In message <b53bef53-f327-44ed-8f23-a85042e99...@delong.com>, Owen DeLong write s: > > On Jun 6, 2011, at 2:23 PM, Mark Andrews wrote: > > >=20 > > In message <alpine.bsf.2.00.1106060732190.68...@goat.gigo.com>, Jason = > Fesler wr > > ites: > >>> But anyway, just consider it: a portion of the major websites go > >>> IPv6-only for 24 hours. What happens is that well, 99% of the = > populace > >>> can't reach them anymore, as the known ones are down, they start = > calling > >>> and thus overloading the helpdesks of their ISPs. > >>=20 > >> Won't happen this year or next. Too much money at stake for the web=20= > > >> sites. Only when IPv4 is single digits or less could this be even=20 > >> remotely considered. Even the 0.05% hit for a day was controverial = > at=20 > >> $dayjob. > >=20 > > IPv4 will never reach those figures. IPv6 isn't preferenced enough = > for > > that to happen and IPv6-only sites have methods of reaching IPv4 only > > sites (DS-Lite, NAT64/DNS64). > > I think you'll be surprised over time. Given the tendency of the = > internet > to nearly double in size every 2 years or so, it only takes 7 cycles = > (about > 15 years) for the existing network to become a single-digit percentage > of the future network. > > Owen
And without there being a strong IPv6 bias in the clients they will continue to use IPv4/IPv6 on a 50/50 basis. I would be quite happy to be proven wrong and only time will tell. -- Mark Andrews, ISC 1 Seymour St., Dundas Valley, NSW 2117, Australia PHONE: +61 2 9871 4742 INTERNET: ma...@isc.org
