IETF Logo Mail Archive

Re: [Int-area] [v6ops] Still need to know what has changed.... Re: IPv10 draft (was Re: FW: v6ops - New Meeting Session Request for IETF 109 - IPv10)

Carsten Strotmann <carsten@strotmann.de> Fri, 25 September 2020 09:07 UTC

Return-Path: <carsten@strotmann.de>
X-Original-To: int-area@ietfa.amsl.com
Delivered-To: int-area@ietfa.amsl.com
Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 9A1FA3A12C0; Fri, 25 Sep 2020 02:07:45 -0700 (PDT)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: -1.899
X-Spam-Level:
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-1.899 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-1.9, RCVD_IN_DNSWL_BLOCKED=0.001, SPF_HELO_NONE=0.001, SPF_PASS=-0.001] autolearn=ham autolearn_force=no
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 P0oqEe8Y-fx2; Fri, 25 Sep 2020 02:07:41 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from smtp3.strotmann.de (smtp3.strotmann.de [46.38.233.133]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher ECDHE-RSA-AES256-GCM-SHA384 (256/256 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 6B9F13A09E7; Fri, 25 Sep 2020 02:07:36 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from smtp2.strotmann.de (unknown [IPv6:fd00::2]) (using TLSv1.3 with cipher TLS_AES_256_GCM_SHA384 (256/256 bits) key-exchange ECDHE (P-256) server-signature RSA-PSS (2048 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by smtp3.strotmann.de (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 6B54781349; Fri, 25 Sep 2020 11:07:33 +0200 (CEST)
Received: from [169.254.240.8] (unknown [IPv6:fd00::1000]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher ECDHE-RSA-AES256-GCM-SHA384 (256/256 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by smtp2.strotmann.de (Postfix) with ESMTPSA id 4ByQzS4WFzz1sNb; Fri, 25 Sep 2020 11:07:32 +0200 (CEST)
From: Carsten Strotmann <carsten@strotmann.de>
To: IPv6 Operations <v6ops@ietf.org>, int-area <int-area@ietf.org>
Date: Fri, 25 Sep 2020 11:07:26 +0200
X-Mailer: MailMate (1.13.2r5673)
Message-ID: <526B3152-E36C-4480-97BD-8476045FAE99@strotmann.de>
In-Reply-To: <20200925065038.GP2485@Space.Net>
References: <VI1P194MB0285F47132384AC7C0D8A8DCAE3C0@VI1P194MB0285.EURP194.PROD.OUTLOOK.COM> <F2516A37-06B1-44FC-850F-307114B7D6A5@gmail.com> <VI1P194MB0285B8AE9ACE88D1AF051ADAAE3A0@VI1P194MB0285.EURP194.PROD.OUTLOOK.COM> <601FB9F8-DB83-4654-B652-BE07C49F7918@gmail.com> <VI1P194MB0285D67301646D4383320B55AE390@VI1P194MB0285.EURP194.PROD.OUTLOOK.COM> <20200925065038.GP2485@Space.Net>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; format="flowed"
Archived-At: <https://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/msg/int-area/7uBI5mrcpaNqRuYbqZkYtp1p09M>
Subject: Re: [Int-area] [v6ops] Still need to know what has changed.... Re: IPv10 draft (was Re: FW: v6ops - New Meeting Session Request for IETF 109 - IPv10)
X-BeenThere: int-area@ietf.org
X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.29
Precedence: list
List-Id: IETF Internet Area Mailing List <int-area.ietf.org>
List-Unsubscribe: <https://www.ietf.org/mailman/options/int-area>, <mailto:int-area-request@ietf.org?subject=unsubscribe>
List-Archive: <https://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/browse/int-area/>
List-Post: <mailto:int-area@ietf.org>
List-Help: <mailto:int-area-request@ietf.org?subject=help>
List-Subscribe: <https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/int-area>, <mailto:int-area-request@ietf.org?subject=subscribe>
X-List-Received-Date: Fri, 25 Sep 2020 09:07:46 -0000

Hi,

On 25 Sep 2020, at 8:50, Gert Doering wrote:

> Hi,
>
> On Thu, Sep 24, 2020 at 09:59:25PM +0000, Khaled Omar wrote:
>> As you know from the IPv10 I-D, it requires the network between hosts 
>> to be IPv4/IPv6 ready, so it still can be considered, as I still 
>> think that the movement to IPv6 still need some time and arrangement 
>> to get the best result for the coming generations.
>
> The transit networks are all ready today.  If IPv6 is not available, 
> it's
> the endpoints or the applications.
>

I did a measurement of the use of IP protocols on a large (> 1M 
customers) DNS resolver in Germany in July. More than 2/3 of all DNS 
traffic from that resolver to the Internet was over IPv6, less than 1/3 
over IPv4.

At least for DNS, IPv6 is doing pretty good.

Greetings

Carsten

v2.23.0 | Report a Bug | By Email