nanog mailing list archives
RE: Microsoft's participation in World IPv6 day
From: "Frank Bulk" <frnkblk () iname com>
Date: Wed, 8 Jun 2011 06:46:05 -0500
As long % IPv6 content > % IPv6 eyeballs, I think the eyeball counts will naturally go up over time. As we're seeing today, content providers can add IPv6 access to a greater percentage of their content in a few months than what ISPs can do with a percentage of their customer base. Frank -----Original Message----- From: Jack Bates [mailto:jbates () brightok net] Sent: Tuesday, June 07, 2011 10:28 PM To: nanog () nanog org Subject: Re: Microsoft's participation in World IPv6 day On 6/7/2011 9:01 PM, Lorenzo Colitti wrote:
On Sun, Jun 5, 2011 at 11:24 PM, Owen DeLong<owen () delong com> wrote:Moving them to IPv6 and hoping that enough of the content providers move forward fast enough to minimize the extent of the LSN deployment required.The problem here is not content, it's access. Look at World IPv6 day. What percentage of web content is represented? Probably order of 10%. How about access? Our public stats still say 0.3%
0.3% of access is fine, so long as the margin of broken stacks and deployments is low enough. If they find that keeping the content dual stacked has acceptable problems, then it's just a matter of access gearing up to match. The largest fear for content is to dual stack and have service levels go down. The only data we really get from this day is a better understanding of the service levels when dual stacked at major content sites. Some access providers may also determine mistakes in their networks, or isolation or MTU issues through transit providers. Jack
Current thread:
- Re: Microsoft's participation in World IPv6 day, (continued)
- Re: Microsoft's participation in World IPv6 day Cameron Byrne (Jun 05)
- Re: Microsoft's participation in World IPv6 day Mark Andrews (Jun 05)
- Re: Microsoft's participation in World IPv6 day Cameron Byrne (Jun 05)
- Re: Microsoft's participation in World IPv6 day Owen DeLong (Jun 05)
- Re: Microsoft's participation in World IPv6 day Mark Andrews (Jun 06)
- Re: Microsoft's participation in World IPv6 day Owen DeLong (Jun 06)
- Re: Microsoft's participation in World IPv6 day Chris Adams (Jun 06)
- Re: Microsoft's participation in World IPv6 day Owen DeLong (Jun 06)
- Re: Microsoft's participation in World IPv6 day Mark Andrews (Jun 05)
- Re: Microsoft's participation in World IPv6 day Lorenzo Colitti (Jun 07)
- Re: Microsoft's participation in World IPv6 day Jack Bates (Jun 07)
- RE: Microsoft's participation in World IPv6 day Frank Bulk (Jun 08)
- Re: Microsoft's participation in World IPv6 day Cameron Byrne (Jun 05)
- Re: Microsoft's participation in World IPv6 day Owen DeLong (Jun 07)
- Re: Microsoft's participation in World IPv6 day Martin Millnert (Jun 07)
- Re: Microsoft's participation in World IPv6 day Owen DeLong (Jun 08)
- Re: Microsoft's participation in World IPv6 day Cameron Byrne (Jun 08)
- Re: Microsoft's participation in World IPv6 day Cameron Byrne (Jun 08)
- Re: Microsoft's participation in World IPv6 day Martin Millnert (Jun 08)
- Re: Microsoft's participation in World IPv6 day Owen DeLong (Jun 08)
- Re: Microsoft's participation in World IPv6 day Owen DeLong (Jun 08)
- Re: Microsoft's participation in World IPv6 day Cameron Byrne (Jun 08)
- Re: Microsoft's participation in World IPv6 day Owen DeLong (Jun 08)