Re: Alternative Re: ipv4/25s and above Re: 202211232221.AYC

[Douglas Fischer <fischerdouglas () gmail com>]

Hello Abraham!

I believe your e-mail client (MUA) is splitting every message on a new
thread.
I'm not sure if it is happening with everyone, but using Gmail as MUA, it
isn't aggregating the mails on the same thread.

Cloud you please check the confs of your tool to avoid it?

Thanks in advance.

Em qui., 24 de nov. de 2022 às 05:56, Abraham Y. Chen <aychen () avinta com>
escreveu:

> Dear Joe:
>
> 0) Allow me to share my understanding of the two topics that you brought
> up.
>
> 1) "... https://www.google.com/intl/en/ipv6/statistics.html, it looks
> like we’ve gone from ~0% to ~40% in 12 years.... ":  Your numbers may be
> deceiving.
>
>    A. The IPv6 was introduced in 1995-12, launched on 2012-06-06 and
> ratified on 2017-07-14. So, the IPv6 efforts have been quite a few years
> more than your impression. That is, the IPv6 has been around over
> quarter of a century.
>
>    B. If you read closely, the statement  "The graph shows the
> percentage of users that access Google over IPv6." above the graph
> actually means "equipment readiness". That is, how many Google users
> have IPv6 capable devices. This is similar as the APNIC statistics whose
> title makes this clearer. However, having the capability does not mean
> the owners are actually using it. Also, this is not general data, but
> within the Google environment. Since Google is one of the stronger
> promoters of the IPv6, this graph would be at best the cap of such data.
>
>    C. The more meaningful data would be the global IPv6 traffic
> statistics. Interestingly, they do not exist upon our extensive search.
> (If you know of any, I would appreciate to receive a lead to such.) The
> closest that we could find is % of IPv6 in AMS-IX traffic statistics
> (see URL below). It is currently at about 5-6% and has been tapering off
> to a growth of less than 0.1% per month recently, after a ramp-up period
> in the past. (Similar saturation behavior can also be found in the above
> Google graph.)
>
> https://stats.ams-ix.net/sflow/ether_type.html
>
>    D.  One interesting parameter behind the last one is that as an
> Inter-eXchange operator, AMS-IX should see very similar percentage
> traffic mix between IPv6 and IPv4. The low numbers from AMS-IX does not
> support this viewpoint for matching with your observation. In addition,
> traffic through IX is the overflow among backbone routers. A couple
> years ago, there was a report that peering arrangements among backbone
> routers for IPv6 were much less matured then IPv4, which meant that
> AMS-IX should be getting more IPv6 traffic than the mix in the Internet
> core. Interpreted in reverse, % of IPv6 in overall Internet traffic
> should be less than what AMS-IX handles.
>
>    E. This is a quite convoluted topic that we only scratched the
> surface. They should not occupy the attention of colleagues on this
> list. However, I am willing to provide more information to you off-line,
> if you care for further discussion.
>
> 2)  "... https://lore.kernel.org/lkml/20080108011057.GA21168 () cisco com/
> ...":  My basic training was in communication equipment hardware design.
> I knew little about software beyond what I needed for my primary
> assignment. Your example, however, reminds me of a programing course
> that I took utilizing APL (A Programming Language) for circuit analysis,
> optimization and synthesis. It was such a cryptic symbolic language that
> classmates (mostly majored in EE hardware) were murmuring to express
> their displeasure. One day we got a homework assignment to do something
> relatively simple. Everyone struggled to write the code to do the job.
> Although most of us did get working codes, they were pages long. The
> shortest one was one full page. Upon reviewed all homework, the
> professor smiled at us and told us to look for the solution section at
> the end of the text book. It turned out to be the answer for a problem
> in the next chapter to be covered. The code was only three lines long!
> Although it did not have the codes for debugging purposes, it covered
> all error messages expected. It was such a shocker that everyone quieted
> down to focus on the subject for the rest of the semester. During my
> first employment, we had the need to optimize circuit designs. Since I
> was the only staff who knew about it, I ended up being the coordinator
> between several hardware designers and the supporting programmer. From
> that teaching, I am always looking for the most concise solution to an
> issue, not being distracted or discouraged by the manifestation on the
> surface.
>
> https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/APL_(programming_language)
>
> 3) Fast forward half a century, I am hoping that my "one-line code"
> serves the purpose of "there exists" an example in proofing a
> mathematical theorem for  inspiring software colleagues to review the
> network codes in front of them for improvement, instead of presenting
> such as a valid hurdle to progress.
>
>
> Regards,
>
>
> Abe (2022-11-24 03:53 EST)
>
>
>
>
>
> On 2022-11-21 19:30, Joe Maimon wrote:
> > David Conrad wrote:
> > > Barry,
> > >
> > > On Nov 21, 2022, at 3:01 PM, bzs () theworld com wrote:
> > > > We've been trying to get people to adopt IPv6 widely for 30 years
> > > > with very limited success
> > >
> > > According to https://www.google.com/intl/en/ipv6/statistics.html, it
> > > looks like we’ve gone from ~0% to ~40% in 12 years.
> > > https://stats.labs.apnic.net/ipv6 has it around 30%. Given an
> > > Internet population of about 5B, this can (simplistically and
> > > wrongly) argued to mean 1.5-2B people are using IPv6. For a
> > > transition to a technology that the vast majority of people who pay
> > > the bills will neither notice nor care about, and for which the
> > > business case typically needs projection way past the normal
> > > quarterly focus of shareholders, that seems pretty successful to me.
> > >
> > > But back to the latest proposal to rearrange deck chairs on the IPv4
> > > Titanic, the fundamental and obvious flaw is the assertion of
> > > "commenting out one line code”. There isn’t “one line of code”. There
> > > are literally _billions_ of instances of “one line of code”, the vast
> > > majority of which need to be changed/deployed/tested with absolutely
> > > no business case to do so that isn’t better met with deploying
> > > IPv6+IPv4aaS. I believe this has been pointed out numerous times, but
> > > it falls on deaf ears, so the discussion gets a bit tedious.
> > >
> > > Regards,
> > > -drc
> > Had the titanic stayed afloat some hours more, many more would have
> > survived and been rescued when assistance eventually arrived. So that
> > makes this a debate over whether this is deck chair re-arrangement or
> > something more meaningful.
> >
> > As I and others have pointed out, it depends on how it is used. And
> > perhaps the attempt should be made regardless of knowing in advance
> > which it will be.
> >
> > You assertion needs some back of the envelope numbers, which once
> > provided, I suspect will render your estimate grossly incorrect.
> >
> > You can hardly attempt to convince anybody that 240/4 as unicast would
> > not be the more trivial change made in any of these products natural
> > life cycle points.
> >
> > Especially as we have examples of what that type of effort might look
> > like. IGTFY and here
> >
> > https://lore.kernel.org/lkml/20080108011057.GA21168 () cisco com/
> >
> > The burdensome position is ridiculous even more so when stated with a
> > straight face.
> >
> > Joe
>
>
> --
> This email has been checked for viruses by Avast antivirus software.
> www.avast.com


-- 
Douglas Fernando Fischer
Engº de Controle e Automação