Re: IPv6 traffic stats

Harald Alvestrand <harald@alvestrand.no> Tue, 11 November 2008 20:38 UTC

Return-Path: <ietf-bounces@ietf.org>
X-Original-To: ietf-archive@megatron.ietf.org
Delivered-To: ietfarch-ietf-archive@core3.amsl.com
Received: from [127.0.0.1] (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by core3.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 9A8F63A6907; Tue, 11 Nov 2008 12:38:12 -0800 (PST)
X-Original-To: ietf@core3.amsl.com
Delivered-To: ietf@core3.amsl.com
Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by core3.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 946A43A699E for <ietf@core3.amsl.com>; Tue, 11 Nov 2008 12:38:11 -0800 (PST)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: -2.599
X-Spam-Level:
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-2.599 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-2.599]
Received: from mail.ietf.org ([64.170.98.32]) by localhost (core3.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id aFlsQ53opt2Q for <ietf@core3.amsl.com>; Tue, 11 Nov 2008 12:38:10 -0800 (PST)
Received: from eikenes.alvestrand.no (eikenes.alvestrand.no [158.38.152.233]) by core3.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 33BD63A6907 for <ietf@ietf.org>; Tue, 11 Nov 2008 12:38:10 -0800 (PST)
Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by eikenes.alvestrand.no (Postfix) with ESMTP id A315C39E407; Tue, 11 Nov 2008 21:36:53 +0100 (CET)
X-Virus-Scanned: Debian amavisd-new at eikenes.alvestrand.no
Received: from eikenes.alvestrand.no ([127.0.0.1]) by localhost (eikenes.alvestrand.no [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id Lg1PCpEBYg-B; Tue, 11 Nov 2008 21:36:52 +0100 (CET)
Received: from [192.168.1.198] (162.80-203-220.nextgentel.com [80.203.220.162]) by eikenes.alvestrand.no (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 97B5E39E254; Tue, 11 Nov 2008 21:36:52 +0100 (CET)
Message-ID: <4919ED2F.2020101@alvestrand.no>
Date: Tue, 11 Nov 2008 21:38:07 +0100
From: Harald Alvestrand <harald@alvestrand.no>
User-Agent: Thunderbird 2.0.0.17 (X11/20080925)
MIME-Version: 1.0
To: David Kessens <david.kessens@nsn.com>
Subject: Re: IPv6 traffic stats
References: <08111108201165.2a71d.487911088@oregon.uoregon.edu> <20081111185711.GG1588@nsn.com>
In-Reply-To: <20081111185711.GG1588@nsn.com>
Cc: tytso@mit.edu, ietf@ietf.org
X-BeenThere: ietf@ietf.org
X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.9
Precedence: list
List-Id: IETF-Discussion <ietf.ietf.org>
List-Unsubscribe: <https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/ietf>, <mailto:ietf-request@ietf.org?subject=unsubscribe>
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>
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii"; Format="flowed"
Sender: ietf-bounces@ietf.org
Errors-To: ietf-bounces@ietf.org

David Kessens wrote:
> Joe,
>
> On Tue, Nov 11, 2008 at 08:20:11AM -0800, Joe St Sauver wrote:
>   
>> I'm not aware of DNS block lists which cover IPv6 address spaces at
>> this time, probably in part because IPv6 traffic remains de minimis 
>> (see http://asert.arbornetworks.com/2008/8/the-end-is-near-but-is-ipv6/
>> showing IPv6 traffic as constituting only 0.002% of all Internet traffic).
>>     
>
> For the record: 
>
> It seems that arbornetworks estimates are extremely low to the point
> where one has to ask whether there were other issues that caused such
> a low estimate.
>
> There is no question that IPv6 traffic is quite low in the Internet.
> However, many other reports that I have seen recently measure multiple
> orders of magnitude more IPv6 traffic (for an easily accesible example
> see: http://www.ams-ix.net/technical/stats/sflow/)
Google's measurements indicate that when faced with a dual-stack host 
(one with both an AAAA and an A record in the DNS), 0.5% of all hosts 
will access that host using IPv6.

(As presented at the RIPE meeting in Dubai last month.)

                    Harald

_______________________________________________
Ietf mailing list
Ietf@ietf.org
https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/ietf