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)

Fernando Gont <fernando@gont.com.ar> Mon, 28 September 2020 13:24 UTC

Return-Path: <fernando@gont.com.ar>
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 9214B3A0ED6; Mon, 28 Sep 2020 06:24:38 -0700 (PDT)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: -2.112
X-Spam-Level:
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-2.112 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-1.9, NICE_REPLY_A=-0.213, SPF_HELO_NONE=0.001, SPF_PASS=-0.001, URIBL_BLOCKED=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 lqDIHvaoMxQN; Mon, 28 Sep 2020 06:24:36 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from skynet.si6networks.com (fernando.ipv6-lab.net [IPv6:2001:9e0:803:1::195]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher ADH-AES256-GCM-SHA384 (256/256 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 879A03A0ECF; Mon, 28 Sep 2020 06:24:36 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from [IPv6:2800:810:464:1088:94f6:e1be:29e9:c5d6] (unknown [IPv6:2800:810:464:1088:94f6:e1be:29e9:c5d6]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher ECDHE-RSA-AES128-GCM-SHA256 (128/128 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by skynet.si6networks.com (Postfix) with ESMTPSA id CF4C71F87; Mon, 28 Sep 2020 10:24:32 -0300 (-03)
To: Carsten Strotmann <carsten@strotmann.de>, IPv6 Operations <v6ops@ietf.org>, int-area <int-area@ietf.org>
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> <526B3152-E36C-4480-97BD-8476045FAE99@strotmann.de>
From: Fernando Gont <fernando@gont.com.ar>
Message-ID: <612b4714-1dc9-d0f0-2047-7be936cd40d1@gont.com.ar>
Date: Mon, 28 Sep 2020 10:18:39 -0300
User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (X11; Linux x86_64; rv:60.0) Gecko/20100101 Thunderbird/60.9.1
MIME-Version: 1.0
In-Reply-To: <526B3152-E36C-4480-97BD-8476045FAE99@strotmann.de>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="utf-8"; format="flowed"
Content-Language: en-US
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit
Archived-At: <https://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/msg/int-area/KCX4QXDfI6I3eDUyl7-w3An4jzQ>
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: Mon, 28 Sep 2020 13:24:39 -0000

On 25/9/20 06:07, Carsten Strotmann wrote:
> 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.

Modulo fragmentation? ;-)

Thanks,
-- 
Fernando Gont
e-mail: fernando@gont.com.ar || fgont@si6networks.com
PGP Fingerprint: 7809 84F5 322E 45C7 F1C9 3945 96EE A9EF D076 FFF1

v2.23.0 | Report a Bug | By Email