mirror of
https://github.com/becarpenter/book6.git
synced 2024-05-07 02:54:53 +00:00
54 lines
2.9 KiB
Markdown
54 lines
2.9 KiB
Markdown
## Deployment by carriers
|
|
|
|
All the organizations providing or using Internet connectivity services
|
|
have an associated Autonous System Number (ASN).
|
|
[APNIC](https://blog.apnic.net/2022/01/06/bgp-in-2021-the-bgp-table/)
|
|
provides statistics on the evolution of IPv6 support across the ASNs in
|
|
the world, as observed in the Internet routing tables.
|
|
|
|
<img src="./Section5_Table2.jpg" alt="Table shows 18% annual IPv6 growth 2018 to 2022">
|
|
|
|
The percentage of IPv6-capable ASNs is growing over the years, which is
|
|
a good sign. On the other hand, the table does not allow to understand
|
|
the degree of adoption across the different industries, that is whether
|
|
the ASNs are associated to a carrier, a service provider or an
|
|
entreprise. To zoom in at that level, it is necessary to look at more
|
|
detailed statistics such as those provided by
|
|
[Akamai](https://www.akamai.com/internet-station/cyber-attacks/state-of-the-internet-report/ipv6-adoption-visualization)
|
|
or [APNIC](https://stats.labs.apnic.net).
|
|
|
|
Not unsurprisingly, the vast majority of carriers worldwide already
|
|
support IPv6. Yet, differences exist. As a general rule, the carriers
|
|
active in those countries with higher IPv6 adoption also show higher
|
|
levels of IPv6 utilization. For example, based on the Akamai statistics,
|
|
IPv6 adoption in the United States is 51%. Carriers such as AT&T,
|
|
Comcast, T-Mobile and Verizon all exceed 70% of IPv6 use in their
|
|
networks. In Europe, both Belgium and Germany reach 50% of IPv6 traffic.
|
|
Proximus, Telenet, DT, Telefonica Germany, Versatel and Vodafone Germany
|
|
range from 50% to 70%. India shows 51% IPv6 adoption. Carriers there
|
|
also have high IPv6 rate. Bharti, Reliance Jio and Vodafone India find
|
|
themselves between 60% and 70%.
|
|
|
|
Whilst it cannot be gneralized, in countries with lower IPv6 adoption
|
|
the local carriers also tend to be slower in enabling IPv6. For example,
|
|
European countries such as Spain, Italy and Poland show respectively
|
|
4.5%, 7% and 13.5% adoption. Based on APNIC data, exluding the
|
|
exceptions of Telefonica de España (26%), Vodafone Italy (21%), Wind/3
|
|
Italy (22%) and Orange Poland (23%), all the other carries sit quite
|
|
below the threshold of 20% adoption.
|
|
|
|
Differences also apply between wired and wireless carriers. The latter
|
|
are often more advanced with IPv6. In several cases
|
|
\[[RFC9386](https://www.rfc-editor.org/info/rfc9386)\], the reason for
|
|
them to move to IPv6 depended on the lack of public IPv4 addresses.
|
|
Those carriers have decided to develop strategic plans to enable
|
|
IPv6-only underlay services, for example through the adoption of
|
|
translation mechanisms such as 464XLAT (Reliance Jio, T-Mobile),
|
|
guaranteeing legacy IPv4-as-a-Service support. Notable examples of early
|
|
IPv6 adoption in the wired domain are Comcast in the US and Sky in the
|
|
UK.
|
|
|
|
<!-- Link lines generated automatically; do not delete -->
|
|
|
|
### [<ins>Previous</ins>](Status.md) [<ins>Next</ins>](Deployment%20in%20the%20home.md) [<ins>Chapter Contents</ins>](8.%20Deployment%20Status.md)
|