Subj : Nodes location. Funny statistics.
To : Dmitry Protasoff
From : Michiel van der Vlist
Date : Mon Aug 04 2025 03:54 pm
Hello Dmitry,
On Saturday August 02 2025 23:33, you wrote to me:
DP> I actually followed your advice and added the functionality you
DP> suggested. Also moved the script to a VM with IPv6. Check out the new
DP> results below.
Great!
DP> Analyzing IPv6 adoption from DNS records...
[..]
DP> IPv6 Adoption Analysis (DNS Records):
DP> Note: 100% accuracy based on actual DNS responses
DP> Hostnames with A records only (IPv4): 503 (72.1%)
DP> Hostnames with AAAA records only (IPv6): 4 (0.6%)
DP> Hostnames with both A and AAAA (dual-stack): 143 (20.5%)
DP> Total unique hostnames analyzed: 698
DP> IPv6 readiness: 147/698 hostnames (21.1%)
The list of IPv6 nodes that I weekly publish in Fidonews presently has 101 entries. Significantly less than the 147 mentioned above. I should mention that my list only contains nodes with whom I have managed to establish an IPv6 binkp connect.
A significant number of nodes advertises IPv6 connectivity via the nodelist but a request to connect does not succeed. When I run into such a situation I try to contact the sysops to help correct the problem. Sometimes this results in the problem being solved but ever so often the sysop does not responds at all and the status quo remains. I have no idea how these entries with uncontactable nodes arise in the first place. It is not limited to IPv4, there are nodes that wrongly advertise IPv4 capabililty as well but he fact remains that most of the uncontactable IPv6 nodes respond to an attempt to connect via IPv4. My guess is that most of the sysops that wrongly advertise IPv6 connectivity are not even aware of the situation.
That's one of the problems with Dual Stack. Ever so often a failure of just one of the two methods can remain unnoticed for quit some time.
Cheers, Michiel
--- GoldED+/W32-MSVC 1.1.5-b20170303
* Origin:
http://www.vlist.org (2:280/5555)
