RE: [Int-area] Google Statistics for IPv6 adoption.

Khaled Omar <eng.khaled.omar@hotmail.com> Sun, 16 April 2017 15:18 UTC

Return-Path: <eng.khaled.omar@hotmail.com>
X-Original-To: ietf@ietfa.amsl.com
Delivered-To: ietf@ietfa.amsl.com
Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 739FD12709D; Sun, 16 Apr 2017 08:18:52 -0700 (PDT)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: -1.147
X-Spam-Level:
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-1.147 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-1.9, DKIM_SIGNED=0.1, DKIM_VALID=-0.1, DKIM_VALID_AU=-0.1, FORGED_HOTMAIL_RCVD2=0.874, FREEMAIL_FROM=0.001, RCVD_IN_DNSWL_NONE=-0.0001, RCVD_IN_MSPIKE_H3=-0.01, RCVD_IN_MSPIKE_WL=-0.01, SPF_HELO_PASS=-0.001, SPF_PASS=-0.001] autolearn=no autolearn_force=no
Authentication-Results: ietfa.amsl.com (amavisd-new); dkim=pass (2048-bit key) header.d=hotmail.com
Received: from mail.ietf.org ([4.31.198.44]) by localhost (ietfa.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id Ln6Vn3f2ufrE; Sun, 16 Apr 2017 08:18:51 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from EUR01-HE1-obe.outbound.protection.outlook.com (mail-oln040092065095.outbound.protection.outlook.com [40.92.65.95]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher ECDHE-RSA-AES256-SHA384 (256/256 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 76D57120454; Sun, 16 Apr 2017 08:18:50 -0700 (PDT)
DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=hotmail.com; s=selector1; h=From:Date:Subject:Message-ID:Content-Type:MIME-Version; bh=XPruf9rC2d7tfBzMHxmKxx9A7aFbgDrnSnT6QRXj8bY=; b=A0jPh4nJ0HGCK/6rWKV1v4y9JnuCYbUvJixEe6h2DUw7iteGw6HNvIJ90uyhHts+blbwn3+cbcuTzHqvZN9W9WDR+43F24po8z0KMOYh5YIddc5mzsKYRFyP+iFgcOSfqGzpjQf411b1K72G4EBWbXKAiETPFL8n0bV075RW77jkOMf+CuFAdR08hUiAbEycyFzupfL7bYLWB8htgWjrx+W0x26WVi1pBr1UXkwuUmfykOlE1jWFoZZ2wXLwmKY8GXcSk5oe6o7uz3vRuyWq+OVz5j/gbt+EofHaaT8dSrCS+22gljhZZyFB3E1sy6pujMzomY34YgSBG8T1m5QfYQ==
Received: from HE1EUR01FT052.eop-EUR01.prod.protection.outlook.com (10.152.0.57) by HE1EUR01HT037.eop-EUR01.prod.protection.outlook.com (10.152.0.240) with Microsoft SMTP Server (version=TLS1_2, cipher=TLS_ECDHE_RSA_WITH_AES_256_CBC_SHA384_P384) id 15.1.1019.14; Sun, 16 Apr 2017 15:18:47 +0000
Received: from AM4PR0401MB2241.eurprd04.prod.outlook.com (10.152.0.54) by HE1EUR01FT052.mail.protection.outlook.com (10.152.1.94) with Microsoft SMTP Server (version=TLS1_2, cipher=TLS_ECDHE_RSA_WITH_AES_128_CBC_SHA256_P256) id 15.1.1019.14 via Frontend Transport; Sun, 16 Apr 2017 15:18:47 +0000
Received: from AM4PR0401MB2241.eurprd04.prod.outlook.com ([fe80::167:4fb:cc08:25a5]) by AM4PR0401MB2241.eurprd04.prod.outlook.com ([fe80::167:4fb:cc08:25a5%19]) with mapi id 15.01.1034.013; Sun, 16 Apr 2017 15:18:47 +0000
From: Khaled Omar <eng.khaled.omar@hotmail.com>
To: "jordi.palet@consulintel.es" <jordi.palet@consulintel.es>
CC: "int-area@ietf.org" <int-area@ietf.org>, "ietf@ietf.org" <ietf@ietf.org>, "intarea-chairs@ietf.org" <intarea-chairs@ietf.org>, "intarea-ads@ietf.org" <intarea-ads@ietf.org>
Subject: RE: [Int-area] Google Statistics for IPv6 adoption.
Thread-Topic: [Int-area] Google Statistics for IPv6 adoption.
Thread-Index: AQHSti47/uaUGNjULEOCU6EGG8PHPKHHMY2wgAB6DwCAADvJgIAAEIOAgAAktTA=
Date: Sun, 16 Apr 2017 15:18:47 +0000
Message-ID: <AM4PR0401MB22411E83E18A63D33E306E01BD070@AM4PR0401MB2241.eurprd04.prod.outlook.com>
References: <1DD1280A-CAF0-4555-87E3-730A609C9423@consulintel.es> <AM4PR0401MB224193019197157A8DC495CBBD070@AM4PR0401MB2241.eurprd04.prod.outlook.com> <FF381A9D-A312-4DEC-90E6-8FF3A595789D@consulintel.es> <8A03EE98-1C94-4A82-A0E3-B1A144B6B1AB@employees.org> <C45F68F4-378B-49DF-8597-F04FFE202A9D@consulintel.es>
In-Reply-To: <C45F68F4-378B-49DF-8597-F04FFE202A9D@consulintel.es>
Accept-Language: en-US
Content-Language: en-US
X-MS-Has-Attach:
X-MS-TNEF-Correlator:
authentication-results: consulintel.es; dkim=none (message not signed) header.d=none; consulintel.es; dmarc=none action=none header.from=hotmail.com;
x-incomingtopheadermarker: OriginalChecksum:A6DC2D4A35583EDE2E5B780957AA95CA3D5FC086D7ECE2A441A28757BD0DE4F7; UpperCasedChecksum:D94CC8A85E3DB673A3C52173936D59EBC4684CFCB14FA12FEADB48545524D06A; SizeAsReceived:8505; Count:42
x-tmn: [vInLFG8m7lv8SY1vCIxbUsoniQENxcFL]
x-microsoft-exchange-diagnostics: 1; HE1EUR01HT037; 5:7tWWDLhVobn4aqm2+zJhkiJv++rNFsJ84G19o15bYJ4UtTsQunB2g8e/D9GZ7W1yqlTgPAT3+HVoZ3j+y876w7bPzccXCwhg1QCGT1+XjkB8Mxt9whKCBqLv1Bg82uSsHyhrXGjXhldqdPnFC0iQLg==; 24:S97heX5Xb5+QrrgBwJCT0wk5sLqjg1oPUpkv6DalduDJcFPgOwA+yND0ztMKch3MqkNMBVXHVINwEW0aCXDXMd7NLfha3WUyWtz1fDwqmJE=; 7:apz+4vAHyX8l/UQEQ5xtAQUUPSq4U0Ni93xI6ylRLvXApeHPPWqAcFHuIGZmc+N2GxQ4s5WEvbqflKTUDHIKbhfrq++gVXNXRq5YyMPiNOg9zbzHy3vMjdNBD8FtUoCOSDE9VERzckGxOSyd7owg8ZlC8xhTS3YAU5j3NsJSRGPPgD5oQpQD/5At5QKPrnzv7syJRzutIRUeB0US/2MgYhatkpp1ukvNNgVPO8jyFi9HdefC15Aj/a1rFyFx4s+YjsIoxjWJLfpK5uA87P5BfJmZhB9/bkb6Y710qpCNPp4IYr0Msm9x4SGr8RELF3Ik
x-incomingheadercount: 42
x-eopattributedmessage: 0
x-forefront-antispam-report: EFV:NLI; SFV:NSPM; SFS:(7070007)(98901004); DIR:OUT; SFP:1901; SCL:1; SRVR:HE1EUR01HT037; H:AM4PR0401MB2241.eurprd04.prod.outlook.com; FPR:; SPF:None; LANG:en;
x-ms-office365-filtering-correlation-id: 6ef7e3cc-b9d6-4f9c-2e28-08d484dbe12f
x-microsoft-antispam: UriScan:; BCL:0; PCL:0; RULEID:(22001)(201702061074)(5061506573)(5061507331)(1603103135)(2017031320274)(2017031324274)(2017031323274)(2017031322274)(1603101448)(1601125374)(1701031045); SRVR:HE1EUR01HT037;
x-exchange-antispam-report-cfa-test: BCL:0; PCL:0; RULEID:(444000031); SRVR:HE1EUR01HT037; BCL:0; PCL:0; RULEID:; SRVR:HE1EUR01HT037;
x-forefront-prvs: 0279B3DD0D
spamdiagnosticoutput: 1:99
spamdiagnosticmetadata: NSPM
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="utf-8"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: base64
MIME-Version: 1.0
X-OriginatorOrg: hotmail.com
X-MS-Exchange-CrossTenant-originalarrivaltime: 16 Apr 2017 15:18:47.6332 (UTC)
X-MS-Exchange-CrossTenant-fromentityheader: Internet
X-MS-Exchange-CrossTenant-id: 84df9e7f-e9f6-40af-b435-aaaaaaaaaaaa
X-MS-Exchange-Transport-CrossTenantHeadersStamped: HE1EUR01HT037
Archived-At: <https://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/msg/ietf/1w1d-DpYxihQP4dM-eSmxSLLJ6E>
X-BeenThere: ietf@ietf.org
X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.22
Precedence: list
List-Id: IETF-Discussion <ietf.ietf.org>
List-Unsubscribe: <https://www.ietf.org/mailman/options/ietf>, <mailto:ietf-request@ietf.org?subject=unsubscribe>
List-Archive: <https://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/browse/ietf/>
List-Post: <mailto:ietf@ietf.org>
List-Help: <mailto:ietf-request@ietf.org?subject=help>
List-Subscribe: <https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/ietf>, <mailto:ietf-request@ietf.org?subject=subscribe>
X-List-Received-Date: Sun, 16 Apr 2017 15:18:52 -0000

Jordi,

> I agree that that was the plan (and it is in the medium term), but my response is to Khaled specific point that seems to say (I understood that at least) that only 15% can access (now) to IPv6-only.

Think about when the percentage will be 50%, it will be a real division for the internet for both IPv4 only and IPv6 only hosts.

Best regards,

Khaled Omar

-----Original Message-----
From: ietf [mailto:ietf-bounces@ietf.org] On Behalf Of JORDI PALET MARTINEZ
Sent: Sunday, April 16, 2017 3:06 PM
To: intarea-ads@ietf.org; int-area@ietf.org; ietf@ietf.org; intarea-chairs@ietf.org
Subject: Re: [Int-area] Google Statistics for IPv6 adoption.

I agree that that was the plan (and it is in the medium term), but my response is to Khaled specific point that seems to say (I understood that at least) that only 15% can access (now) to IPv6-only.

Regards,
Jordi
 

-----Mensaje original-----
De: ietf <ietf-bounces@ietf.org>; en nombre de <otroan@employees.org>; Responder a: <otroan@employees.org>;
Fecha: domingo, 16 de abril de 2017, 14:06
Para: <jordi.palet@consulintel.es>;
CC: "intarea-ads@ietf.org"; <intarea-ads@ietf.org>;, "int-area@ietf.org"; <int-area@ietf.org>;, "ietf@ietf.org"; <ietf@ietf.org>;, "intarea-chairs@ietf.org"; <intarea-chairs@ietf.org>;
Asunto: Re: [Int-area] Google Statistics for IPv6 adoption.

    Jordi,
    
    > And actually, in general, nobody complains that any hosts in IPv4 is not able to access resources at IPv6 hosts. This is why we have the transition mechanism, that are being deployed in parallel to the IPv6 deployment.
    
    This is not true.
    The plan was for a short period where hosts were dual stack and then as soon as IPv6 was everywhere, turn IPv4 off.
    That's not where we are. I would expect the number of  IPv6 only networks and services to grow. Possibly without IPv4 support at all, or where the cost and responsibility of legacy support will be pushed out towards the IPv4 only users.
    
    > Nobody is so crazy to just deploy IPv6 and do not provide those transition mechanisms.
    > 
    > If that happens, clearly is the fault of somebody that doesn’t know how to do his job. This can happen exactly the same if your protocol becomes approved and some folks don’t update their hosts or routers to comply with your protocol, right?
    
    The transition has turned out to be a real pain.
    I understand the problem Khaled set out to solve.
    Unfortunately his solution is not practical nor deployable.
    And we have in fact tried many of the same flavours of solution before.
    Given Khaled's apparent non-interest in two-way communication I wouldn't imagine any number of emails would help in that regard.
    
    Best regards,
    Ole
    



**********************************************
IPv4 is over
Are you ready for the new Internet ?
http://www.consulintel.es
The IPv6 Company

This electronic message contains information which may be privileged or confidential. The information is intended to be for the use of the individual(s) named above. If you are not the intended recipient be aware that any disclosure, copying, distribution or use of the contents of this information, including attached files, is prohibited.