HackerTube

The benefits of deploying IPv6 only

NANOG3 HN recommenders · recommended in 2 months, 2015–2016
YouTube
talk · intermediate · 2015–2016 on HN

A NANOG 64 panel with speakers from Comcast, APNIC, T-Mobile and Facebook on deploying IPv6-only networks, including performance data showing IPv6 outperforming NAT-ed IPv4.

Cited as real operator data that IPv6 is faster than IPv4 and that large networks are already going IPv6-only.

8 comments from Hacker News

@scurvy2015-07 · in “ARIN Activates IPv4 Unmet Requests Policy”

NATs do induce a fair amount of latency. It's not exaggerated. Watch Paul Saab from Facebook talk about how much better IPv6 performs at NANOG 64: ▶ this video

Recommends View on HN
@X-Istence2015-06 · in “National IPv6 launch day in Finland”

Comcast is going for a pure IPv6 core network, they are currently at 60% of their customers getting an IPv6 address of some sort (cable modem or even cable box). T-Mobile's network is IPv6 as well. Especially for customer devices that support 464XLAT: link There is a LOT of support for IPv6, and many companies like Facebook are finding that IPv6 actually offers better performance end to end for their users. Take a look at this NANOG presentation: ▶ this video

Recommends View on HN
@ay2015-06 · in “IPv4 Depletion”

Exactly. And as the home speeds reach 1Gbps to the home, there will not be enough CGN boxes that will be able to sustain that load, so one of the two options: 1) more stateless mechanisms will be used (lw4o6, MAP) - which do not give the entire IPv4 address to residential users => so even if the service has an IPv4 address, the clients might have to go through the hurdles to get to it. Service providers are planning to go IPv6-only, and content providers already note that IPv6 gives a double-digit performance increase compared to IPv4 [1] 2) The residential ISPs will debundle the IPv4 from the cost - given that a lot of the sites average consumer needs (google, facebook, youtube, netflix) are already IPv6-enabled. For this case, you will not be even able to see that something is "wrong". Just the users will click on the link, see it's not reachable, say "huh?" and move on. [1] ▶ this video - 1h12 well spent.

Recommends View on HN
@X-Istence2016-01 · in “IPv6 celebrates its 20th birthday by reaching 10% deployment”

This is contrarian to real world testing: link ▶ this video Facebook and many other companies are finding that IPv6 is faster, personally at home I have found that disabling IPv4 allows me to more quickly buffer and stream Netflix, and about 30 - 40% of my traffic is IPv6. My Apple TV is the last hold-out that still seems to use IPv4 over IPv6 for Netflix.

@scurvy2015-07 · in “ARIN Activates IPv4 Unmet Requests Policy”

That's simply not true. Over 22% of US Internet consumers have IPv6 addresses. Your mobile phone probably has a (few) IPv6 addresses. From NANOG 64: ▶ this video