ms latency, 0.02% impact Romania: -10ms latency, 0.01% impact Bulgaria: 10ms latency, 0.03% impact Japan: 20ms latency, 0.03% impact All that I can divine so far is that 20ms appears to be the threshold at which your country will receive a red tint regardless of your adoption percentage.

icebraining 12y ago
I believe the latency is the difference vis-a-vis IPv4.

skywhopper 12y ago

Two comments about the presentation itself: 1. The color selections on the "Per-country IPv6 Adoption" tab are abysmal for those of us with poor color perception. 2. Since we're talking about replacing outdated technology, why use a Flash-based graph on the "IPv6 Adoption" tab?

dhm 12y ago
The graphic in the "Per-Country IPv6 adoption" tab appears to be implemented with scalable vector graphics.
- deleted 12y ago
  [deleted]

zacwest 12y ago

My ISP here in SF, Webpass, has begun deploying their customers behind an IPv4 NAT with an IPv6 /64 prefix. I think this trend is going to be more common with consumer ISPs. I mind a little bit, since VPN access is impossible on IPv4, but with mobile carriers deploying IPv6 I think I will care less as time goes on. It is noticeably faster to use IPv6 with Google, something like 4ms vs. 30ms connection times. I'm not sure if it's a more efficient route, or underutilized routers handling the traffic.

pwr22 12y ago

UK is still abysmal :(

smcl 12y ago

Has anyone got any idea what the (relatively) big spike on October 4th 2014 was? A quick google revealed it's not some "World IPV6 day" or something (though there was something like that on 2011 which had a next-to-zero impact). Was there maybe a new phone or console (or an OS update released to either) released?

Caketh 12y ago
I would hazard a guess that that was when global routing table hit 512K routes and crashed a few hundred ISP routers worldwide? That might have been earlier in the year though.

IvyMike 12y ago

This seems like a good place to ask--I'm on Time Warner. I have an ipv6 address, and can get to ipv6.google.com, so it seems like everything is in place. But all my web browsing (chrome or ff, Windows 7) defaults to use ipv4 everywhere. Is there something I need to change on my end? I've got pretty vanilla settings. Thanks!

organsnyder 12y ago
There are a few potential factors in play: 1. What kind of IPv6 connectivity do you have? If it's not a native deployment, it could be 6rd or 6to4. I believe that some applications/OSes will prefer IPv4 over non-native IPv6 when they have the choice, since the latter will be running through a proxy (and therefore will probably be slower). 2. It could be an OS setting. I think that most recent OSes will prefer IPv6 by default, but I could be mistaken. 3. Application settings could also be in play. I installed a Chrome extension named "IPvFoo" that adds an indicator in the address bar to tell me whether I'm connecting over IPv4 or IPv6. When I'm at home (Comcast residential, native dual-stack), it shows me connecting over IPv6 a lot of the time, especially when I'm connected to larger sites; in fact, the majority of sites connect over IPv6 at least partially, since many popular services (Google Analytics, Google Fonts, some common CDNs for Javascript libraries) are available over v6. Perhaps this will help you figure out what's going on: http://test-ipv6.comcast.net/ http://test-ipv6.comcast.net/
- IvyMike 12y ago
  I spent some time checking into things, and here's what appears to be happening: 1. I do get an IPv6 address from Time-Warner... and it appears to be legit. (It's not the link-local address; it starts with 2605:e000, which is in the Time-Warner block) 2. But... it appears to be non-routable from the general internet. I think this is Time-Warner's fault. But maybe it's my router. I am not sure. Traceroute from http://4or6.com/traceroute?l=en http://4or6.com/traceroute?l=en gives me this. (I attempted to obfuscate my real address with XXXX) #traceroute 2605:e000:xxxx traceroute to 2605:e000:xxxx (2605:e000:xxxx), 30 hops max, 80 byte packets 1 2607:f2f8:1600::1 (2607:f2f8:1600::1) 1.653 ms 1.597 ms 1.583 ms 2 2001:504:13::1a (2001:504:13::1a) 11.753 ms 11.746 ms 11.732 ms 3 twcable-backbone-as7843.10gigabitethernet17.switch2.lax2.he.net (2001:470:0:2bf::2) 2.618 ms 2.610 ms 2.599 ms 4 2001:1998:0:4::11d (2001:1998:0:4::11d) 3.956 ms 2001:1998:0:4::11b (2001:1998:0:4::11b) 3.477 ms 2001:1998:0:4::11d (2001:1998:0:4::11d) 5.512 ms 5 2001:1998:0:8::83 (2001:1998:0:8::83) 4.090 ms 5.784 ms 2001:1998:0:8::87 (2001:1998:0:8::87) 6.542 ms 6 2605:e000:0:4::41 (2605:e000:0:4::41) 6.753 ms 5.032 ms 5.011 ms 7 2605:e000:0:4::5:7f (2605:e000:0:4::5:7f) 6.859 ms 7.042 ms 7.128 ms 8 * * * 3. Since a recent firmware upgrade, my router detects this problem, and sometimes (but not always) decides to set up a 6to4 tunnel. I am not sure how this works, exactly. 4a. If the router does set up the 6to4 tunnel, I do have IPv6, but as organsnyder says, since 6to4 tunnels suck, the OS prefers to use ipv4. 4b. If the router does not set up the 6to4 tunnel, I have a completely non-functional IPv6. Oh well, maybe next year.

X-Istence 12y ago

This is only going to grow as ISP's start running out of IPv4 space and deploy IPv6 with IPv4 over CGN or some other solution!

dzhiurgis 12y ago

Are there any VPS providers in UK that support IPv6? The idea would be to set up personal VPN that would exit thru IPv6 and/or get anonymomized on a public IPV4 NAT. Would that make sense?

blfr 12y ago
Digital Ocean supports IPv6 in their London DC. But if you just want a tunnel, it's much easier to get one from HE[1], or SixXS[2] than set up your own VPN. It's not anonymous though. [1] Their London PoP is not accepting new users right now https://tunnelbroker.net/new_tunnel.php https://tunnelbroker.net/new_tunnel.php [2] Two PoPs in London https://www.sixxs.net/pops/ https://www.sixxs.net/pops/
organsnyder 12y ago
Why go through all the trouble? Just get a free tunnel from Hurricane Electric (https://tunnelbroker.net/ https://tunnelbroker.net/). Their site mentions that they have servers in London. If anonymity is your goal, then a VPS probably wouldn't be much help—you'd be traced right back to your VPS provider, so you'd still be hoping that they wouldn't divulge your information. Since a VPS is normally on a static IP, it'd be slightly worse than a typical dynamic IP from a residential ISP.

jleahy 12y ago

Although they're still using Adobe Flash Player for the graph.

guyht 12y ago

29% in Belgium, any idea why they are so far ahead of everyone else?