[AusNOG] IPv6

[Noel Butler]

On 27/03/2015 21:37, Mark Newton wrote: 

> You're going to make sure that IPv6 cannot possibly be something you can use by constructing an impractical test scenario that is guaranteed to produce a poor result? 
> 
> Dual stack, Noel. That means both protocols are running. 
> 
> You don't need to nuke IPv4, you just need to prevent Happy Eyeballs from selecting your IPv4 addresses in preference to your higher-latency tunneled IPv6 addresses. 
> 
> If you had deployed IPv6 on your network, the latencies if the two protocols would be equivalent and you'd be sending and receiving about half of your household traffic over IPv6 just like the rest of us without needing to tweak any Happy Eyeballs settings. 
> 
> That's up from about 10-15% three years ago. IPv4 is diminishing, and will be at background radiation levels by approximately the date at which AusNOG participants decide to stop blocking new IPv6 deployment. 
> 
> - mark

On the contrary Mark, if you and others are saying half my household
traffic should be over ipv6, than the other half should just not be
there... 

I have my results, on Saturday I sent David an email checking if it was
ok to send it to the list, he has not yet replied, but that's OK I
decided since I am blogging about it anyway, I'll advise the link to the
post later today, so those who want to see details. It's already
written, just need to be polished of typos :) But in case you don't care
to read it for details, the summary is I found 0.04% of my sites
workable on IPv6. 

Ohh and Mark Smith's concerns were addressed as well, and only came into
play on 1 site. 

 
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.ausnog.net/pipermail/ausnog/attachments/20150330/58111763/attachment.html>