James,
james woodyatt wrote:
I now feel compelled to reiterate that I would prefer a more
controlled phase-out plan than, "equipment vendors and operators
are free to commence the destruction of 6to4 at their individual
convenience and without further warning to the user community."
According to this:
http://www.pam2010.ethz.ch/papers/full-length/15.pdf
Slightly less than 50% of IPv6 traffic comes from a MacOS client (fig
3); about 90% MacOS hits is 6to4, which possibly means (to me) that this
piece of 6to4 MacOS software of yours represents a third of global IPv6
traffic.
Would you care to comment on the numbers?
Also, according to Cisco's blog (that links to the document above):
http://blogs.cisco.com/sp/france-is-famous-for-fine-wine-cheese-and-now-
ipv6/
-or-
http://tinyurl.com/5u3eorn
"France is responsible for more than half of current IPv6 traffic
worldwide"; I can positively confirm that Free (AS12322) that
contributes to most of the French IPv6 native hits is delivering
"native" IPv6 to their eyeballs using 6rd and that they are indeed the
800-pound gorilla of French IPv6 traffic, no contest.
So, a third of IPv6 traffic is James' MacOS 6to4 software, another third
is AS12322's 6rd (which, given recent comments, is indeed 6to4-bis) and
we want to declare 6to4 historic?
Michel.
_______________________________________________
Ietf mailing list
Ietf(_at_)ietf(_dot_)org
https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/ietf