On 29/07/14 22:22, Owen DeLong wrote: > On Jul 29, 2014, at 4:13 PM, Mark Andrews <ma...@isc.org> wrote: >> In message <20140729225352.go7...@hezmatt.org>, Matt Palmer writes: >>> On Wed, Jul 30, 2014 at 09:28:53AM +1200, Tony Wicks wrote: >>>> 2. IPv6 is nice (dual stack) but the internet without IPv4 is not a viable >>>> thing, perhaps one day, but certainly not today (I really hate clueless >>>> people who shout to the hills that IPv6 is the "solution" for today's >>>> internet access) >>> >>> Do you have IPv6 deployed and available to your entire customer base, so >>> that those who want to use it can do so? To my way of thinking, CGNAT is >>> probably going to be the number one driver of IPv6 adoption amongst the >>> broad customer base, *as long as their ISP provides it*. >> >> Add to that over half your traffic will switch to IPv6 as long as >> the customer has a IPv6 capable CPE. That's a lot less logging you >> need to do from day 1. > > That would be nice, but I’m not 100% convinced that it is true. > > Though it will be an increasing percentage over time. > > Definitely a good way of reducing the load on your CGN, with the additional > benefit > that your network is part of the solution rather than part of the problem.
Being on the content provider side I don't know the actual percentages in practice, but in the NANOG region you've got Google/Youtube, NetFlix, Akamai & Facebook all having a significant amount of their services v6 native. I'd be very surprised if these four together weren't a majority of any consumer-facing network's traffic in peak times.
