[nznog] IPv6 Incentive

[Andrew Ruthven]

Hey,

During the NZNOG conference it was joked that if the next WoW pack
required IPv6 then IPv6 would be rolled out by the ISPs (and transit
providers) for the next morning.

See the attached mail for an experiment that might be cause it to be
rolled out for that evening...

Cheers!

[Nathan Ward]

Unfortunately, the mentioned content is plentiful enough (both large
numbers of discrete items, and replicated large numbers of times) in
other places that people seeking it out are unlikely to jump through
hoops in order to access this particular instance of it.

The 'egg' content has to be globally unique, and attractive enough
for people to want it.

Post by Andrew Ruthven
Hey,
During the NZNOG conference it was joked that if the next WoW pack
required IPv6 then IPv6 would be rolled out by the ISPs (and transit
providers) for the next morning.
See the attached mail for an experiment that might be cause it to be
rolled out for that evening...
Cheers!
--
Andrew Ruthven, Wellington, New Zealand
| left blank.
Date: 9 April 2007 1:27:28 PM
Subject: IPv6 content experiment
Just a quick announcement that details of a new IPv6 experiment
have been posted at http://www.ipv6experiment.com
As everyone's aware, there's the issue of not enough eyeballs to
justify content providers spending the time to deploy IPv6. End
user ISPs won't do it until there's content. Many say that there
are ways (tunnel brokers, teredo, etc) end users can get on IPv6,
and the fact that they aren't using them means it's up to the
content providers to step forward. Either way, "lack of demand" is
cited by many for the biggest reason why they aren't deploying
IPv6. So, what if we put some desirable content up and made it
available only on IPv6 and gave those who accessed via IPv4
detailed instructions on how to get on IPv6?
How many are actually able to get on IPv6 if they want?
What problems do they run into when trying?
Is their connectivity over IPv6 worse than IPv4? (number of hops,
packet loss, overall transfer speeds, etc)
How many users have IPv6 configured, but don't actually have a
working IPv6 connection? (i.e. how many people do you lock out by
publishing AAAA records for your site?)
(I'm being intentionally vague here about the details of the
content, as not to trip any email content filters. See the site for
more details.)
Before we begin with this experiment, I'd like to ask the community
if there are any other interesting metrics you'd like us to try to
capture, what methodologies you suggest we use, etc.
If you have any questions or comments, feel free to contact me
directly!
-- Kevin
_______________________________________________
NZNOG mailing list
http://list.waikato.ac.nz/mailman/listinfo/nznog
!DSPAM:22,461ac2b08174507110817!

[Simon Lyall]

Post by Nathan Ward
Unfortunately, the mentioned content is plentiful enough (both large
numbers of discrete items, and replicated large numbers of times) in
other places that people seeking it out are unlikely to jump through
hoops in order to access this particular instance of it.

I'm not sure this is the case. Many people seem to find it hard enough to
get the content now that they are prepared to pay significant amounts of
money to obtain it.

Also while complaining to their ISP that a certain site doesn't work is
harder when it hosts that sort of content, it doesn't stop some people.

It's been done before with BitTorrent:

"In the summer of 2002, Cohen collected free p..nography to lure beta
testers to use the program" (wikipedia:Bram_Cohen) [my dots]

[Jeremy Brooking]

Post by Simon Lyall
"In the summer of 2002, Cohen collected free p..nography to lure beta
testers to use the program" (wikipedia:Bram_Cohen) [my dots]

Deployment costs $$$. Those same people who want their IPv6 FREE XXX
DOWNLOADS!!!111one1 are the same people who refuse to pay more for their
connection and already complain about the price they're paying now.

[Jamie Baddeley]

The only redeeming feature of the proposal is establishing that people
are prepared to pay USD$29 per month (instead of USD$30) for access to
IPv6.

"tens of thousands of people are paying $30/month to access these
videos"

At least then we have quantified what the market is prepared to pay.

Prior to that, it's a lot of heat and light and noise.

So, lets assume the average residential consumer of this content can
spell IPv6. And they ask for it. And let's assume they're prepared to
pay $50 NZD for "broadband" IPv4 connection. And they ring up and ask
for the V6 thing. And you tell them it's ~$40 NZD extra (conversion
rates kids), plus they may need to spend money V6'ing themselves.

If mass market forked out nearly twice what they're paying now, I think
NZ would be V6 enabled by the end of the year.

But sadly I suspect that neither of the above is likely to be true.


jamie

Post by Simon Lyall

Post by Nathan Ward
Unfortunately, the mentioned content is plentiful enough (both large
numbers of discrete items, and replicated large numbers of times) in
other places that people seeking it out are unlikely to jump through
hoops in order to access this particular instance of it.

I'm not sure this is the case. Many people seem to find it hard enough to
get the content now that they are prepared to pay significant amounts of
money to obtain it.
Also while complaining to their ISP that a certain site doesn't work is
harder when it hosts that sort of content, it doesn't stop some people.
"In the summer of 2002, Cohen collected free p..nography to lure beta
testers to use the program" (wikipedia:Bram_Cohen) [my dots]

[Michael Fincham]

Post by Nathan Ward
Unfortunately, the mentioned content is plentiful enough (both large
numbers of discrete items, and replicated large numbers of times) in
other places that people seeking it out are unlikely to jump through
hoops in order to access this particular instance of it.
The 'egg' content has to be globally unique, and attractive enough for
people to want it.

You mean to say that a full-colour version of the blinkenlights.nl ASCII
starwars isn't enough for everyone? ;)

I've lately been experimenting with 6to4, but I know that if native IPv6
transit was available* easily in NZ I would jump at the opportunity.

* at the right price, of course :)

--
-Michael Fincham
Unleash Technology Solutions

[Neil Gardner]

Hmmm. Fail I think. Follow my logic...

Ring Ring...

ISP - "Hello, helpdesk speaking"
User - "Hi, I really really need IPv6, can I get it please?"
ISP - "Are you joking? There's no content out there, and you can get
everything over V4"
User - "Actually, there is some unique content available only on V6 I
would like access to"

(Here's what Kevin foresees)

ISP - "Well, actually, you're the 1000th person today citing that
reason... We'll have IPv6 up in the morning, thanks for calling"
User - "Gee thanks!"

(Here's what's going to happen)

ISP - "Bulls**t, what content?"
User - "Ummm, some really important streaming media"
ISP - "And it's not available on V4?"
User - "No, just V6, that's why I want V6"
ISP - "What's the site? That sounds strange they don't make it
available over V4"
User - "Um... I'd rather not say"
ISP - "Why? Is it a secret or classified?"
User - "No... Actually it's adult entertainment moving pictures - for
research purposes"
ISP - "Sir, (*1) you're aware that you can get that stuff on V4?"
User - "Yeah, but this _specific_ stuff is only available on v6"

(At this stage, User breaks down and confesses the actual sitename and
the ISP figures out it's an experiment, because figuring out that they
don't have to supply V6 is cheaper and easier than actually doing it
at this stage)

(*1) - Or Madam, I wouldn't like to presume that only men want IPv6

Cheers - N

Post by Andrew Ruthven
During the NZNOG conference it was joked that if the next WoW pack
required IPv6 then IPv6 would be rolled out by the ISPs (and transit
providers) for the next morning.
See the attached mail for an experiment that might be cause it to be
rolled out for that evening...
---------- Forwarded message ----------

[snip]

Post by Andrew Ruthven
Just a quick announcement that details of a new IPv6 experiment have
been posted at http://www.ipv6experiment.com

[snip]

Post by Andrew Ruthven
(I'm being intentionally vague here about the details of the content,
as not to trip any email content filters. See the site for more
details.)

[snip]

Post by Andrew Ruthven
If you have any questions or comments, feel free to contact me directly!
-- Kevin

[Andrew Ruthven]

Possibly, except that Kevin's website has information on how to setup
tunnels if you can't get native transit.

So the conversation will possibly go something like:

ISP - "Hello, helpdesk speaking"
User - "Hi, I really really need IPv6, can I get it please?"
ISP - "Are you joking? There's no content out there, and you can get
everything over V4"
User - "Well, there is content that *I* want, do you provide native IPv6
or don't you?"
ISP - "No, we don't."
User - "Oh well, I'll setup one of these tunnel things then."
<click>

And the ISP can't see what traffic is going across their network.
<shrug>

[Juha Saarinen]

Now that makes me wonder if the IPv6 adoption reluctance isn't due to poor
naming... IPvSex should boost the deployment, no?

[Shane Hobson]

That's explains why IPv6 is so much more popular across the Tasman
compared to here.

Post by Juha Saarinen
Now that makes me wonder if the IPv6 adoption reluctance isn't due to poor
naming... IPvSex should boost the deployment, no?
--
Juha Saarinen
www.geekzone.co.nz/juha | Skype: juha_saarinen
blogs.pcworld.co.nz/pcworld/techsploder
Voice: [phone] Subtle recursive jokes in .sigs are not funny.
_______________________________________________
NZNOG mailing list
http://list.waikato.ac.nz/mailman/listinfo/nznog

Shane Hobson

Phn 07 929 2118
Cell 021 221 3999
Fax [phone]
Web www.liteup.co.nz
Skype hobsonshane

[David Zanetti]

Post by Juha Saarinen
Now that makes me wonder if the IPv6 adoption reluctance isn't due to poor
naming... IPvSex should boost the deployment, no?

I'd just like to state for the record my utter digust at this 'concept'.
Anyone who honestly thinks this is a good idea should be ashamed of
themselves. Another Internet full of exploitation and violence against
women for the pleasure of a few sick men is the last thing we need.

IMO, this thread should be closed now.

And maybe some people on this list need to re-examine just what sort of
people they are.

[Gerard Creamer]

I take offense at this post.

I don't like the implication that because I didn't instantly take
offense at the idea that I am somehow morally corrupt.

To be completely honest, I think IPv6 is a really good idea...

Gerard

Post by David Zanetti

Post by Juha Saarinen
Now that makes me wonder if the IPv6 adoption reluctance isn't due to poor
naming... IPvSex should boost the deployment, no?

I'd just like to state for the record my utter digust at this 'concept'.
Anyone who honestly thinks this is a good idea should be ashamed of
themselves. Another Internet full of exploitation and violence against
women for the pleasure of a few sick men is the last thing we need.
IMO, this thread should be closed now.
And maybe some people on this list need to re-examine just what sort of
people they are.
------------------------------------------------------------------------
_______________________________________________
NZNOG mailing list
http://list.waikato.ac.nz/mailman/listinfo/nznog

[John @ netTRUST]

I second that. At least some of us, who are still morally upright intividuals,
have a SOH (sense of humor)

Post by Gerard Creamer
I take offense at this post.
I don't like the implication that because I didn't instantly take
offense at the idea that I am somehow morally corrupt.
To be completely honest, I think IPv6 is a really good idea...

SNIP.

Post by Gerard Creamer

Post by David Zanetti
I'd just like to state for the record my utter digust at this 'concept'.
Anyone who honestly thinks this is a good idea should be ashamed of
themselves. Another Internet full of exploitation and violence against
women for the pleasure of a few sick men is the last thing we need.
IMO, this thread should be closed now.
And maybe some people on this list need to re-examine just what sort of
people they are.

[Simon Lyall]

I think this thread should confine itself to technical matters.

Discussion of how to promote ipv6 usage should avoid language and
concepts that might be offensive to some people (or their work's filters).

Discussion about what is or is not offensive should not be conducted on
the list.

Simon.
Moderator.

[Steve Phillips]

Post by Simon Lyall
I think this thread should confine itself to technical matters.
Discussion of how to promote ipv6 usage should avoid language and
concepts that might be offensive to some people (or their work's filters).

It is offensive that the net really became popular through the
distribution of porn ?

My goodness, some people really need to get a slightly thicker skin or
get off the internet.

Porn is popular = fact.
free porn over ipv6 could quite easily speed up adoption = fact

if adoption speeds up overnight due to good marketing, then we may have
a technical issue on our hands.

how is this off topic ? or are you saying that because the word "porn"
offends some people we have to forget history and never mention it again ?

Please, lets not become so politically correct we cannot even discuss
things on this list anymore. (or, if this is not to be the case I would
like to state for the record that the word 'nettrust' is offensive to me
and I would like to see no more posts with that in the message at all
(headers included) )

Oh, and Juha is well known for making jokes, if you REALLY find his
posts offensive, then setup your own filters, please dont moderate the list.

sheesh.

[Lin Nah]

Following up to various points
a. Neil Gardner's dialogue
I think the conversation will be

Ring Ring...

ISP helpdesker- "Hello, helpdesk speaking"
User - "Hi, I really really need IPv6, can I get it please?"
ISP helpdesker- "What is IPv6?"

...

b. Content
There's a few press articles about how the Beijing 2008 Olympics will be
streamed using IPv6. I can't find anything at the moment that says it is
going to be exclusively used, apart from one mention in Wikipedia
"all Beijing Olympics 2008 communications will be IPv6"
based" http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/IPv6

"At the Beijing Olympics in 2008, China plans to use CNGI for everything
from broadcasting the events to controlling the Olympic facilities."
http://www.cw.com.hk/computerworldhk/article/articleDetail.jsp?id=388172

One article (http://www.gridtoday.com/grid/473932.html) says
"With the Beijing Olympics just around the corner, this solution now
offers broadcasters an alternative to traditional leased line and
satellite-based transport."

So perhaps
1. the streams will be made available to public
2. Spectators online will try to use it to watch sports events that
aren't served by their local TV stations.
3. This may create a demand for IPv6?

While it is perhaps small beginnings and perhaps not as popular as
streaming the sort of content mentioned in the experiment, it may be a
start to generating demand?

Let's not forget China is where the fastest growth in internet use is
happening. Remember one of the speaker at nznog06 (who lives and works
in China) mentioned IPv6 was already used then to carry ipv4 traffic.


c. Can we pl stop the flame war re OTT/OT replies that resulted from
Dave Zanetti reply.


Thanks
Lin

[Andrew Ruthven]

Post by Lin Nah
Following up to various points
a. Neil Gardner's dialogue
I think the conversation will be
Ring Ring...
ISP helpdesker- "Hello, helpdesk speaking"
User - "Hi, I really really need IPv6, can I get it please?"
ISP helpdesker- "What is IPv6?"

User - Check out this webpage ...

:)

Post by Lin Nah
b. Content

On the matter of content, what if some other organisations (i.e., Apple
or Microsoft) were to make just a portion of their music catalogues
freely available over IPv6? (With rate limiting and so on in place of
course.)

Ignoring for a moment the licensing issues and the recording companies
not liking it, this could be huge incentive. MacOS X and Vista have
IPv6 support built in today, complete with tunnelling technologies, it
wouldn't be that hard to do.

And we we've already seen that Apple has the muscles to take care of the
recording companies...

Post by Lin Nah
There's a few press articles about how the Beijing 2008 Olympics will be
streamed using IPv6. I can't find anything at the moment that says it is
going to be exclusively used, apart from one mention in Wikipedia
"all Beijing Olympics 2008 communications will be IPv6"
based" http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/IPv6

It wouldn't surprise me if they used IPv6 only internally, made it
available externally and have IPv4 proxies in place for the rest of the
Internet. It would be insanity to not have IPv4 support.

Post by Lin Nah
So perhaps
1. the streams will be made available to public
2. Spectators online will try to use it to watch sports events that
aren't served by their local TV stations.

Vista will use Teredo to automatically build a tunnel if there is no
native IPv6 connection and an installed software package asks for IPv6
connectivity. So they could do "download this movie viewer to watch the
Olympics" and the movie viewer requests IPv6. <shrug>

Post by Lin Nah
3. This may create a demand for IPv6?

If they take the side step approach above, then yeah, but the punters
won't know they're using it.

Post by Lin Nah
While it is perhaps small beginnings and perhaps not as popular as
streaming the sort of content mentioned in the experiment, it may be a
start to generating demand?

Different target demographics. :)

There are also a couple of completely open Usenet servers for IPv6 users
to access, different demographics again. Unfortunately it appears that
Usenet hasn't been enough incentive to get on IPv6!

Cheers!

[Nathan Ward]

Post by Andrew Ruthven

Post by Lin Nah
b. Content

On the matter of content, what if some other organisations (i.e., Apple
or Microsoft) were to make just a portion of their music catalogues
freely available over IPv6? (With rate limiting and so on in place of
course.)

Wait, what?
Why would they put their $ in to that project? What do they gain?


In order to bring this in to the realms of beer and operational
issues (in order of preference) I'd like to call attention to:
http://www.ietf.org/internet-drafts/draft-ietf-v6ops-natpt-to-
historic-00.txt
and ask if any of you have given thought to what happens when you
can't get any v4 addresses for your subscribers anymore.
When thinking about this, keep in mind that until there's a critical
mass of IPv6 eyeballs, most content providers are unlikely to spend $
to move.

--
Nathan Ward

[Andrew Ruthven]

Post by Nathan Ward

Post by Andrew Ruthven

Post by Lin Nah
b. Content

On the matter of content, what if some other organisations (i.e., Apple
or Microsoft) were to make just a portion of their music catalogues
freely available over IPv6? (With rate limiting and so on in place of
course.)

Wait, what?
Why would they put their $ in to that project? What do they gain?

Because they want people to start using the new technology in their
operating systems? It makes life easier from their support point of
views if they can get remote access to peoples machines? Microsoft
can see other benefits as well:

http://technet.microsoft.com/en-us/windowsvista/aa905083.aspx

Post by Nathan Ward
In order to bring this in to the realms of beer and operational
http://www.ietf.org/internet-drafts/draft-ietf-v6ops-natpt-to-
historic-00.txt
and ask if any of you have given thought to what happens when you
can't get any v4 addresses for your subscribers anymore.

This is of course where the nay-sayers say that the rate of IPv4
exhaustion is a joke. I'm not one of those, and I've already started
experimenting with IPv6. (And for the record, I started experimenting
*long* before that experiment website was created!)

Also, the IPv4 Internet certainly isn't going away anytime soon, and
there are protocol level proxies that work okay for going between IPv6
and IPv4.

Post by Nathan Ward
When thinking about this, keep in mind that until there's a critical
mass of IPv6 eyeballs, most content providers are unlikely to spend $
to move.

There are content providers out there that are starting to deploy IPv6,
their concern at the moment is the potential for slow performance and
bad end-user experience due to all the crappy tunnels stitching the IPv6
Internet together.

The people that replied to those concerns all said that they've had very
little negative feedback.

Cheers!

[Nathan Ward]

Post by Andrew Ruthven

Post by Nathan Ward

Post by Andrew Ruthven

Post by Lin Nah
b. Content

On the matter of content, what if some other organisations (i.e., Apple
or Microsoft) were to make just a portion of their music catalogues
freely available over IPv6? (With rate limiting and so on in place of
course.)

Wait, what?
Why would they put their $ in to that project? What do they gain?

Because they want people to start using the new technology in their
operating systems? It makes life easier from their support point of
views if they can get remote access to peoples machines? Microsoft
http://technet.microsoft.com/en-us/windowsvista/aa905083.aspx

Many of the points there are weak for several reasons, but I'm not
going to get in to that debate again here.

Post by Andrew Ruthven

Post by Nathan Ward
In order to bring this in to the realms of beer and operational
http://www.ietf.org/internet-drafts/draft-ietf-v6ops-natpt-to-
historic-00.txt
and ask if any of you have given thought to what happens when you
can't get any v4 addresses for your subscribers anymore.

This is of course where the nay-sayers say that the rate of IPv4
exhaustion is a joke. I'm not one of those, and I've already started
experimenting with IPv6. (And for the record, I started experimenting
*long* before that experiment website was created!)
Also, the IPv4 Internet certainly isn't going away anytime soon, and
there are protocol level proxies that work okay for going between IPv6
and IPv4.

What do you mean by "protocol level"? HTTP proxies and such, or
things like NAT-PT?

--
Nathan Ward

[Andrew Ruthven]

Post by Nathan Ward

Post by Andrew Ruthven
Also, the IPv4 Internet certainly isn't going away anytime soon, and
there are protocol level proxies that work okay for going between IPv6
and IPv4.

What do you mean by "protocol level"? HTTP proxies and such, or
things like NAT-PT?

Yes, I mean HTTP proxies and others of that ilk. Yes, they suck, but
NAT-PT appears to suck more.

Cheers!

[Philip D'Ath]

NAT-PT is a deprecated standard. It is no more.

-----Original Message-----
From: Andrew Ruthven [mailto:***@etc.gen.nz]
Sent: Wednesday, 11 April 2007 1:56 p.m.
To: nznog
Subject: Re: [nznog] IPv6 Incentive

Post by Nathan Ward

Post by Andrew Ruthven
Also, the IPv4 Internet certainly isn't going away anytime soon, and
there are protocol level proxies that work okay for going between IPv6
and IPv4.

What do you mean by "protocol level"? HTTP proxies and such, or
things like NAT-PT?

Yes, I mean HTTP proxies and others of that ilk. Yes, they suck, but
NAT-PT appears to suck more.

[Andy Davidson]

Post by Andrew Ruthven
On the matter of content, what if some other organisations (i.e.,
Apple or Microsoft) were to make just a portion of their music
catalogues freely available over IPv6? (With rate limiting and so
on in place of course.)

It isn't in Apple's interest to do that, why should they care whether
v6 is driven or not ? Similarly for other companies, why should they
care ?

ip is a means to an end, I don't craft packets for fun, I do work or
have fun, and ip occurs as a way to send my messages from A to B.

[Erin Salmon - Unleash]

Post by Steve Phillips
sheesh.

I can tell you were holding back from something much worse there...

I'm quite in agreement, for the record. If it weren't for porn, there'd be
a lot less fibre around for one thing. You don't have to subscribe to that
sort of morality (or lack thereof) to see that there are benefits for the
Internet generally.

Unless someone comes up with a much better idea, we will, sooner or later,
be forced to adopt IPv6. As with most forms of impending doom, things will
no doubt be more pleasant if we tackle the problem early.

Pity porn can't save us from Global Warming too. ;)

My $0.02.

Erin Salmon
Managing Director
Unleash Technology Solutions
Phone: [phone]
Mobile: [phone]

-----Original Message-----
From: Steve Phillips [mailto:***@focb.co.nz]
Sent: Wednesday, 11 April 2007 11:21 a.m.
To: nznog
Subject: Re: [nznog] IPv6 Incentive

Post by Steve Phillips
I think this thread should confine itself to technical matters.
Discussion of how to promote ipv6 usage should avoid language and
concepts that might be offensive to some people (or their work's filters).

It is offensive that the net really became popular through the
distribution of porn ?

My goodness, some people really need to get a slightly thicker skin or
get off the internet.

Porn is popular = fact.
free porn over ipv6 could quite easily speed up adoption = fact

if adoption speeds up overnight due to good marketing, then we may have
a technical issue on our hands.

how is this off topic ? or are you saying that because the word "porn"
offends some people we have to forget history and never mention it again ?

Please, lets not become so politically correct we cannot even discuss
things on this list anymore. (or, if this is not to be the case I would
like to state for the record that the word 'nettrust' is offensive to me
and I would like to see no more posts with that in the message at all
(headers included) )

Oh, and Juha is well known for making jokes, if you REALLY find his
posts offensive, then setup your own filters, please dont moderate the list.

sheesh.

--
Steve.

_______________________________________________
NZNOG mailing list
***@list.waikato.ac.nz
http://list.waikato.ac.nz/mailman/listinfo/nznog
--
No virus found in this incoming message.
Checked by AVG Free Edition.
Version: 7.5.446 / Virus Database: 269.0.0/754 - Release Date: 9/04/2007
10:59 p.m.

--
No virus found in this outgoing message.
Checked by AVG Free Edition.
Version: 7.5.446 / Virus Database: 269.0.0/754 - Release Date: 9/04/2007
10:59 p.m.

[Scott Weeks]

--- ***@nosignal.org wrote:----------------
ip is a means to an end, I don't craft packets for fun, I do work or
have fun, and ip occurs as a way to send my messages from A to B.
---------------------------------------------


ding, ding, ding! From the many lists discussing these issues recently, we finally have a winner! Most folk don't care about v4, v6, v8 or v<insert stuff here>. They want to do something and they 'just want it to work'. 99.999% couldn't give less than a crap how that happens.

scott



BTW 6,525,170,264 x .00001 = 65250

That's this:

World — Population: 6,525,170,264 (July 2006 est.)

https://www.cia.gov/cia/publications/factbook/print/xx.html

times one minus five nines

65250 is about how many of there are who do give more th

[Steve Phillips]

Post by Andy Davidson
ip is a means to an end, I don't craft packets for fun, I do work or
have fun, and ip occurs as a way to send my messages from A to B.
---------------------------------------------
ding, ding, ding!

[Truman Boyes]

ISP starts seeing increase in v6 tunneled traffic

Steve, you mean to assume that ISPs actually look at the traffic they
are carrying? If 20,000 v6 users in NZ started tunneling between each
other and created ipv6 bittorrent trackers to carry porn and 0-day
exploits, I think most ISPs would have no idea that was happening
over their network.

best regards,
truman

[Alastair Johnson]

Post by Truman Boyes

ISP starts seeing increase in v6 tunneled traffic

Steve, you mean to assume that ISPs actually look at the traffic they
are carrying? If 20,000 v6 users in NZ started tunneling between each
other and created ipv6 bittorrent trackers to carry porn and 0-day
exploits, I think most ISPs would have no idea that was happening
over their network.

This may have been the case a couple years ago, but I suspect ISPs today
would notice (assuming we're talking significant traffic volumes):

- increase in international bandwidth consumption;
- decrease in effectiveness of their DPI/QoS boxes;
- increase in "unknown protocol"

Very quick netflow and/or DPI analysis would show what's going on. If
it starts hitting the bottom line, the ISPs will figure it out damn quick.

Certainly I used to notice things like this from Netflow data. If the
traffic volume is low enough, you'd probably miss it... but we're
talking BT here, right?

aj.

[Truman Boyes]

Post by Alastair Johnson

Post by Truman Boyes

ISP starts seeing increase in v6 tunneled traffic

Steve, you mean to assume that ISPs actually look at the traffic they
are carrying? If 20,000 v6 users in NZ started tunneling between each
other and created ipv6 bittorrent trackers to carry porn and 0-day
exploits, I think most ISPs would have no idea that was happening
over their network.

This may have been the case a couple years ago, but I suspect ISPs today
- increase in international bandwidth consumption;
- decrease in effectiveness of their DPI/QoS boxes;
- increase in "unknown protocol"
Very quick netflow and/or DPI analysis would show what's going on. If
it starts hitting the bottom line, the ISPs will figure it out damn quick.
Certainly I used to notice things like this from Netflow data. If the
traffic volume is low enough, you'd probably miss it... but we're
talking BT here, right?
aj.

Greetings a.j.,

I would expect traffic volumes would be no more significant than
today's volumes which are already full of p2p. I believe ISPs just
don't care that much. As long as they are making some margin, then
there is no significant interest (aside from stochastic modeling for
fun) in seeing how much tunneled v6 a provider is carrying. They just
wouldn't care, unless, as you point out, this is being used to avoid
DPI/QoS boxes. The number of ISPs that monitor these types of things
in detail would be far and in between. I believe that if we proposed
a pop quiz to the top 10 ISPs in NZ and asked them how much GRE or
IPIP traffic they carry a day, the answer would generally be "not
sure". But I bet the top 10 ISPs would know pretty close to how many
Mbps / Gbps they are sending to international.

truman

[Alastair Johnson]

Howdy, Truman. :)

I would expect traffic volumes would be no more significant than today's
volumes which are already full of p2p. I believe ISPs just don't care
that much. As long as they are making some margin, then there is no
significant interest (aside from stochastic modeling for fun) in seeing
how much tunneled v6 a provider is carrying. They just wouldn't care,
unless, as you point out, this is being used to avoid DPI/QoS boxes. The
number of ISPs that monitor these types of things in detail would be far
and in between. I believe that if we proposed a pop quiz to the top 10
ISPs in NZ and asked them how much GRE or IPIP traffic they carry a day,
the answer would generally be "not sure". But I bet the top 10 ISPs
would know pretty close to how many Mbps / Gbps they are sending to
international.

The problem is (from my experience at ISPs, and generally being in touch
with the industry in NZ) is that they *aren't* making a fantastic margin
at the moment, and they generally keep a very close eye on their
International bandwidth consumption and what protocols are consuming the
majority of that traffic.

An unexpected change in protocol utilisation that could bypass a QoS/DPI
platform and cause either performance degradation/congestion, or cause
an ISPs costs to change significantly would be caught reasonably quickly.

Many ISPs in NZ already have this capability (including many of the top
10), or have been evaluating it. If they don't have the DPI/QoS
capability, they would still have netflow -- if for nothing other than
billing -- which would allow them to reasonably quickly determine what
the hell is going on in their network.

I suspect you are correct in that none could tell you today because it's
not a significant traffic flow and thereby just recorded in "other" (or
they're just not interested), but if they saw their aggregate traffic
pattern changing I'd imagine that people would begin asking questions
very quickly.

If squashing that v6 tunnel traffic down is going to allow them to
control their contention better and allow more, shall we say, fair-use
services, through, then that will happen pretty quickly.

I think protocol/payload inspection is becoming more common, as people
seem to be trying to derive the most revenue possible from their
expenses to make a profit, and this is one way that really helps them
understand their cost basis and customer models. In the past I've
certainly used netflow/protocol statistics to offload customers that
just were not profitable and allow us to make a business change to
support profitable customers.

Outside of NZ (and maybe Australia - although my experience here is
looking similar), people maybe don't care anywhere near as much because
their transit costs are significantly lower. NZ and certain products
sold within NZ also have had restrictions on transport costs that also
made DPI important.

YMMV? Absolutely.

aj.

[Andy Davidson]

Post by Andy Davidson

ip is a means to an end, [...] ip occurs as a way to send my

messages from A to B.
ding, ding, ding!

[Jamie Baddeley]

Post by Andy Davidson

ip is a means to an end, [...] ip occurs as a way to send my

messages from A to B.
ding, ding, ding!

[Joe Abley]

People want porn.
Free porn site opens on IPv6 only

This is where your model falls down. Free porn is available on v4.

I'm growing tired of this thread and I don't think it does much for
credible debate.

I was actually quite enjoying it. I put on my raincoat, and everything.

So, what happens to the experiment when what happens in practice is
that the first few v6-capable porn enthusiasts download all the
content and then share it using p2p protocols over IPv4?


Joe

[Dean Pemberton]

And 10G isn't all that much.

I'm not a porn fan myself, but from other types of media, 10G isn't that
much.
Maybe if they put 1TB of porn and 1TB of free tv content from a major
studio, then we'd have an experiment.

Joe's point would still stand though - it would get shared on v4.

Post by Joe Abley
So, what happens to the experiment when what happens in practice is
that the first few v6-capable porn enthusiasts download all the
content and then share it using p2p protocols over IPv4?

[Craig Whitmore]

Post by Dean Pemberton
I'm not a porn fan myself, but from other types of media, 10G isn't that
much.
Maybe if they put 1TB of porn and 1TB of free tv content from a major
studio, then we'd have an experiment.

There is some content at http://www.ipv6porn.co.nz. (If you have IPv6)

Thanks
Me
Myself

[Philip D'Ath]

I do have an IPv6 connection, but can't get to this web site. There
appears to be a lack of connectivity between the two of us.

-----Original Message-----
...
There is some content at http://www.ipv6porn.co.nz. (If you have IPv6)

Thanks
Me
Myself

[Andrew McMillan]

Post by Philip D'Ath
I do have an IPv6 connection, but can't get to this web site. There
appears to be a lack of connectivity between the two of us.
-----Original Message-----
...
There is some content at http://www.ipv6porn.co.nz. (If you have IPv6)

Funnily enough I was discussing this thread in the office just yesterday
and ended up at the same content. Fetching it over v6 is quite
different to fetching it over v4, it seems, and the end user experience
is definitely that this is more choppy.

Given that I'm 9mS from the office, where my tunnel connects to an IPv6
router which I would *really* like to be well-connected over v6,
especially to NZ[1] sites, I thought I'd look a bit harder.

WTF! The route goes via _stockholm_ and *then* via _montreal_!!!!!

Yep. I wouldn't normally use 5 exclamation marks, but I think this
rates...

To be honest I have to rate New Zealand's performance on IPv6 as
abysmal-- compared to the rest of the world. As far as I can ascertain
we have one (1) ISP in New Zealand who appears to be willing to offer
IPv6 connectivity to (normal) customers, and they appear to be forced to
do that through a tunnel to the US of A.

I suspect the situation is just as crappy in Australia, which is why so
far the only place in Australia we have managed a v6 tunnel to is Perth.

***THIS*** ***SUCKS***

IPv6 routes to New Zealand cannot possibly follow reasonable paths until
there are (at the very least) tunnel brokers that can get upstream from
ISPs who are close in a v4 sense.

It is interesting to see IPv6 traceroutes from Europe, because they all
seem to do sane things. IPv6 traceroutes from China or Japan probably
also do, but as far as I can see New Zealand is very much in the v4th
world in this.

Cheers,
Andrew McMillan.


And just for anyone who cares, this is the traceroute from my laptop to
Philip's site. Sure it's arbitrarily crappy because we're both
tunnelling to the US, but there's a whole world of stupidity in the
middle even _with_ that caveat.


1. 2404:130:1:f100::f102:1 0.0% 29 11.2 9.3 5.6 19.4 2.9
2. sl-bb1v6-sj-t-45.sprintv6.net 0.0% 28 174.1 172.8 169.1 180.1 2.0
3. sl-bb1v6-nyc-t-1001.sprintv6.net 0.0% 28 251.7 252.9 245.2 362.8 21.7
4. sl-bb1v6-sto-t-102.sprintv6.net 0.0% 28 344.5 347.8 341.6 419.9 14.4
5. 2001:7f8:d:fb::34 0.0% 28 347.2 347.6 341.8 388.6 8.5
6. 2001:440:1880:3000::15 0.0% 28 418.2 423.9 397.4 593.8 37.7
7. c2sth-ge-3-3-0.sunet.se 0.0% 28 423.2 441.2 406.5 531.0 25.6
8. stockholm2-pos-6-0-0.sunet.se 0.0% 28 424.9 421.3 399.5 551.7 28.1
c1sth-ae3.sunet.se
9. stockholm4-ge12-1-1.sunet.se 0.0% 28 423.5 420.7 398.4 508.4 25.2
stockholm2-POS1.sunet.se
10. se-ov.nordu.net 0.0% 28 379.3 382.7 376.5 435.0 10.9
11. dk-gw2.nordu.net 0.0% 28 376.2 381.4 374.9 400.0 5.9
12. dk-gw.nordu.net 0.0% 28 393.5 381.3 376.2 396.5 4.8
dk-gw.nordu.net
13. 2001:798:15:10aa::d 0.0% 28 382.6 390.0 377.3 528.0 31.1
14. so-6-2-0.rt1.fra.de.geant2.net 0.0% 28 382.3 380.4 376.6 390.0 3.3
15. so-6-0-0.rt1.pra.cz.geant2.net 0.0% 28 377.3 382.2 375.7 418.7 8.8
16. so-7-2-0.rt1.vie.at.geant2.net 0.0% 28 377.5 379.3 375.2 389.6 3.3
17. 2001:1900:5:2::5 0.0% 28 376.7 384.4 374.4 513.9 25.6
18. 2001:1900:5:1::1 3.6% 28 396.0 403.2 391.0 619.4 43.3
19. 2001:7f8:4::1935:1 0.0% 28 442.4 467.0 431.4 650.8 47.7
20. ???
21. ???
22. ???
23. if-7-0.mcore4.njy-newark.ipv6.teleglobe.ne 0.0% 28 432.5 456.4 423.9 617.4 47.5
24. if-12-0.mcore3.njy-newark.ipv6.teleglobe.n 0.0% 28 432.1 450.9 421.2 797.4 69.8
25. if-5-0.core2.nto-newyork.ipv6.teleglobe.ne 0.0% 28 433.6 463.5 421.9 829.8 86.6
26. if-4-0-0.core2.nto-newyork.ipv6.teleglobe. 3.7% 28 462.6 453.2 422.2 798.1 71.2
27. if-5-0.mcore4.mtt-montreal.ipv6.teleglobe. 3.8% 27 448.1 457.6 427.5 766.4 64.8
28. gin-mtt-6bb1.ipv6.teleglobe.net 0.0% 27 448.1 456.8 427.4 732.5 56.8
29. ix-5-0-1.6bb1.mtt-montreal.ipv6.teleglobe. 0.0% 27 450.7 456.1 429.0 702.9 51.2
30. 2001:5c0:0:5::117 3.8% 27 454.6 454.6 431.0 666.3 44.9



[1] We'll have a v6 .nz DNS server on there fairly soon.

-------------------------------------------------------------------------
Andrew @ Catalyst .Net .NZ Ltd, PO Box 11-053, Manners St, Wellington
WEB: http://catalyst.net.nz/ PHYS: Level 2, 150-154 Willis St
DDI: [phone] MOB: +64(272)DEBIAN OFFICE: [phone]
You've been leading a dog's life. Stay off the furniture.
-------------------------------------------------------------------------

[Philip D'Ath]

Just spotted this. I am an advocated of IPv6, but www.v6.co.nz is not
my site. The credit belongs to Craig Whitmore (correct me if I am
wrong).

-----Original Message-----
...

And just for anyone who cares, this is the traceroute from my laptop to
Philip's site. Sure it's arbitrarily crappy because we're both
tunnelling to the US, but there's a whole world of stupidity in the
middle even _with_ that caveat.

[Andrew Ruthven]

Post by Craig Whitmore
There is some content at http://www.ipv6porn.co.nz. (If you have IPv6)

Brilliant! :)

[Scott Weeks]

Post by Andy Davidson
ip is a means to an end, I don't craft packets for fun, I do work or
have fun, and ip occurs as a way to send my messages from A to B.
---------------------------------------------
ding, ding, ding!