IPv6 traffic data in Asian networks?

[Rémi Denis-Courmont]

On Thursday 22 March 2007 09:48:03 Pekka Savola wrote:
> On Wed, 21 Mar 2007, Carlos Friacas wrote:
> > Hmmm... dropping the transition mechanisms bit, i would prefer to see,
> > say AS15169 enabling v6 on their network/services ;-)))

> A serious question -- what benefit would GOOG have for enabling IPv6
> on their services?  I see none

I can only agree here. For any service that works fine through IPv4 NATs, if 
not through proxies, there is really no business advantage to offering 
IPv6... and there will definitely be a lower perceived quality of service on 
average: IPv6 has much more transient (or not) reachability problems, and 
typically bigger latencies and lower bandwidth, particularly if a transition 
mechanisms are involved.

As such, IPv6 for any commercial website is, I am afraid to say, a big NO NO 
at the moment. I am pretty much afraid this is a vicious circle, to which I 
could find no exit strategy.

> (except maybe for service like Google
> Talk that might be able to leverage IPv6 in the future)

Yes.

Gtalk uses some variant of draft ICE for connectivity. This should allow 
for "opportunistic" IPv6 usage.

-- 
Rémi Denis-Courmont