[dpark]

> traffic level stayed close to 50% during the IPv6 only period.

> Nobody complained: those who did not have working IPv6 probably blamed it on cloudflare.

You described a situation where the outage resulted in 50% of your customers were unable to reach you and you were unable to do anything about it. I don’t think this story is a win for IPv6, regardless of whether your customers blame CloudFlare or not.

[orangeboats]

Compared to 0% like others?

50% is a very substantial retention rate.

[dpark]

Would hand been 100% if his site supported ipv4 natively instead of relying on CloudFlare to do the translation.

The story here is not “ipv6 made my site resilient to CloudFlare outage”. It’s “50% of my customers can’t reach my site even when I turn off CloudFlare”.

[orangeboats]

>if his site supported ipv4 natively

And it's becoming difficult for people to do so precisely because of IPv4 addresses running out...

[patmorgan23]

This has nothing to do with anything inherent to IPv6 and everything to do with the failure of organizations to timely implement it.

[dpark]

I didn’t say it was an issue inherent to IPv6. But it is a practical issue with IPv6.