World IPv6 Day? [included bonus report on brokeness studies]

Brian E Carpenter brian.e.carpenter at
Thu Jan 13 20:32:25 CET 2011

On 2011-01-13 18:15, Martin Millnert wrote:
> Hi Tore,
> thanks for your extensive addition to the thread.
> On Thu, 2011-01-13 at 00:44 +0100, Tore Anderson wrote:
>>> So in summary, this well-studied issue has two current data points,
>>> one  at 0.082% and one at max 0.058% (or better). This is far from
>>> 0.3%. In fact, it's even outside 0.2% ±0.1%. :)
>> It's >0%, which makes it a hard business decision regardless.  How
>> hard,
>> exactly, is probably largely dependent on the size and culture of the
>> corporation in question...
> I recently saw that Geoff Houston has measured 0.2% brokeness on v4 (!)
> on his site in a test he ran recently:
>  It's there in the
> text between Figure 4 and 5.
> If for whatever reasons, v6 connectivity meant having access to a
> better-functioning Internet than v4, that would put this debate in a
> whole new light.. :)  

On a side issue, a large (although only partially commercial) content
provider apparently doesn't care about losing "less than 1%"
of customers if it reduces OPEX:

I do wonder how big a deal these failure rates really are, when you
consider the cost of fixing them. Of course, we should try to fix them,
but not at *any* price.


More information about the ipv6-ops mailing list