[AusNOG] IPv6: Who's dual stacked? Why don't I look stacked?

[Robert Hudson]

(Apologies for the top-post - I am mobile).

I wondered something similar yesterday. I am an Internode customer at home,
ans have a Fritzbox as my CPE, Win7 as my desktop OS, and Android 4.1 on my
phone.

I know my Win7 box has full IPv6 connectivity (having run dozens of tests),
but to my knowledge my Android phone doesn't yet support IPv6 (
https://code.google.com/p/android/issues/detail?id=3389 - partial support
available in 4.2 apparently).

What I don't know or have any visibility of is how much of my Internet
traffic is IPv6 vs IPv4. For that matter, really of what apps do and do not
support IPv6 transit and which do not, and even if an app (a mail client
for example) supports IPv6, whether the server (Internode's mail server for
example) supports IPv6. And finally, if everything supports IPv6, what
priority is given to IPv6 over IPv4 (or vice versa).

I am sure all the answers to all of these questions are out there
somewhere, but as someone who has about a billion other things on my plate
right now, spending the time to find out and/or make any changes required
to improve my IPv6 utilisation is right up there in my priority list along
with things like booking my first moon flight and discovering the cure for
broken fingernails, given things "just work" right now for me regardless of
the version of IP being used for transit.

This leads me to believe we have two other problems to solve, and that
we''re also using a potentially bad metric for judging success. The two
problems are visibility and priority. The metric (what percent of global
traffic is IPv6 is bad because although I am ready, right now on my home
network for IPv4 exhaustion and an IPv6-only world, I doubt I am mail g use
of that readiness - and I've highlighted another piece of the puzzle that
needs tracking - application readiness.

So, does there exist:

a) A register of IPv6 capable/enabled/exclusive applications/operating
systems/hardwRe? If not, I am happy to start one.
b) A way for me to tell, on the fly, just how much of my personal IP
traffic is actually IPv6?

Regards,
On 08/03/2013 8:11 AM, "Don Gould" <don at bowenvale.co.nz> wrote:

> Why don't my email headers suggest I'm dual stacked?
>
>
> thinkdesignprint.co.nz>_ ~# ifconfig
> eth0      Link encap:Ethernet  HWaddr 00:00:20:01:85:02
>           inet addr:117.121.243.25  Bcast:117.121.243.255
> Mask:255.255.255.0
>           inet6 addr: 2403:cc00:1000:0:200:20ff:**fe01:8502/64
> Scope:Global
>           inet6 addr: fe80::200:20ff:fe01:8502/64 Scope:Link
>
>
> I've got an IPv6 address on my server but it doesn't look like my mail
> application is using it if you look at the headers in this message.
>
> I discovered this because I thought it might be interesting to have a bit
> of a look at my favourite lists and see how we're going in industry for
> dual stacking.
>
> On 8/03/2013 9:34 a.m., Mark Smith wrote:
> > Your sarcasm is obvious, and clearly you're the horse that doesn't want
> to drink water.
>
> Mark's comments were fear enough this morning.
>
> If he's bothered to take just 10 seconds to have a look at my message
> headers, it's no wonder he'd be thinking I'm just yanking the chain.
>
> I dual stacked that VPS 18 months ago, but it seems it's not playing the
> game.
>
> It's no wonder that we're only seeing 1% traffic if the traffic isn't
> flowing.
>
> D
>
>
> FYI for Friday fun...
>
> GOOD
> canonical name  lists.ausnog.net.
> aliases
> addresses       2407:9000:3::9
> 203.161.158.9
>
> BAD
> canonical name  list.waikato.ac.nz.
> aliases
> addresses       130.217.66.63
>
> BAD
> canonical name  forums.whirlpool.net.au.
> aliases
> addresses       117.53.166.22
>
> BAD
> canonical name  geekzone.co.nz.
> aliases
> addresses       202.175.128.169
> 202.175.128.164
>
> GOOD
> www.nznog.org
> canonical name  ghs.googlehosted.com.
> aliases
> addresses       2607:f8b0:4003:c02::79
> 173.194.64.121
>
> Source:  www.domainwhitepages.com
> --
> Don Gould
> 31 Acheson Ave
> Mairehau
> Christchurch, New Zealand
> Ph: + 64 3 348 7235
> Mobile: + 64 21 114 0699
>
> ______________________________**_________________
> AusNOG mailing list
> AusNOG at lists.ausnog.net
> http://lists.ausnog.net/**mailman/listinfo/ausnog<http://lists.ausnog.net/mailman/listinfo/ausnog>
>
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.ausnog.net/pipermail/ausnog/attachments/20130308/d78f282f/attachment.html>