nanog mailing list archives
Re: IPv6 faster/better proof? was Re: Need /24 (arin) asap
From: Matt Harris <matt () netfire net>
Date: Mon, 11 Jun 2018 17:10:08 -0500
On Mon, Jun 11, 2018 at 5:03 PM, Ca By <cb.list6 () gmail com> wrote:
A similar take, is that big eyeballs (tmobile, comcast, sprint, att, verizon wireless)
There're a lot of big eyeball networks missing from that list. Spectrum biz class, no IPv6, for one. And some big "content"-ish ones, too. Google's cloud service, for example? No IPv6 for VMs you lease from them. And some of the biggest "web hosting providers" in the world still don't have IPv6 deployed, and they host millions if not billions of sites which, individually, have very little traffic, but in aggregate amount to a fair bit.
Current thread:
- Re: IPv6 faster/better proof? was Re: Need /24 (arin) asap, (continued)
- Re: IPv6 faster/better proof? was Re: Need /24 (arin) asap Mark Tinka (Jun 22)
- Re: IPv6 faster/better proof? was Re: Need /24 (arin) asap Jared Mauch (Jun 23)
- Re: IPv6 faster/better proof? was Re: Need /24 (arin) asap Randy Bush (Jun 23)
- Re: IPv6 faster/better proof? was Re: Need /24 (arin) asap Mark Tinka (Jun 25)
- Re: IPv6 faster/better proof? was Re: Need /24 (arin) asap Randy Bush (Jun 25)
- Re: IPv6 faster/better proof? was Re: Need /24 (arin) asap Ben Cannon (Jun 25)
- Re: IPv6 faster/better proof? was Re: Need /24 (arin) asap Mark Tinka (Jun 25)
- Re: IPv6 faster/better proof? was Re: Need /24 (arin) asap Mike Hammett (Jun 23)
- Re: IPv6 faster/better proof? was Re: Need /24 (arin) asap Mark Tinka (Jun 25)
- Re: IPv6 faster/better proof? was Re: Need /24 (arin) asap Mike Hammett (Jun 23)
- Re: IPv6 faster/better proof? was Re: Need /24 (arin) asap Matt Harris (Jun 11)
- Re: IPv6 faster/better proof? was Re: Need /24 (arin) asap lobna gouda (Jun 19)
- Re: IPv6 faster/better proof? was Re: Need /24 (arin) asap Jean | ddostest.me via NANOG (Jun 23)
- Re: IPv6 faster/better proof? was Re: Need /24 (arin) asap valdis . kletnieks (Jun 23)