
Global IPv6 Deployment Progress Report - fcambus
http://bgp.he.net/ipv6-progress-report.cgi
======
_jomo
My ISP is having issues with IPv4 via DS-Lite, so I often cannot connect to
IPv4-only servers and it's frustrating how few servers are using IPv6 yet.

twitter, heroku, amazon, github, HN, they all don't have IPv6. Is there a
reason for the lack of IPv6 support? It shouldn't be that hard to get a v6
address and add an AAAA record.

~~~
taf2
i've found it much harder to block unwanted IPv6 traffic compared to IPv4...
but part of that is just the addresses are so much longer... and I need to get
better at iptables

~~~
simoncion
It might help if you built your IPv6 firewall rules to deal with networks,
rather than individual IPs.[0]

[0] Hell, with the horrorshow that is IPv6 "Privacy" addresses, it's all but
impossible to recognise a particular host.

------
zAy0LfpBZLC8mAC
There is one big problem I see with IPv6 deployment: Hosting providers don't
get it.

Yes, you can increasingly get IPv6 connectivity, but it's common that you get
a single /64, or even just a single address. Now, I want to run a bunch of
virtual machines on my server, with a virtual network or two between them ...
and already, I have to use ugly hacks to get by instead of just assigning
addresses using the standard way of doing things with IPv6. In the best case,
I just have to ask for more address space, but even that is completely
pointless overhead that only works as an incentive to use fragile network
constructs instead of just assigning addresses where they are needed.

People seem to have internalized that addresses are scarce and therefore
precious and therefore have to be conserved at all cost - they don't even
notice that that was the problem of IPv4 (or at least the most important
problem of IPv4) that IPv6 was supposed to solve, and which it indeed does
solve very well, and that their efforts at conserving IPv6 address space cause
more harm than they help.

Lots of hosters around here are RIPE members who have their standard /32
allocation (which they could extend to /29 without any further documentation
required), so if they chose to assign /56 networks to customers, they would
have space for about 16 million customers before they would need to request
more address space from RIPE, and for 128 million before they need to justify
any further need. But apparently they consider it better use of that address
space to just leave it mostly unused and make it difficult for their customers
to use IPv6, not even noticing that there is a reason why RIPE assigned them a
/32 ...

~~~
mappu
Correct me if i'm wrong, but doesn't an IPv6 /64 give you 2^64 globally
routeable addresses? How is that not sufficient?

~~~
matteotom
AFAIK, it's customary to assign a /64 to each machine, and the last 64 bits
are used for other purposes (usually the MAC address I think?).

[https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/IPv6_subnetting_reference](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/IPv6_subnetting_reference)

~~~
simoncion
Perhaps we're using different terminology, but it's absolutely _not_ customary
to assign a /64 to each machine.

IME one advertises one or more /64's on a given network, then (either through
DHCPv6, or SLAAC [or both]) machines attached to that network acquire
addresses within those spaces.

These machines will have a XXXX::XXXX/64 address, but that just means that
they're attached to a network that advertises a /64, not that that machine has
been _assigned_ an entire /64 for its use.

------
tedunangst
This report is really hard to interpret. Is there no way to know how many of
the top 100 sites support IPv6 except by counting them up by hand? I get that
google.XX supports IPv6; not sure I needed to actually see all their repeated
addresses though.

Similarly, if I wanted to know that 2.35% of .com domains have AAAA records,
why do I need to divide the numbers myself?

------
axaxs
Interesting. The TLD status isn't that telling as full IPv6 compliance is
required for all new tlds. A good thing, but doesn't show 'willful' adoption
nor use in the grand scheme. The AAAA glue to A glue ratios are still
extremely low, and is probably a good indication of adoption and everyday use.

------
pmontra
A more interesting report would be which ISP by country let their customers
use IPv6, landline and mobile. If servers are IPv6 but people can access them
only over IPv4 then we're still at IPv4.

~~~
p1mrx
This data shows the fraction of users with IPv6, per ISP:
[http://www.worldipv6launch.org/measurements/](http://www.worldipv6launch.org/measurements/)

And here is some similar data, but per country:
[http://www.google.com/intl/en/ipv6/statistics.html#tab=per-c...](http://www.google.com/intl/en/ipv6/statistics.html#tab=per-
country-ipv6-adoption)

The US just recently crossed 10%.

------
stalinone
I personally think that Path MTU Discovery is one of the major obstacle of
IPv6. It is quite unstable to me. My home WiFi router has v6-ready
certification but cannot properly tell my Windows PC which MTU size should be
chosen. I have to manually lower down MTU size but it keep reverting. Directly
PPPoE from my PC is better but there's still some website I have to set my MTU
size to 1280 to reach.

~~~
zAy0LfpBZLC8mAC
Are you sure the problem is the uplink MTU of your DSL(?)?

That's the only thing where your router would be responsible for telling your
PC about the bottleneck (if it receives a packet from your PC that doesn't fit
through the link, it should send an "ICMP6 packet too big" to the PC), and if
you get any working TCP6 connections at all, that most likely is working just
fine.

If you get stuck connections with some websites, the problem most likely is
with that website: Their server sends you a big-ish packet, the router at the
provider's end of your DSL drops the packet and sends an "ICMP6 packet too
big" back to the server, but some incompetent admin configured their firewall
to drop ICMP6, so their server never learns that its packets are too big, and
just keeps resending the big packet until it times out.

~~~
simoncion
It really bothers me that some network admins choose to drop all ICMP traffic.

I wish that the Shields UP! crowd had sent the message that ICMP is a very
important part of IP signalling; rather than sending the message that eeeevil
hackers might discover your network and Hax your Gibsons, so you'd better drop
_everything_ you can on the floor to throw them off of your trail.

~~~
ghshephard
With IPv6, admins learn within a week or two that they have to allow ICMPv6,
or their networks don't work. With IPv4 you could (sort of) get by without
ICMP, with IPv6 it's mandatory.

------
calinet6
All I know is that I have native IPv6 at home now thanks—and I can't believe
I'm saying this—to Comcast. Progress perhaps?

Also, cute: Facebook's IPv6 address is 2a03:2880:f00d:401:face:b00c:0:1

~~~
2bluesc
I've had Comcast native for a while too. Impressed that it just works. Even
more excited that I can request a prefix delegation.

~~~
simoncion
What does it mean to "request" a prefix delegation?

I know that they use DHCPv6-PD to allocate v6 blocks to end-user networks, and
that you can (on residential service) request blocks as large as /60\. Is
there something more going on?

