On Fri, Sep 05, 2014 at 07:40:08AM -0700, Paul Ferguson wrote:
> -----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-----
> Hash: SHA256
>
> On 9/5/2014 7:35 AM, Jay Ashworth wrote:
>
> > "Interface" sure.
> >
> > But the dangers of replacing actual /addresses/ with things which
> > are not is sufficiently well understood that even Van Jacobson
> > ought to know about 'em, right? :-)
> >
>
> Compare & contrast: There is still large-scale resistance (for lack of
> a better term) to IPv6 deployment, so what chance does deployment of
> Named Data-Networking stand? :-)
resistance [to ipv6] is futile -
http://www.spreadshirt.com/-C3376A12786302
I certainly don't think IPv6 will reach 100% deployment, people
will continue [to get paid?] to operate 6to4 and 4to6 gateways, even if just
enterprise edge from a nat44(+) gateways.
I'm still waiting for a few orgs to make the IPv6 jump like
Wayport/attwifi as an example. They could do nat66 like they do nat44
and easily make the sites look the same through their templates.
If you assume most people are right and Netflix is 33% of the US
internet at peak, that's 33% that's fully ipv6 capable on the server-side.
facebook, google and others count up as well, so much of content is reachable.
If apple/icloud make the jump to publishing AAAA records as part
of their CDN efforts to move away from akamai, I suspect much more of the
LTE traffic would make that jump to v6. (Waiting to see ATT upgrade their LTE
to support v6 to match VZ).
It also appears that OSX 10.10 fixes some of the IPv6 issues that exist
in 10.9, so with that update in the coming months I'm expecting even more IPv6
traffic to replace the IPv4 bits.
- Jared
--
Jared Mauch | pgp key available via finger from ja...@puck.nether.net
clue++; | http://puck.nether.net/~jared/ My statements are only mine.
