The metric is flawed. What should be counted are high-quality IPv6 deployments.
The following would be disqualifications:
* IPv6 traffic to a different ISP in the same country goes through the USA
* Only one /64 prefix is available (seems to be unavoidable on mobile networks)
* The main router supports IPv6, but the wireless mesh network system installed by the same ISP is IPv4-only
* The router gives out an IPv6 prefix, but actual IPv6 connectivity exists only once in a blue moon
* A mobile operator switches the network in a certain area to IPv6-only, despite the widely-deployed units sold in official stores not supporting 464XLAT
And I have seen all of that. Sorry, enough is enough. My default recommendation now is to switch off IPv6, unless extensive tests by third parties show that it really works as intended in the particular network location.
rfv6723•9mo ago
It is a privilege that the United States has sufficient IPv4 addresses; for Asian countries, especially developing nations that lack IPv4 addresses, IPv6 is essential.
N19PEDL2•9mo ago
> IPv6 traffic to a different ISP in the same country goes through the USA
patrakov•9mo ago
The following would be disqualifications:
* IPv6 traffic to a different ISP in the same country goes through the USA
* Only one /64 prefix is available (seems to be unavoidable on mobile networks)
* The main router supports IPv6, but the wireless mesh network system installed by the same ISP is IPv4-only
* The router gives out an IPv6 prefix, but actual IPv6 connectivity exists only once in a blue moon
* A mobile operator switches the network in a certain area to IPv6-only, despite the widely-deployed units sold in official stores not supporting 464XLAT
And I have seen all of that. Sorry, enough is enough. My default recommendation now is to switch off IPv6, unless extensive tests by third parties show that it really works as intended in the particular network location.
rfv6723•9mo ago
N19PEDL2•9mo ago
Why could this happen?