Re: Big day for IPv6 - 1% native penetration

["Patrick W. Gilmore" <patrick () ianai net>]

On Nov 20, 2012, at 11:42 , Mike Jones <mike () mikejones in> wrote:
> On 20 November 2012 16:05, Patrick W. Gilmore <patrick () ianai net> wrote:
> > On Nov 20, 2012, at 08:45 , Owen DeLong <owen () delong com> wrote:
> >
> > > It is entirely possible that Google's numbers are artificially low for a number
> > > of reasons.
> >
> > AMS-IX publishes stats too:
> >        <https://stats.ams-ix.net/sflow/>
> >
> > This is probably a better view of overall percentage on the Internet than a specific company's content.  It shows 
> > order of 0.5%.
> >
> > Why do you think Google's numbers are lower than the real total?
>
> They are also different stats which is why they give such different numbers.
>
> In a theoretical world with evenly distributed traffic patterns if 1%
> of users were IPv6 enabled it would require 100% of content to be IPv6
> enabled before your traffic stats would show 1% of traffic going over
> IPv6.
>
> If these figures are representative (google saying 1% of users and
> AMSIX saying 0.5% of traffic) then it would indicate that dual stacked
> users can push ~50% of their traffic over IPv6. If this is even close
> to reality then that would be quite an achievement.

There is even more complexity.  Remember the 6-to-4 stuff?  Suppose a user on Network A used a tunnel broker on HE, and 
his traffic passed over AMS-IX encapsulated in v4?  He would show up as v4 to AMS-IX and v6 to Google.

Lies, damned lies, and graphs. :)

-- 
TTFN,
patrick