Hi,
It seems that today is a "big day" for IPv6. It is the very first
time when native IPv6 on google statistics
(http://www.google.com/intl/en/ipv6/statistics.html) reached 1%. Some
might say it is tremendous success after 16 years of deploying IPv6 
T.
And given the rate on that graph, we'll hit 2% before year-end 2013.
It is entirely possible that Google's numbers are artificially low for a number
of reasons.
Owen
Or artificially high ...
APNIC labs have an interesting set of numbers on IPv6 uptake as well.
Tomas Podermanski wrote:
Hi,
It seems that today is a "big day" for IPv6. It is the very first time
when
native IPv6 on google statistics
(IPv6 – Google) reached 1%. Some
might say it is tremendous success after 16 years of deploying IPv6T.
Or one could look at it as; despite 16 years of lethargy and lack of
deployment by access networks, the traffic still finds a way. 
Tony
Hi,
So, I assume 6in4 tunnels like HE.net are included in the "native" percentage?
As the traffic is delivered as native traffic to Google I don't think Google can even see that there is a tunnel between them and the user. They might see a lower MTU, but to Google the traffic is native IPv6.
- Sander
Dr. Frederick Frankenstein: LIFE! DO YOU HEAR ME? GIVE MY CREATION... LIFE!
* Oliver Garraux
So, I assume 6in4 tunnels like HE.net are included in the "native"
percentage?
Probably. Fortunately, they are a drop in the ocean (at least from my
point of view).
6to4 tunnels, no. 6in4 (such as tunnel broker), yes, those are part of the native count.
Owen
That's only really true of the 6in4 (tunnel broker) tunnels. The 6to4 traffic that comes through our 6to4 or any other 6to4 gateways, OTOH, will have 2002::/16 addresses which makes it just as obvious as Teredo.
Owen
Hello,
AMS-IX publishes stats too:
<https://stats.ams-ix.net/sflow/>
This is probably a better view of overall percentage on the Internet than a specific company's content. It shows order of 0.5%.
Why do you think Google's numbers are lower than the real total?
They are also different stats which is why they give such different numbers.
In a theoretical world with evenly distributed traffic patterns if 1%
of users were IPv6 enabled it would require 100% of content to be IPv6
enabled before your traffic stats would show 1% of traffic going over
IPv6.
If these figures are representative (google saying 1% of users and
AMSIX saying 0.5% of traffic) then it would indicate that dual stacked
users can push ~50% of their traffic over IPv6. If this is even close
to reality then that would be quite an achievement.
- Mike
There is even more complexity. Remember the 6-to-4 stuff? Suppose a user on Network A used a tunnel broker on HE, and his traffic passed over AMS-IX encapsulated in v4? He would show up as v4 to AMS-IX and v6 to Google.
Lies, damned lies, and graphs.
Purely anecdotally, I can say: Yes.
Atleast in my case I have native IPv6 at home and via my mobile devices,
but not at my client sites.
*Sidenote: That's why I am at those client sites, helping 'fix' that. 
...
I've found myself becoming a snob about IPv6. I almost look down on
IPv4-only networks in the same way that I won't go see a film that isn't
projected on DLP unless my arm is twisted. I'm a convert, and I'm glad to
see the adoption rate edging up.
However, I still scratch my head on why most major US ISPs *have* robust
IPv6 peering and infrastructure and are ready to go, but they have not
turned it on for their fiber/cable/DSL customers for reasons that are not
clear to me.
I keep pestering my home ISP about turning it on (since their network is
now 100% DOCSIS 3), but they just seem to think I'm making up words. One
can hope, though.
Blair
Mike Jones wrote:
>
>> It is entirely possible that Google's numbers are artificially low
>> for a number of reasons.
>
> AMS-IX publishes stats too:
> <https://stats.ams-ix.net/sflow/>
>
> This is probably a better view of overall percentage on the Internet than a
specific company's content. It shows order of 0.5%.
>
> Why do you think Google's numbers are lower than the real total?
>They are also different stats which is why they give such different numbers.
In a theoretical world with evenly distributed traffic patterns if 1% of users
were IPv6 enabled it would require 100% of content to be IPv6 enabled
before your traffic stats would show 1% of traffic going over IPv6.If these figures are representative (google saying 1% of users and AMSIX
saying 0.5% of traffic) then it would indicate that dual stacked users can push
~50% of their traffic over IPv6. If this is even close to reality then that would
be quite an achievement.
If you assume that Youtube/Facebook/Netflix are 50% of the overall traffic, why wouldn't a dual stacked end point have half of its traffic as IPv6 after June???
Tony
