Re: Also Facebook (was: Re: Dual stack IPv6 for IPv4 depletion)

[Nicholas Suan <nsuan () nonexiste net>]

You should elaborate on some of these 'holes' then.

On Fri, Jul 10, 2015 at 12:53 AM, Ricky Beam <jfbeam () gmail com> wrote:
> On Thu, 09 Jul 2015 21:48:06 -0400, John Curran <jcurran () arin net> wrote:
> > Both techniques indicate more than 20% of the US Internet users are
> > connecting via IPv6.
>
>
> Interesting method that's full of holes (and they know it), but it's data
> nonetheless.
>
> Globally, it's still ~4.5%. Within my own pool of providers, I'm ZERO for 5.
> (I've not pinged TWC-BC lately, 'tho. And no one has gotten back to me that
> Earthlink has provided TWC with any prefixes, so us Earthlink cable internet
> customers are still dark.)
>
> > (They’ve also observing a significant performance
> > improvement with IPv6 connected users over IPv4 connected...
>
>
> IPv4 tends to be NAT'd and aggressively proxied. I also wouldn't rule out v6
> taking a different path, but that wouldn't explain the magnitude of
> difference those slides would suggest. (not really readable via youtube)