Technical Summary
During the World IPv6 Day on June 8th, 2011, several key content
providers enabled their networks to offer both IPv4 and IPv6
services. Hundreds of organizations participated in this effort, and
in the months and weeks leading up to the event worked hard on
preparing their networks to support this event. The event was
largely unnoticed by the general public, which is a good thing since
it means that no major problems were detected. For the Internet,
however, there was a major change on such a small timescale. This
memo discusses measurements that the authors made from the
perspective of an end-user with good IPv4 and IPv6 connectivity. Our
measurements include the number of most popular networks providing
AAAA records for their service as well as delay and connection
failure statistics.
Working Group Summary
This document is an ISE submission.
From the ISE:
Bob Hinden reviewed it for me, he noted:
"This draft has four informative references with links to graphs that
may not be stable enough for an RFC. The ISE and authors should
consider finding a better repository for these as they are important
for the document as we can't include them directly in the ASCII
version of the document. They should also be shown as normative
references as they are essentially part of the document."
It might also be useful to publish a companion pdf version of this
document with the graphs included in the document.
These are RFC Production issues - however they've agreed that
publishing a (non-normative) .pdf version will be OK, and the
authors have agreed to help with that.
Document Quality
See the IESG note for suggested RFC 5742 text.
Brian Haberman reviewed the document according to RFC 5742 and
recommends responding that the IESG has no problem with the
publication of 'Some Measurements on World IPv6 Day from End-User
Perspective'
<draft-keranen-ipv6day-measurements-03> as an Informational RFC.
Personnel
Brian Haberman <brian@innovationslab.net> is the responsible AD.
IESG Note
The IESG has concluded that there is no conflict between this
document and IETF work.