On Jul 27, 2009, at 3:02 AM, Iljitsch van Beijnum wrote:
On 27 jul 2009, at 9:43, Arnt Gulbrandsen wrote:
This must mean that silently enabling IPv6 increases the number of
people for whom IPv6 works by a factor of around 100 (from <0.01%
in the general population
(http://asert.arbornetworks.com/2008/08/the-end-is-near-but-is-
ipv6/ said <0.01%.)
The 0.01% they talk about is TRAFFIC, not USERS. And it's bogus
anyway.
Not that I want to have this discussion here again (folks should
revisit the archives), but it is not bogus, you just have to understand
what's being measured - and continues to be measured (and the same
measurement is today about 20x that .0025% from last August - I'll
write something up on this (with details again on methodology) within
the next month or two.
For instance, just the traffic through the AMS-IX is many times more
than what they measured:
AMS-IX is an anomaly and not representative of the global Internet
in this regard, _IMO. Then again, it is another data point, and
so long as folks know what's being measured, it is simply another
data point.
http://www.ams-ix.net/technical/stats/sflow/
(Note that they use meaningless lying graphs = don't start at 0.)
At AMS-IX, native IPv6 traffic is now 0.3% on average, up from 0.1%
a year or so ago. When I did some web bug measurements years ago my
results where about 0.16% IPv6 users (1 in 666). Last year, Google
got 0.25%.
To your point, that Google stat was users,not traffic. I suspect
their traffic rates are much lower than that :-)
-danny
_______________________________________________
Ietf mailing list
Ietf(_at_)ietf(_dot_)org
https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/ietf