We now have apple and fb saying ipv6 is faster than ipv4.
If we can onboard Amazon, Netflix, Google and some others, then it is a done deal that ipv6 is indeed faster than ipv4. Hence, an easy argument to tell your CFO that you need IPv6 for your CDN. Xmas is coming so the budget season. Who knows. You might get lucky this year. From: NANOG <nanog-bounces+jean=ddostest...@nanog.org> On Behalf Of Michael Thomas Sent: November 26, 2021 6:20 PM To: Ca By <cb.li...@gmail.com> Cc: nanog@nanog.org Subject: Re: IPv6 and CDN's On 11/26/21 3:11 PM, Ca By wrote: On Fri, Nov 26, 2021 at 6:07 PM Michael Thomas <m...@mtcc.com <mailto:m...@mtcc.com> > wrote: On 11/26/21 1:44 PM, Jean St-Laurent via NANOG wrote: Here are some maths and 1 argument kicking ass pitch for CFO’s that use iphones. Apple tells app devs to use IPv6 as it's 1.4 times faster than IPv4 https://www.zdnet.com/article/apple-tells-app-devs-to-use-ipv6-as-its-1-4-times-faster-than-ipv4/ Build around that maybe? This really hits my bs meter big time. I can't see how nat'ing is going to cause a 40% performance hit during connections. The article also mentions http2 (and later v3) which definitely make big improvements so I'm suspecting that the author is conflating them. Mike Ok, take the same ipv6 is faster claim from facebook https://www.internetsociety.org/blog/2015/04/facebook-news-feeds-load-20-40-faster-over-ipv6/ Still really thin with details of why. At least this says that they are NAT'ing v4 at *their* edge. But 99% of the lag of filling your newsfeed is their backend and transport, not connection times so who knows what they are actually measuring. Most NAT'ing is done at the consumer end by your home router in any case. Mike
