What's special about Sunday peaks and Friday lows on that graph? I think I
asked that once before, with no firm conclusions. But there's a definite
sawtooth there, big enough that we probably want to understand it.
Right. But why is Google seeing noticeably higher IPv6 loads on Sunday and
lower loads on Friday? I'd buy a "different traffic pattern for home/office",
but then you'd expect Friday to be about the same as M-Th, and Sat/Sun to be
about even.
I wonder if there is a disproportionately large amount of IPv6 usage
in the Middle East where a number of countries have their weekend on
Friday and Saturday, with Sunday being the first day of their working
week? UAE and Israel as examples.
Tony
Interestingly, providing access services to students in the UK, I see Friday
and Saturday as my quiet days, with Sunday being as busy as Monday - Thursday.
I always just put it down to students going out drinking on Fridays and
Saturdays.
Simon
Everyone is out interacting with Humans on Friday nights.
Sunday, everyone is home trying to avoid dealing with their families.
(Mostly tongue in cheek)
Owen
From nanog-bounces+bonomi=mail.r-bonomi.com@nanog.org Fri Jun 3 17:25:39 2011
To: surfer@mauigateway.com
Subject: Re: Microsoft's participation in World IPv6 day
From: Valdis.Kletnieks@vt.edu
Date: Fri, 03 Jun 2011 18:24:42 -0400
Cc: nanog@nanog.org--==_Exmh_1307139882_2680P
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii> There're about 52 peaks in a year on the timeline...
Right. But why is Google seeing noticeably higher IPv6 loads on Sunday and
lower loads on Friday? I'd buy a "different traffic pattern for home/office",
but then you'd expect Friday to be about the same as M-Th, and Sat/Sun to be
about even.
Possibly traffic from the 'wrong side' of the International Date line??
There're about 52 peaks in a year on the timeline...
Right. But why is Google seeing noticeably higher IPv6 loads on Sunday and
lower loads on Friday? I'd buy a "different traffic pattern for home/office",
but then you'd expect Friday to be about the same as M-Th, and Sat/Sun to be
about even.Everyone is out interacting with Humans on Friday nights.
Sunday, everyone is home trying to avoid dealing with their families.
Note that from Geoff's published experiment presented in IETF v6ops the success rate of v6 connection attempts particularly auto-tunneled is higher on the weekends than during weekdays, you can thank corporate firewall policy for that particular phenomena.
Note that from Geoff's published experiment presented in IETF v6ops the success rate of v6 connection attempts particularly auto-tunneled is higher on the weekends than during weekdays, you can thank corporate firewall policy for that particular phenomena.
Indeed... Unfortunately, this means that LSN is going to _REALLY_ suck for such tunnel users.
Owen
Note that from Geoff's published experiment presented in IETF v6ops the success rate of v6 connection attempts particularly auto-tunneled is higher on the weekends than during weekdays, you can thank corporate firewall policy for that particular phenomena.
Indeed... Unfortunately, this means that LSN is going to _REALLY_ suck for such tunnel users.
The smart money is on there being no-saving the auto-tunneling users. The situation is not that good now and it will get worse.
In message <D90C3982-9321-4BC2-A37C-8DBF2321AD2A@bogus.com>, Joel Jaeggli write
s:
>>=20
>> Note that from Geoff's published experiment presented in IETF v6ops =
the success rate of v6 connection attempts particularly auto-tunneled is =
higher on the weekends than during weekdays, you can thank corporate =
firewall policy for that particular phenomena.
>>=20
>> http://tools.ietf.org/agenda/80/slides/v6ops-22.pdf
>=20
> Indeed... Unfortunately, this means that LSN is going to _REALLY_ suck =
for such tunnel users.The smart money is on there being no-saving the auto-tunneling users. =
The situation is not that good now and it will get worse.
There really is no reason that everyone has to be behind a LSN.
ISP's offer residential customers differentent levels of service
today. See the web pages to re-open port 25 for examples of this.
There is no reason that they can't do a similar thing to move
customers who are doing things that break with LSN out from behind
the LSN.
Also when Microsoft and Apple have shipped fixed versions of IE and
Safari that have sub-second failover most of the visible issues
with broken 6to4 tunnels will disappear.
Mark
Oh, you're right, they'll surelly do that. But not in time, and not for free.
LSN is beeing actively implemented in the core network of several
ISPs, and most didn't yet consider it as optional. Nor are ready for
v6 connectivity to residential customers, though.
For users behind a forced NAT (no way to disable it on the CPE) or
LSN, the only way out is still tunneling. Talking about bandwidth and
infrastructure waste...
> There is no reason that they can't do a similar thing to move
> customers who are doing things that break with LSN out from behind
> the LSN.Oh, you're right, they'll surelly do that. But not in time, and not for fre=
e.
Well here in Australia I would be calling the ACCC is a ISP tried
to charge extra for a address that is not behind a LSN. As for in
time it should be in place before they turn on LSN. If you can
adjust port 25 filters whenever a customer gets a new address you
can also ensure that they get address from the correct pool when
they connect to the network. This really isn't rocket science.
It's updating the provisioning database from a web form and generating
new configs based on that database. Yes there is some work required
to ensure that this gets done properly and there needs to be checks
that address pools are appropriately sized.
If I were doing it I would also have checkboxes for some of the
more common reasons and include IPv6 connectivity as one then have
a 6 month grace period once the ISP offers IPv6 connectivity before
removing that as a valid reason for needing a address that is not
behind the LSN.
Well here in Australia I would be calling the ACCC is a ISP tried
to charge extra for a address that is not behind a LSN.
On France, our bigger ISP charges extra for a fixed IP. Its network
beeing rather old-fashioned, every DSL (and residential fiber) line is
terminated on a LNS through a PPP session. Assigning a fixed IP is
technically done by adding a RADIUS parameter to force the termination
LNS to those having a static pool. The same method could be applied to
get a user out of the LSN, but as their LSN isn't yet in place, we
have no clue of what they'll do. We just know their CEO just announced
ongoing discussions with CDNs (including google) about service
differenciation and charging users for priority bandwidth.
If you can
adjust port 25 filters whenever a customer gets a new address you
can also ensure that they get address from the correct pool when
they connect to the network. This really isn't rocket science.
Well, you can't open port25 on Orange's ADSL service 
> Well here in Australia I would be calling the ACCC is a ISP tried
> to charge extra for a address that is not behind a LSN.On France, our bigger ISP charges extra for a fixed IP. Its network
beeing rather old-fashioned, every DSL (and residential fiber) line is
terminated on a LNS through a PPP session. Assigning a fixed IP is
technically done by adding a RADIUS parameter to force the termination
LNS to those having a static pool. The same method could be applied to
get a user out of the LSN, but as their LSN isn't yet in place, we
have no clue of what they'll do. We just know their CEO just announced
ongoing discussions with CDNs (including google) about service
differenciation and charging users for priority bandwidth.
Which just reinforces the point that it is not technically hard.
Remember when you introduce LSN you are degrading the service not
adding to it. I can seen consumer bodies saying thay you need to
compensate your customers unless there is a free path to get into
the exception pool.