Investigating IPv6 Traffic

What Happened at the World IPv6 Day?
  • Nadi Sarrar
  • Gregor Maier
  • Bernhard Ager
  • Robin Sommer
  • Steve Uhlig
Part of the Lecture Notes in Computer Science book series (LNCS, volume 7192)


While the IETF standardized IPv6 more than fifteen years ago, IPv4 is still the prevalent Internet protocol today. On June 8th, 2011, several large content and service providers coordinated a large-scale IPv6 test-run, by enabling support for IPv6 simultaneously: the World IPv6 Day. In this paper, we compare IPv6 activity before, during, and after the event. We examine traffic traces recorded at a large European Internet Exchange Point (IXP) and on the campus of a major US university; analyzing volume, application mix, and the use of tunneling protocols for transporting IPv6 packets.

For the exchange point we find that native IPv6 traffic almost doubled during the World IPv6 Day while changes in tunneled traffic were limited. At the university, IPv6 traffic increased from 3–6 GB/day to over 130 GB/day during the World IPv6 Day, accompanied by a significant shift in the application and HTTP destination mix. Our results also show that a significant number of participants at the World IPv6 Day kept their IPv6 support online even after the test period ended, suggesting that they did not encounter any significant problems.


Vantage Point USENIX Security Symposium IPv6 Packet Tunneling Protocol Packet Size Distribution 
These keywords were added by machine and not by the authors. This process is experimental and the keywords may be updated as the learning algorithm improves.


Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.


  1. 1.
    Brzozowski, J., Griffiths, C.: Comcast IPv6 Trial/Deployment Experiences, Internet-Draft: draft-jjmb-v6ops-comcast-ipv6-experiences-01 (July 2011)Google Scholar
  2. 2.
    Cho, K., Luckie, M., Huffaker, B.: Identifying ipv6 network problems in the dual-stack world. In: Proceedings of the ACM SIGCOMM Workshop on Network Troubleshooting: Research, Theory and Operations Practice Meet Malfunctioning Reality, NetT 2004, pp. 283–288. ACM, New York (2004)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  3. 3.
    Claffy, k.: Tracking ipv6 evolution: data we have and data we need. SIGCOMM Comput. Commun. Rev. 41, 43–48Google Scholar
  4. 4.
    Dreger, H., Feldmann, A., Mai, M., Paxson, V., Sommer, R.: Dynamic application-layer protocol analysis for network intrusion detection. In: Proc. USENIX Security Symposium (2006)Google Scholar
  5. 5.
    Guérin, R., Hosanagar, K.: Fostering ipv6 migration through network quality differentials. SIGCOMM Comput. Commun. Rev. 40, 17–25 (2010)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  6. 6.
    Hinden, B.: Check Point’s World IPv6 Day Experience. IETF 81 V6OPS,
  7. 7.
    Kim, J., Schneider, F., Ager, B., Feldmann, A.: Today’s Usenet Usage: Characterizing NNTP Traffic. In: Proc. IEEE Global Internet Symposium (2010)Google Scholar
  8. 8.
    Labovitz, C.: Six month, six providers and IPv6. Tech. rep. (March 2011),
  9. 9.
    Levy, M.: IETF 81 - World IPv6 Day Operators Review. IETF 81 V6OPS,
  10. 10.
    Limoncelli, T.A., Cerf, V.G.: Successful strategies for ipv6 rollouts. really. Commun. ACM 54, 44–48 (2011)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  11. 11.
    Maier, G., Feldmann, A., Paxson, V., Allman, M.: On dominant characteristics of residential broadband internet traffic. In: Proc. Internet Measurement Conf., IMC (2009)Google Scholar
  12. 12.
    Palmer, C., Thaler, D.: World IPv6 Day at Microsoft. IETF 81 V6OPS,
  13. 13.
    Paxson, V.: Bro: A system for detecting network intruders in real-time. Computer Networks Journal 31, 2435–2463 (1999), Bro homepage: CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  14. 14.
  15. 15.
    Wijnen, B., Aben, E., Wilhelm, R., Kisteleki, R.: World IPv6 Day—What did we learn? IETF 81 V6OPS,

Copyright information

© Springer-Verlag Berlin Heidelberg 2012

Authors and Affiliations

  • Nadi Sarrar
    • 1
  • Gregor Maier
    • 2
  • Bernhard Ager
    • 1
  • Robin Sommer
    • 2
    • 3
  • Steve Uhlig
    • 4
  1. 1.Telekom Innovation LaboratoriesTU BerlinBerlinGermany
  2. 2.International Computer Science InstituteBerkeleyUSA
  3. 3.Lawrence Berkeley National LaboratoryBerkeleyUSA
  4. 4.Queen Mary, University of LondonLondonUK

Personalised recommendations