> On Jan 20, 2016, at 04:41 , Job Snijders <j...@instituut.net> wrote: > > On Wed, Jan 20, 2016 at 01:32:11PM +0100, nanog-...@mail.com wrote: >> On Wednesday, January 20, 2016 Jared Mauch wrote: >>> I currently see around 56.4:1 with the timing of peaks the same in v4 and >>> v6. >> So that's more in line with AMS-IX (70G/4T) than Comcast/Swisscom >> then. AMS-IX: >> https://ams-ix.net/technical/statistics/sflow-stats/ipv6-traffic > > I propose the following axiom: the greater the distance over which a > packet is forwarded, the less likely it is to be an IPv6 packet. > > Kind regards, > > Job
I’m not sure that is the issue so much as packets outside of North America are less likely to be IPv6 packets than packets traversing networks entirely within North America. Packets outside of North America and Europe are less likely than packets within those two continents. Asia is more likely than Mexico or Africa, and about equally likely with most of South America. I can see how this circumstance could lead one to believe that there is a correlation with distance, but I draw the distinction because I want to avoid the introduction of “Post hoc ergo propter hoc” based errors into decisions about how to improve the situation. Owen
