text:
Get IPv6 essential facts below. View Videos or join the IPv6 discussion. Add IPv6 to your PopFlock.com topic list for future reference or share this resource on social media.
Parts of this article (those related to RFC 8200 and RFC 8201) need to be updated. Please update this article to reflect recent events or newly available information. (July 2017)
Internet Protocol version 6 (IPv6) is the most recent version of the Internet Protocol (IP), the communications protocol that provides an identification and location system for computers on networks and routes traffic across the Internet. IPv6 was developed by the Internet Engineering Task Force (IETF) to deal with the long-anticipated problem of IPv4 address exhaustion. IPv6 is intended to replace IPv4.[1] In December 1998, IPv6 became a Draft Standard for the IETF, who subsequently ratified it as an Internet Standard on 14 July 2017.[2]
Devices on the Internet are assigned a unique IP address for identification and location definition. With the rapid growth of the Internet after commercialization in the 1990s, it became evident that far more addresses would be needed to connect devices than the IPv4 address space had available. By 1998, the Internet Engineering Task Force (IETF) had formalized the successor protocol. IPv6 uses a 128-bit address, theoretically allowing 2128, or approximately addresses. The actual number is slightly smaller, as multiple ranges are reserved for special use or completely excluded from use. The total number of possible IPv6 addresses is more than times as many as IPv4, which uses 32-bit addresses and provides approximately 4.3 billion addresses. The two protocols are not designed to be interoperable, complicating the transition to IPv6. However, several IPv6 transition mechanisms have been devised to permit communication between IPv4 and IPv6 hosts.
IPv6 provides other technical benefits in addition to a larger addressing space. In particular, it permits hierarchical address allocation methods that facilitate route aggregation across the Internet, and thus limit the expansion of routing tables. The use of multicast addressing is expanded and simplified, and provides additional optimization for the delivery of services. Device mobility, security, and configuration aspects have been considered in the design of the protocol.
IPv6 addresses are represented as eight groups, separated by colons, of four hexadecimal digits. The full representation may be simplified by several methods of notation; for example, 2001:0db8:0000:0000:0000:8a2e:0370:7334 becomes 2001:db8::8a2e:370:7334.
IPv6 architecture
Decomposition of the IPv6 address representation into its binary form
The addressing architecture of IPv6 is defined in RFC 4291 and allows three different types of transmission: unicast, anycast and multicast.[3]
IPv4 address exhaustion
Decomposition of the quad-dotted IPv4 address representation to its binary value
Internet Protocol Version 4 (IPv4) was the first publicly used version of the Internet Protocol. IPv4 was developed as a research project by the Defense Advanced Research Projects Agency (DARPA), a United States Department of Defense agency, before becoming the foundation for the Internet and the World Wide Web. IPv4 includes an addressing system that uses numerical identifiers consisting of 32 bits. These addresses are typically displayed in quad-dotted notation as decimal values of four octets, each in the range 0 to 255, or 8 bits per number. Thus, IPv4 provides an addressing capability of 232 or approximately 4.3 billion addresses. Address exhaustion was not initially a concern in IPv4 as this version was originally presumed to be a test of DARPA's networking concepts.[4] During the first decade of operation of the Internet, it became apparent that methods had to be developed to conserve address space. In the early 1990s, even after the redesign of the addressing system using a classless network model, it became clear that this would not suffice to prevent IPv4 address exhaustion, and that further changes to the Internet infrastructure were needed.[5]
The last unassigned top-level address blocks of 16 million IPv4 addresses were allocated in February 2011 by the Internet Assigned Numbers Authority (IANA) to the five regional Internet registries (RIRs). However, each RIR still has available address pools and is expected to continue with standard address allocation policies until one /8 Classless Inter-Domain Routing (CIDR) block remains. After that, only blocks of 1024 addresses (/22) will be provided from the RIRs to a local Internet registry (LIR). As of September 2015, all of Asia-Pacific Network Information Centre (APNIC), the Réseaux IP Européens Network Coordination Centre (RIPE_NCC), Latin America and Caribbean Network Information Centre (LACNIC), and American Registry for Internet Numbers (ARIN) have reached this stage.[6][7][8] This leaves African Network Information Center (AFRINIC) as the sole regional internet registry that is still using the normal protocol for distributing IPv4 addresses. As of November 2018, AFRINIC's minimum allocation is /22 or 1024 IPv4 addresses. A LIR may receive additional allocation when about 80% of all the address space has been utilized.[9]
Comparison with IPv4
On the Internet, data is transmitted in the form of network packets. IPv6 specifies a new packet format, designed to minimize packet header processing by routers.[10][11]
Larger address space
The main advantage of IPv6 over IPv4 is its larger address space. The length of an IPv6 address is 128 bits, compared with 32 bits in IPv4.[10] In addition, the IPv4 address space is poorly allocated; in 2011, approximately 14% of all available addresses were utilized.[12]
Multicasting
Multicasting, the transmission of a packet to multiple destinations in a single send operation, is part of the base specification in IPv6. In IPv4 this is an optional (although commonly implemented) feature.[13] IPv6 multicast addressing has features and protocols in common with IPv4 multicast, but also provides changes and improvements by eliminating the need for certain protocols. IPv6 does not implement traditional IP broadcast, i.e. the transmission of a packet to all hosts on the attached link using a special broadcast address, and therefore does not define broadcast addresses. In IPv6, the same result is achieved by sending a packet to the link-local all nodes multicast group at address ff02::1, which is analogous to IPv4 multicasting to address 224.0.0.1. IPv6 also provides for new multicast implementations, including embedding rendezvous point addresses in an IPv6 multicast group address, which simplifies the deployment of inter-domain solutions.[14]
In IPv4 it is very difficult for an organization to get even one globally routable multicast group assignment, and the implementation of inter-domain solutions is arcane.[15] Unicast address assignments by a local Internet registry for IPv6 have at least a 64-bit routing prefix, yielding the smallest subnet size available in IPv6 (also 64 bits). With such an assignment it is possible to embed the unicast address prefix into the IPv6 multicast address format, while still providing a 32-bit block, the least significant bits of the address, or approximately 4.2 billion multicast group identifiers. Thus each user of an IPv6 subnet automatically has available a set of globally routable source-specific multicast groups for multicast applications.[16]
Stateless address autoconfiguration (SLAAC)
IPv6 hosts can configure themselves automatically when connected to an IPv6 network using the Neighbor Discovery Protocol via Internet Control Message Protocol version 6 (ICMPv6) router discovery messages. When first connected to a network, a host sends a link-local router solicitation multicast request for its configuration parameters; routers respond to such a request with a router advertisement packet that contains Internet Layer configuration parameters.[17] Routers present a special case of requirements for address configuration, as they often are sources of autoconfiguration information, such as router and prefix advertisements. Stateless configuration of routers can be achieved with a special router renumbering protocol.[18]
Renumbering an existing network for a new connectivity provider with different routing prefixes is a major effort with IPv4.[19][20] With IPv6, however, changing the prefix announced by a few routers can in principle renumber an entire network, since the host identifiers (the least-significant 64 bits of an address) can be independently self-configured by a host.[17]
SLAAC privacy extensions
A unique IP address can potentially be used to track the network activity of a device. Moreover, when using IPv6 address auto-configuration, the Interface Identifier (MAC address) of a network card is used to make its public IPv6 interface identifier unique, exposing the type of hardware used and providing a unique handle for a user's online activity.[] Autoconfiguration on the basis of the network card MAC address is therefore a particular privacy concern for mobile devices, such as laptops, because when they access the Internet from different local area networks, their MAC based interface identifier would always stay the same. Thus the MAC address based interface identifier can be used to track the movement and usage of a particular mobile device.[21]
When IPv6 was developed in the mid-90s, the Internet was not accessed by a large number of mobile devices and privacy was not the priority it has become today. To address these privacy concerns, the SLAAC protocol was updated with mechanisms that were termed "Privacy Extensions for Stateless Address Autoconfiguration in IPv6", codified in RFC 4941. This allows for the IPv6 address interface identifier to be generated randomly. If the same interface identifier is generated for two devices in the same local area network, the Duplicate Address Detection (DAD) function of the IPv6 Neighbor Discovery Protocol (NDP) will resolve the situation. The SLAAC privacy extension also implements a time out, which is configurable, so that the IPv6 interface addresses will be discarded and a new interface identifier is generated. Typically the time out is configured to 24 hours. So IPv6 autoconfiguration will generate and set a new IPv6 host address every day. As of late 2014 the SLAAC privacy extensions functionality was implemented by the following operating systems: all Microsoft Windows after Windows XP, all versions of Mac OS X from 10.7 onward, all versions of iOS since 4.3, all versions of Android since 4.0 (Ice Cream Sandwich).[22] The privacy extension is now enabled by default in Windows (since XP SP1), OS X (since 10.7), and iOS (since version 4.3).[23][24] Some Linux distributions have enabled privacy extensions as well.[25]
Internet Protocol Security (IPsec) was originally developed for IPv6, but found widespread deployment first in IPv4, for which it was re-engineered. IPsec was a mandatory part of all IPv6 protocol implementations,[10] and Internet Key Exchange (IKE) was recommended, but with RFC 6434 the inclusion of IPsec in IPv6 implementations was downgraded to a recommendation because it was considered impractical to require full IPsec implementation for all types of devices that may use IPv6. However, as of RFC 4301 IPv6 protocol implementations that do implement IPsec need to implement IKEv2 and need to support a minimum set of cryptographic algorithms. This requirement will help to make IPsec implementations more interoperable between devices from different vendors. The IPsec Authentication Header (AH) and the Encapsulating Security Payload header (ESP) are implemented as IPv6 extension headers.[26]
Simplified processing by routers
The packet header in IPv6 is simpler than the IPv4 header. Many rarely used fields have been moved to optional header extensions.[27] With the simplified IPv6 packet header the process of packet forwarding by routers has been simplified. Although IPv6 packet headers are at least twice the size of IPv4 packet headers, packet processing by routers is generally more efficient, because less processing is required in routers due to the headers being aligned to match common word sizes.[10][11]
Unlike mobile IPv4, mobile IPv6 avoids triangular routing and is therefore as efficient as native IPv6. IPv6 routers may also allow entire subnets to move to a new router connection point without renumbering.[28]
Extension headers
The IPv6 packet header has a minimum size of 40 octets (320 bits). Options are implemented as extensions. This provides the opportunity to extend the protocol in the future without affecting the core packet structure.[10] However, a study in 2015 indicated that some network operators dropped IPv6 packets with extension headers when they traversed transit autonomous systems.[29]
Jumbograms
IPv4 limits packets to 65,535 (216-1) octets of payload. An IPv6 node can optionally handle packets over this limit, referred to as jumbograms, which can be as large as 4,294,967,295 (232-1) octets. The use of jumbograms may improve performance over high-MTU links. The use of jumbograms is indicated by the Jumbo Payload Option extension header.[30]
IPv6 packets
IPv6 packet header
IPv6 addresses have 128 bits. The design of the IPv6 address space implements a different design philosophy than in IPv4, in which subnetting was used to improve the efficiency of utilization of the small address space. In IPv6, the address space is deemed large enough for the foreseeable future, and a local area subnet always uses 64 bits for the host portion of the address, designated as the interface identifier, while the most-significant 64 bits are used as the routing prefix.[31]
The identifier is only unique within the subnet to which a host is connected. IPv6 has a mechanism for automatic address detection.[32]
Address representation
The 128 bits of an IPv6 address are represented in 8 groups of 16 bits each. Each group is written as four hexadecimal digits (sometimes called hextets[33][34] or more formally a hexadectets[35] and informally a quibble or quad-nibble [35]) and the groups are separated by colons (:). An example of this representation is 2001:0db8:0000:0000:0000:ff00:0042:8329.
For convenience, an IPv6 address may be abbreviated to shorter notations by application of the following rules.
One or more leading zeros from any groups of hexadecimal digits are removed; this is usually done to either all or none of the leading zeros. For example, the group 0042 is converted to 42.
Consecutive sections of zeros are replaced with a double colon (::). The double colon may only be used once in an address, as multiple use would render the address indeterminate. RFC 5952 recommends that a double colon not be used to denote an omitted single section of zeros.[36]
An example of application of these rules:
Initial address: 2001:0db8:0000:0000:0000:ff00:0042:8329
After removing all leading zeros in each group: 2001:db8:0:0:0:ff00:42:8329
After omitting consecutive sections of zeros: 2001:db8::ff00:42:8329
The loopback address 0000:0000:0000:0000:0000:0000:0000:0001 is defined in RFC 5156 and may be abbreviated to ::1 by using both rules.
As an IPv6 address may have more than one representation, the IETF has issued a proposed standard for representing them in text.[37]
Link-local address
All interfaces of IPv6 hosts require a link-local address. An IPv6 link-local address is derived from the MAC address of the interface and the prefix fe80::/10. The process involves filling the address space with prefix bits left-justified to the most-significant bit, and filling the MAC address in EUI-64 format into the least-significant bits. If any bits remain to be filled between the two parts, those are set to zero.[32]
Address uniqueness and router solicitation
Because IPv6 does not implement broadcast, on which the functionality of the Address Resolution Protocol (ARP) is based, the Neighbor Discovery Protocol (NDP, ND) is used at the link layer to map Layer 3 IPv6 addresses to Layer 2 addresses, such as the MAC address of Ethernet network cards. The NDP relies on ICMPv6 and multicast transmission.[3]:210 IPv6 hosts verify the uniqueness of their IPv6 addresses in a local area network (LAN) by sending a neighbor solicitation message asking for the link layer address of the IPv6 address. If any other host in the LAN is using that address, it responds. In a LAN, MAC addresses are designed to be unique on each network card, which minimizes chances of duplication.[38]
After having generated a link-local address, the IPv6 host determines if the LAN is connected to any router network card with IPv6 implementation by sending out a ICMPv6 router solicitation message to the all-routers[39][40]
The other information consists of one or more prefix information options for the subnets that the host is attached to, a lifetime for the prefix, and two flags:[38]
Global addressing
The assignment procedure for global addresses is similar to local address construction. The prefix is supplied from router advertisements on the network. Multiple prefix announcements cause multiple addresses to be configured.[38]
Stateless address autoconfiguration (SLAAC) requires a /64 address block, as defined in RFC 4291. Local Internet registries are assigned at least /32 blocks, which they divide among subordinate networks.[41] The initial recommendation stated assignment of a /48 subnet to end-consumer sites (RFC 3177). This was replaced by RFC 6177, which "recommends giving home sites significantly more than a single /64, but does not recommend that every home site be given a /48 either". /56s are specifically considered. It remains to be seen if ISPs will honor this recommendation. For example, during initial trials, Comcast customers were given a single /64 network.[42]
IPv6 in the Domain Name System
In the Domain Name System (DNS), hostnames are mapped to IPv6 addresses by AAAA ("quad-A") resource records. For reverse resolution, the IETF reserved the domain ip6.arpa, where the name space is hierarchically divided by the 1-digit hexadecimal representation of nibble units (4 bits) of the IPv6 address. This scheme is defined in RFC 3596.
When a dual-stack host queries a DNS server to resolve a fully qualified domain name (FQDN), the DNS client of the host sends two DNS requests, one querying A records and the other querying AAAA records. The host operating system may be configured with a preference for address selection rules RFC 6724.[43]
An alternate record type was used in early DNS implementations for IPv6, designed to facilitate network renumbering, the A6 records for the forward lookup and a number of other innovations such as bit-string labels and DNAME records. It is defined in RFC 2874 and its references (with further discussion of the pros and cons of both schemes in RFC 3364), but has been deprecated to experimental status (RFC 3363).
Transition mechanisms
IPv6 is not foreseen to supplant IPv4 instantaneously. Both protocols will continue to operate simultaneously for some time. Therefore, IPv6 transition mechanisms are needed to enable IPv6 hosts to reach IPv4 services and to allow isolated IPv6 hosts and networks to reach each other over IPv4 infrastructure.[44]
According to Silvia Hagen, a dual-stack implementation of the IPv4 and IPv6 on devices is the easiest way to migrate to IPv6.[45] Many other transition mechanisms use tunneling to encapsulate IPv6 traffic within IPv4 networks and vice versa. This is an imperfect solution, which reduces the maximum transmission unit (MTU) of a link and therefore complicates Path MTU Discovery, and may increase latency.[46][47]
Dual-stack IP implementation
Dual-stack IP implementations provide complete IPv4 and IPv6 protocol stacks in the operating system of a computer or network device on top of the common physical layer implementation, such as Ethernet. This permits dual-stack hosts to participate in IPv6 and IPv4 networks simultaneously. The method is defined in RFC 4213.[48]
A device with dual-stack implementation in the operating system has an IPv4 and IPv6 address, and can communicate with other nodes in the LAN or the Internet using either IPv4 or IPv6. The Domain Name System (DNS) protocol is used by both IP protocols to resolve fully qualified domain names (FQDN) and IP addresses, but dual stack requires that the resolving DNS server can resolve both types of addresses. Such a dual stack DNS server would hold IPv4 addresses in the A records, and IPv6 addresses in the AAAA records. Depending on the destination that is to be resolved, a DNS name server may return an IPv4 or IPv6 IP address, or both. A default address selection mechanism, or preferred protocol, needs to be configured either on hosts or the DNS server. The IETF has published Happy Eyeballs to assist dual stack applications, so that they can connect using both IPv4 and IPv6, but prefer an IPv6 connection if it is available. However, dual-stack also needs to be implemented on all routers between the host and the service for which the DNS server has returned a IPv6 address. Dual-stack clients should only be configured to prefer IPv6, if the network is able to forward IPv6 packets using the IPv6 versions of routing protocols. When dual stack networks protocols are in place the application layer can be migrated to IPv6.[49]
ISP customers with public-facing IPv6
IPv6 Prefix Assignment mechanism with IANA, RIRs, and ISPs.
Internet service providers (ISPs) are increasingly providing their business and private customers with public-facing IPv6 global unicast addresses. However, if in the local area network (LAN) IPv4 is still used, and the ISP can only provide a public facing IPv6, the IPv4 LAN addresses are translated into the public facing IPv6 address using NAT64, a network address translation (NAT) mechanism. Some ISPs cannot provide their customers with public-facing IPv4 and IPv6 addresses, thus supporting dual stack networking, because some ISPs have exhausted their globally routable IPv4 address pool. Meanwhile, ISP customers are still trying to reach IPv4 web servers and other destinations.[50]
A significant percentage of ISPs in all Regional Internet Registry (RIR) zones have obtained IPv6 address space. This includes many of the world's major ISPs and mobile network operators, such as Verizon Wireless, StarHub Cable, Chubu Telecommunications, Kabel Deutschland, Swisscom, T-Mobile, Internode and Telefonica.[51]
While some ISPs still allocate customers only IPv4 addresses, many ISPs allocate their customers only an IPv6 or dual stack IPv4 and IPv6. ISPs report the share of IPv6 traffic from customers over their network to be anything between 20% and 40%,[] but by mid-2017 IPv6 traffic still only accounted for a fraction of total traffic at several large Internet exchange points (IXPs). AMS-IX reported it to be 2% and SeattleIX reported 7%. A 2017 survey found that many DSL customers that were served by a dual stack ISP did not request DNS servers to resolve fully qualified domain names into IPv6 addresses. The survey also found that the majority of traffic from IPv6-ready webserver resources were still requested and served over IPv4, mostly due to ISP customers that did not use the dual stack facility provided by their ISP and to a lesser extent due to customers of IPv4-only ISPs.[52]
The technical basis for tunneling, or encapsulating IPv6 packets in IPv4 packets, is outlined in RFC 4213. When the Internet backbone was IPv4-only, one of the frequently used tunneling protocols was 6to4.[53]Teredo tunneling was also frequently used for integrating IPv6 LANs with the IPv4 Internet backbone. Teredo is outlined in RFC 4380 and allows IPv6 local area networks to tunnel over IPv4 networks, by encapsulating IPv6 packets within UDP. The Teredo relay is an IPv6 router that mediates between a Teredo server and the native IPv6 network. It was expected that 6to4 and Teredo would be widely deployed until ISP networks would switch to native IPv6, but by 2014 Google Statistics showed that the use of both mechanisms had dropped to almost 0.[54]
IPv4-mapped IPv6 addresses
Addresses in this group consist of an 80-bit prefix of zeros, the next 16 bits are ones, and the remaining, least-significant 32 bits contain the IPv4 address. For example, ::ffff:192.0.2.128 represents the IPv4 address 192.0.2.128. Another deprecated format for IPv4-compatible IPv6 addresses is ::192.0.2.128.[55]
Because of the significant internal differences between IPv4 and IPv6 protocol stacks, some of the lower-level functionality available to programmers in the IPv6 stack does not work the same when used with IPv4-mapped addresses. Some common IPv6 stacks do not implement the IPv4-mapped address feature, either because the IPv6 and IPv4 stacks are separate implementations (e.g., Microsoft Windows 2000, XP, and Server 2003), or because of security concerns (OpenBSD).[56] On these operating systems, a program must open a separate socket for each IP protocol it uses. On some systems, e.g., the Linux kernel, NetBSD, and FreeBSD, this feature is controlled by the socket option IPV6_V6ONLY, as specified in RFC 3493.[57]
IPv6 readiness
Compatibility with IPv6 networking is mainly a software or firmware issue. However, much of the older hardware that could in principle be upgraded is likely to be replaced instead. In 2010, the American Registry for Internet Numbers (ARIN) suggested that all Internet servers be prepared to serve IPv6-only clients by January 2012.[58]
Host software may have only IPv4 or only IPv6 networking software, or it may support dual-stack, or hybrid dual-stack operation. Many popular applications with networking capabilities are compliant. Some software transitioning mechanisms are outlined in RFC 4038, RFC 3493, and RFC 3542.
Hardware and embedded systems
The CableLabs consortium published the 160 Mbit/s DOCSIS 3.0 IPv6-ready specification for cable modems in August 2006. DOCSIS 2.0 was updated as DOCSIS 2.0 + IPv6 to provide IPv6 support, which may be available with a firmware upgrade.[59][60]
Shadow networks
The addition of nodes having IPv6 enabled by default by the software manufacturer, may result in the inadvertent creation of shadow networks, causing IPv6 traffic flowing into networks having only IPv4 security management in place. This may also occur with operating system upgrades, when the newer operating system enables IPv6 by default, while the older one did not. Failing to update the security infrastructure to accommodate IPv6 can lead to IPv6 traffic bypassing it.[61] Shadow networks have occurred on business networks in which enterprises are replacing Windows XP systems that do not have an IPv6 stack enabled by default, with Windows 7 systems, that do.[62] Some IPv6 stack implementors have therefore recommended disabling IPv4 mapped addresses and instead using a dual-stack network where supporting both IPv4 and IPv6 is necessary.[63]
Standardization through RFCs
Working-group proposals
Due to the anticipated global growth of the Internet, the Internet Engineering Task Force (IETF) in the early 1990s started an effort to develop a next generation IP protocol.[3]:209 By the beginning of 1992, several proposals appeared for an expanded Internet addressing system and by the end of 1992 the IETF announced a call for white papers.[64] In September 1993, the IETF created a temporary, ad-hoc IP Next Generation (IPng) area to deal specifically with such issues. The new area was led by Allison Mankin and Scott Bradner, and had a directorate with 15 engineers from diverse backgrounds for direction-setting and preliminary document review:[5][65] The working-group members were J. Allard (Microsoft), Steve Bellovin (AT&T), Jim Bound (Digital Equipment Corporation), Ross Callon (Wellfleet), Brian Carpenter (CERN), Dave Clark (MIT), John Curran (NEARNET), Steve Deering (Xerox), Dino Farinacci (Cisco), Paul Francis (NTT), Eric Fleischmann (Boeing), Mark Knopper (Ameritech), Greg Minshall (Novell), Rob Ullmann (Lotus), and Lixia Zhang (Xerox).[66]
The Internet Engineering Task Force adopted the IPng model on 25 July 1994, with the formation of several IPng working groups.[5] By 1996, a series of RFCs was released defining Internet Protocol version 6 (IPv6), starting with RFC 1883. (Version 5 was used by the experimental Internet Stream Protocol.)
RFC standardization
The first RFC to standardize IPv6 was the RFC 1883 in 1995, which became obsoleted by RFC 2460 in 1998.[3]:209 In July 2017 this RFC was replaced by RFC 8200.[67]
Monthly IPv6 allocations per Regional Internet registry (RIR)
The 1993 introduction of Classless Inter-Domain Routing (CIDR) in the routing and IP address allocation for the Internet, and the extensive use of network address translation (NAT), delayed IPv4 address exhaustion. The final phase of exhaustion started on 3 February 2011.[68] Universities were among the early adopters of IPv6. Virginia Tech deployed IPv6 at a trial location in 2004 and has since expanded IPv6 deployment across the campus network. In 2016 82% of the traffic on their network used IPv6. Imperial College London has been experimenting with IPv6 deployment since 2003 and in 2016 the IPv6 traffic on their networks averaged between 20% and 40%. A significant portion of this IPv6 traffic was generated through their high energy physics collaboration with CERN, which depends entirely on IPv6.[69]
Since 2008, the Domain Name System (DNS) supports IPv6. In the same year, IPv6 was first used in a major world event during the 2008 Summer Olympic Games in Beijing.[70][71] As of September 2013[update], about 4% of domain names and 16.2% of the networks in the Internet had IPv6 protocol support.[72] In 2014 IPv4 still carried more than 99% of worldwide Internet traffic.[73][74]
The deployment of IPv6 in the Internet backbone is in progress. In 2018 only 25.3% of the about 54,000 autonomous systems advertised both IPv4 and IPv6 prefixes in the global Border Gateway Protocol (BGP) routing database. A further 243 networks advertised only an IPv6 prefix. Internet backbone transit networks offering IPv6 support exist in every country globally, except in parts of Africa, the Middle East and China.[75] By mid-2018 some major European broadband ISPs had deployed IPv6 for the majority of their customers. British Sky Broadcasting provided over 86% of its customers with IPv6, Deutsche Telekom had 56% deployment of IPv6, XS4ALL in the Netherlands had 73% deployment and in Belgium the broadband ISPs VOO and Telenet had 73% and 63% IPv6 deployment respectively.[76] In the United States the broadband ISP Comcast had an IPv6 deployment of about 66%. In 2018 Comcast reported an estimated 36.1 million IPv6 users, while AT&T reported 22.3 million IPv6 users.[77]
The Internet exchanges in Amsterdam and Seattle are the only large exchanges that publicly show IPv6 traffic statistics, which as of October 2018 are tracking at about 2.9% and 7.7%, growing at about 1.9% and -2.6% per year, respectively.[78][79] As of 15 June 2019[update], the percentage of users reaching Google services with IPv6 is about 29%[80] and about 26% of Alexa Top 1000 web servers support IPv6.[81] According to the Internet Society's report State of IPv6 Deployment 2018 major mobile network providers drove the IPv6 adoption. In Japan the mobile network providers Nippon Telegraph and Telephone (NTT), KDDI and SoftBank pushed forward on IPv6 deployment, while in India IPv6 adoption was advanced by Jio,[82] which has a LTE network which covers India's 29 states and reaches 80% of the country's population.[83] In 2018 Jio had an estimated 237.6 million IPv6 users.[84] In the United States IPv6 adoption was pioneered by Verizon Wireless. In 2009 Verizon mandated IPv6 operation and reduced IPv4 to an optional capability for LTE cellular hardware.[85] Verizon productively deployed IPv6 across its existing IPv4 network to avoid the network complexity that arose from networks using the same private network IPv4 address space. As of 2018 80% of the traffic from Verizon Wireless to major content providers was using IPv6.[86]
In the United States, some data centers are transitioned to IPv6 networking. Since 2018, Facebook has been eliminating IPv4 in data centers, while the network-facing load balancers accept IPv4 and IPv6 traffic. LinkedIn and Microsoft have stated intentions to move their networks to IPv6.[87]Google, LinkedIn, and Akamai are as of 2018 deploying IPv6 in data center networks and are connecting natively with IPv6 end users.[88]
Some governments, including the United States and China, have issued guidelines and requirements for IPv6 capability.[]
China Next Generation Internet
Comparison of IPv6 support in operating systems
Comparison of IPv6 support in common applications
DoD IPv6 product certification
Happy Eyeballs
List of IPv6 tunnel brokers
University of New Hampshire InterOperability Laboratory
^ New Zealand IPv6 Task Force. "FAQs". Retrieved 2015.
^ Siddiqui, Aftab (17 July 2017). "RFC 8200 - IPv6 has been standardized". Internet Society. Retrieved 2018.
^ a b c d Rami Rosen (2014). Linux Kernel Networking: Implementation and Theory. New York: Apress. ISBN 9781430261971. OCLC 869747983.
^ Google IPv6 Conference 2008: What will the IPv6 Internet look like?. Event occurs at 13:35.
^ a b c Bradner, S.; Mankin, A. (January 1995). The Recommendation for the IP Next Generation Protocol. IETF. doi:10.17487/RFC1752. RFC 1752.
^ Rashid, Fahmida. "IPv4 Address Exhaustion Not Instant Cause for Concern with IPv6 in Wings". eWeek. Retrieved 2012.
^ Ward, Mark (14 September 2012). "Europe hits old internet address limits". BBC News. BBC. Retrieved 2012.
^ Huston, Geoff. "IPV4 Address Report".
^ "African Network Information Center : -". my.afrinic.net. Retrieved 2018.
^ a b c d e S. Deering; R. Hinden (December 1998), Internet Protocol, Version 6 (IPv6) Specification, Internet Engineering Task Force (IETF), RFC 2460 Obsoletes RFC 1883.
^ a b Partridge, C.; Kastenholz, F. (December 1994). "Technical Criteria for Choosing IP The Next Generation (IPng)". RFC 1726.
^ "Moving to IPv6: Now for the hard part (FAQ)". Deep Tech. CNET News. Archived from the original on 9 February 2011. Retrieved 2011.
^ RFC 1112, Host extensions for IP multicasting, S. Deering (August 1989)
^ RFC 3956, Embedding the Rendezvous Point (RP) Address in an IPv6 Multicast Address, P. Savola, B. Haberman (November 2004)
^ RFC 2908, The Internet Multicast Address Allocation Architecture, D. Thaler, M. Handley, D. Estrin (September 2000)
^ RFC 3306, Unicast-Prefix-based IPv6 Multicast Addresses, B. Haberman, D. Thaler (August 2002)
^ a b Thomson, S.; Narten, T.; Jinmei, T. (September 2007). "IPv6 Stateless Address Autoconfiguration". RFC 4862.
^ RFC 2894, Router Renumbering for IPv6, M. Crawford, August 2000.
^ Ferguson, P.; Berkowitz, H. (January 1997). "Network Renumbering Overview: Why would I want it and what is it anyway?". RFC 2071.
^ Berkowitz, H. (January 1997). "Router Renumbering Guide". RFC 2072.
^ T. Narten; R. Draves; S. Krishnan (September 2007). "Privacy Extensions for Stateless Address Autoconfiguration in IPv6". www.ietf.org. Retrieved 2017.
^ T. Narten; R. Draves; S. Krishnan (8 August 2014). "Privacy Extensions for IPv6 SLAAC". www.internetsociety.org. Retrieved 2017.
^ "Overview of the Advanced Networking Pack for Windows XP". web.archive.org. Archived from the original on 7 September 2017. Retrieved 2019.
^ Kaps, Reiko (13 April 2011). "IPv6: Privacy Extensions einschalten". Heise (in German). Retrieved 2019.
^ "Comment #61 : Bug #176125 : Bugs: "procps" package: Ubuntu". Bugs.launchpad.net. Retrieved 2012.
^ Silvia Hagen (2014). IPv6 Essentials: Integrating IPv6 Into Your IPv4 Network (3rd ed.). Sebastopol, CA: O'Reilly Media. p. 196. ISBN 978-1-4493-3526-7. OCLC 881832733.
^ "The History of Domain Names | IPv6". www.historyofdomainnames.com. Archived from the original on 12 June 2018. Retrieved 2018.
^ RFC 3963, Network Mobility (NEMO) Basic Protocol Support, V. Devarapalli, R. Wakikawa, A. Petrescu, P. Thubert (January 2005)
^ Gont, F.; Linkova, J.; Chown, T.; Liu, S. (October 2015). "Observations on the Dropping of Packets with IPv6 Extension Headers in the Real World". draft-ietf-v6ops-ipv6-ehs-in-real-world-01.
^ RFC 2675, IPv6 Jumbograms, D. Borman, S. Deering, R. Hinden (August 1999)
^ RFC 4291, p. 9
^ a b RFC 3315, R. Droms, J. Bound, B. Volz, T. Lemon, C. Perkins, and M. Carney, Dynamic Host Configuration Protocol for IPv6 (DHCPv6), July 2003 (Proposed Standard)
^ Graziani, Rick (2012). IPv6 Fundamentals: A Straightforward Approach to Understanding IPv6. Cisco Press. p. 55. ISBN 978-0-13-303347-2.
^ Coffeen, Tom (2014). IPv6 Address Planning: Designing an Address Plan for the Future. O'Reilly Media. p. 170. ISBN 978-1-4919-0326-1.
^ a b Horley, Edward (2013). Practical IPv6 for Windows Administrators. Apress. p. 17. ISBN 978-1-4302-6371-5.
^ S. Kawamura (August 2010). "A Recommendation for IPv6 Address Text Representation". section 4.2.2. RFC 5952.
^ S. Kawamura (August 2010). "A Recommendation for IPv6 Address Text Representation". RFC 5952.
^ a b c Narten, T. (August 1999). "Neighbor discovery and stateless autoconfiguration in IPv6". IEEE Internet Computing. 3 (4): 54-62. doi:10.1109/4236.780961.
^ S. Thomson (September 2007). "IPv6 Stateless Address Autoconfiguration". section 5.5.1. RFC 4862.
^ T. Narten (September 2007). "Neighbor Discovery for IP version 6 (IPv6)". section 6.3.7. RFC 4861.
^ "IPv6 Address Allocation and Assignment Policy". RIPE NCC. 8 February 2011. Retrieved 2011.
^ Brzozowski, John (31 January 2011). "Comcast Activates First Users With IPv6 Native Dual Stack Over DOCSIS". corporate.comcast.com. Comcast. Retrieved 2019.
^ Silvia Hagen (2014). IPv6 Essentials: Integrating IPv6 Into Your IPv4 Network. O'Reilly Media, Inc. p. 176. ISBN 9781449335267.
^ "IPv6 Transition Mechanism / Tunneling Comparison". Sixxs.net. Retrieved 2012.
^ Silvia Hagen (2014). IPv6 Essentials: Integrating IPv6 Into Your IPv4 Network. O'Reilly Media, Inc. pp. 222-223. ISBN 9781449335267.
^ "Advisory Guidelines for 6to4 Deployment". IETF. RFC 6343. Retrieved 2012.
^ "IPv6: Dual stack where you can; tunnel where you must". www.networkworld.com. 5 September 2007. Archived from the original on 11 May 2008. Retrieved 2012.
^ "Basic Transition Mechanisms for IPv6 Hosts and Routers". IETF. RFC 4213. Retrieved 2012.
^ Juniper TechLibrary (31 August 2017). "Understanding Dual Stacking of IPv4 and IPv6 Unicast Addresses". www.juniper.net. Retrieved 2017.
^ "IPv6". www.nro.net. Retrieved 2017.
^ Enric Pujol (12 June 2017). "What stops IPv6 traffic in a dual-stack ISP?". www.apnic.net. Retrieved 2017.
^ Steven J. Vaughan-Nichols (14 October 2010). "Five ways for IPv6 and IPv4 to peacefully co-exist". www.zdnet.com. Retrieved 2017.
^ Silvia Hagen (2014). IPv6 Essentials: Integrating IPv6 Into Your IPv4 Network. O'Reilly Media, Inc. p. 33. ISBN 9781449335267.
^ "IP Version 6 Addressing Architecture". IETF. February 2006. RFC 4291. Retrieved 2017.
^ inet6(4) - OpenBSD Kernel Interfaces Manual
^ "Basic Socket Interface Extensions for IPv6". IETF. February 2003. p. 22. RFC 3493. Retrieved 2017.
^ "Web sites must support IPv6 by 2012, expert warns". Network World. 21 January 2010. Retrieved 2010.
^ "DOCSIS 2.0 Interface". Cablemodem.com. 29 October 2007. Archived from the original on 4 September 2009. Retrieved 2009.
^ "RMV6TF.org" (PDF). Archived from the original (PDF) on 5 January 2012. Retrieved 2012.
^ Mullins, Robert (5 April 2012), Shadow Networks: an Unintended IPv6 Side Effect, archived from the original on 11 April 2013, retrieved 2013
^ Cicileo, Guillermo; Gagliano, Roque; O'Flaherty, Christian; et al. (October 2009). IPv6 For All: A Guide for IPv6 Usage and Application in Different Environments (PDF). p. 5. Retrieved 2013.
^ Jun-ichiro itojun Hagino (October 2003). "IPv4-Mapped Addresses on the Wire Considered Harmful".
^ Bradner, S.; Mankin, A. (December 1993). "IP: Next Generation (IPng) White Paper Solicitation". RFC 1550.
^ "History of the IPng Effort". Sun. Archived from the original on 23 May 2014.
^ "The Recommendation for the IP Next Generation Protocol - Appendix B". RFC 1752.
^ S. Deering; R. Hinden (July 2017), Internet Protocol, Version 6 (IPv6) Specification, Internet Engineering Task Force (IETF), ISSN 2070-1721, RFC 8200 Obsoletes RFC 2460.
^ "IPv4 Address Report". Potaroo.net. Retrieved 2012.
^ State of IPv6 Deployment 2018, Internet Society, 2018, p. 3
^ "Beijing2008.cn leaps to next-generation Net" (Press release). The Beijing Organizing Committee for the Games of the XXIX Olympiad. 30 May 2008. Archived from the original on 4 February 2009.
^ Das, Kaushik (2008). "IPv6 and the 2008 Beijing Olympics". IPv6.com. Retrieved 2008.
^ Mike Leber (2 October 2010). "Global IPv6 Deployment Progress Report". Hurricane Electric. Retrieved 2011.
^ van Beijnum, Iljitsch (28 August 2014). "IPv6 adoption starting to add up to real numbers: 0.6 percent". Ars Technica. Retrieved 2015.
^ David Frost (20 April 2011). "Ipv6 traffic volumes going backwards". iTWire. Retrieved 2012.
^ State of IPv6 Deployment 2018, Internet Society, 2018, p. 7-8
^ "Traffic Graphs | www.seattleix.net". www.seattleix.net. Retrieved 2017.
^ "AMS-IX - sFlow Statistics". stats.ams-ix.net. Retrieved 2019.
^ "IPv6". Google Statistics. Retrieved 2019.
^ "Measurements | World IPv6 Launch". www.worldipv6launch.org. Retrieved 2019.
^ Reliance Jio Infocomm Limited, Cellular Operators Association of India
^ Derek Morr (9 June 2009). "Verizon Mandates IPv6 Support for Next-Gen Cell Phones". CircleID.
IPv6 in the Linux Kernel by Rami Rosen.
Free Pool of IPv4 Address Space Depleted
An Introduction and Statistics about IPV6
View Cisco Self-Study: Implementing Cisco IPv6 Networks (IPV6) (paperback): Implementing IPv6
IPv6 Quick Hits: IPv6 - Why IPv6
What is IPV6 ? | Kyu aa rahi hai ipv6 ? | Explained in Hindi
Key Issues in IPv6 Today by Vint Cerf at gogoNET LIVE! IPv6 Event
IPv6 Video Cheat Sheet: Enabling IPv6 Routing
IPv6 Conference & Workshops 2012 - What Makes Enterprises Want to Adopt IPv6 Now
Gain control over IPv6 addressing with IPv6 DHCP-stateful
IPv6 - the Two Way Internet by Latif Ladid at gogoNET LIVE! IPv6 Event
IPv6 - Lesson 3 - Subnetting in IPv4 - (Needed to understand IPv6)
Collection Book Cisco Self-Study: Implementing Cisco IPv6 Networks (IPV6)
[Download] IPv6 Fundamentals: A Straightforward Approach to Understanding IPv6 Free Online
Read Cisco Self-Study: Implementing Cisco IPv6 Networks (IPV6) Ebook Free
[PDF Download] IPv6 Fundamentals: A Straightforward Approach to Understanding IPv6 [PDF] Full
[PDF] Migrating to IPv6: A Practical Guide to Implementing IPv6 in Mobile and Fixed Networks
About For Books Migrating to Ipv6: A Practical Guide to Implementing IPv6 in Mobile and Fixed
Curso Cisco CCNA - Fundamentos de IPv6 - Introduccion a IPv6
PDF [FREE] DOWNLOAD Cisco Self-Study: Implementing Cisco IPv6 Networks (IPV6) (paperback)
FREE [PDF] Migrating to IPv6: A Practical Guide to Implementing IPv6 in Mobile and Fixed Networks
[Free Read] Cisco Self-Study: Implementing Cisco IPv6 Networks (IPV6) Free Online
Download Cisco Self-Study: Implementing Cisco IPv6 Networks (IPV6) Read Online


Mama always said, life is like a man in a step class. You never know where to put your feet.
Well, actually my mama never said that, but it sure felt true when I found myself in a step class recently; which is healthier than eating a box of chocolates even when it is frustrating and challenging.
Do your best. Follow your guidance. Accept and realize that your best will vary from day to day.
I hope you find your next step class that pushes you beyond your comfort zone.
Leave a comment for: "Life is Like a Guy in Step Class"


The dimple pattern controls ball flight, and we have developed three pattern's with varying dimple sizes, depths and edge shapes to control lift and drag coefficients, force angle and spin ratios.
A slice or hook shot shape is due mainly to the ball's spinning motion (about its vertical axis) and the Magnus effect, causing a horizontal force that moves the ball away from a straight line in its flight. As an example, with our 336 dimple pattern, we aimed to reduce the effects of Magnus force to reduce the severity of the slice or hook. This design creates the best combination to optimise lift, carry and roll for all golfers, not just tour players.
The cover on our PRO balls (SD-01, SD-02 & SD-05)is a thermoset cast urethane, for professional-grade feel and spin control. Backspin on a golf ball causes a vertical force that counteracts the force of gravity slightly, and enables the ball to remain airborne a little longer. This allows the ball to travel further than a non-spinning ball. The softer urethane cover of the SD-01 and SD-05 helps increase spin rates, providing more backspin (if struck correctly, of course) and a great soft feel.
The mantle layer is found inside our 3 piece 'tour' balls and is used to improve feel and control. Our mantles are a high performance DuPont HPF resin which performs multiple roles within the SD-01, SD-02 and SD-05. On full speed swings (driver, long irons) the mantle works with the core to increase spin and improve feel. Our mantle layer's were developed to maintain faster ball speeds and to meet our compression and feel targets.
The core helps us control compression, driver spin rates and overall ball speed. The USGA regulates ball velocity and we have designed various core formulation's to deliver the maximum speed allowed for each model, while controlling compression to provide the feel required.


Dr. Julie Lee has been performing refractive surgery since 1995. He has performed RK, PRK, LASIK, and Refractive Lens Exchange. Dr. Julie Lee performs all pre-operative and post-operative exams, and spends time with his refractive surgery patients, making sure to answer all the questions they may have about the procedure.
Dr. Julie Lee is committed to helping you decide which vision correction option is most appropriate for you. Whether you choose LASIK, PRK, NearVisionSM CK®, or monovision contact lenses, Dr. Julie Lee will strive to provide you with the best possible results. If you would like to find out more about LASIK or other refractive surgery options, please contact our office at (502) 447-7315 to arrange a free screening.
Myopia, or nearsightedness, is a condition that occurs when the eye is longer or has a steeper cornea than a normal eye. For myopic individuals, close objects can be seen clearly, while objects at greater distance appear blurry.
Hyperopia, or farsightedness, occurs when the eye is shorter or has a flatter cornea than a normal eye. For hyperopic individuals, far-away objects are seen more clearly than objects close by.
Astigmatism describes a condition in which the eye is irregularly curved, which causes light rays to be focused inconsistently depending on their angle of origin with respect to the eye. Astigmatism may be to blame for blurry vision, headaches, eye pain, fatigue, and double vision.
Presbyopia describes the natural degradation of vision with age. It typically manifests around age 45, when the crystalline lens begins losing its focusing ability. Individuals experiencing presbyopia have to hold reading material further away or must rely on reading glasses. Conductive Keratoplasty® is an FDA approved procedure to correct presbyopia.
Laser vision correction involves reshaping the cornea to improve visual acuity using a high-energy laser known as the excimer laser. With the aid of this computer-controlled laser, Dr. Julie Lee is able to remove tissue from the cornea with extreme precision. The two laser eye surgeries performed most frequently by Dr. Julie Lee are laser in-situ keratomileusis (LASIK) and photorefractive keratectomy (PRK).
LASIK involves removing tissue from the middle layers of the cornea using the excimer laser. LASIK can be used to treat myopia, presbyopia, and astigmatism. There are two steps to the LASIK procedure. First, a corneal flap is created, which is lifted to expose the inner cornea for step two, tissue ablation by an excimer laser. Once the cornea has been reshaped, the flap is repositioned, at which point the procedure is complete. LASIK is popular because it is extremely effective, with very low incidence of complications. LASIK patients generally recover very quickly, with little discomfort reported following the procedure.
PRK differs from LASIK in that it uses the excimer laser to reshape the front surface of the cornea, rather than the interior layers. Part of the epithelium, a layer of cells on the outer surface of the cornea, is removed to expose the corneal tissue itself. Once the cornea has been reshaped, the procedure is complete. Because it takes several days for the epithelium to heal, PRK patients will have to wear a soft contact lens to protect the cornea. Dr. Julie Lee often recommends PRK to patients who are not good candidates for LASIK. PRK patients generally take longer to recover, and are required to use steroid eye drops for some time after the procedure to facilitate proper healing of the cornea.
New developments in laser vision correction technology have made LASIK even safer, more accurate, and more effective than ever before. These technologies are known as the IntraLase Method™, or "bladeless LASIK," and CustomVue™, or "custom LASIK." Both of these technologies have revolutionized laser vision correction by making completely customized procedures a reality.
he IntraLase® FS laser introduced the concept of blade-free LASIK in 2001, representing the first improvement in the procedure's first step – creation of the corneal flap. In the IntraLase Method™, a laser is used to create the corneal flap during LASIK, rather than the conventional microkeratome blade. Rapid, precise laser pulses applied to the cornea cause bubbles to form beneath the surface. Once the bubbles have formed, Dr. Julie Lee will separate the affected tissue to create the corneal flap.
The principle advantages of IntraLase® in comparison to the conventional LASIK procedure are fourfold. First, the procedure virtually eliminates most severe LASIK complications. Second, clinical studies show that IntraLase® reduces dry eye symptoms by 72%. Third, IntraLase® reduces the prevalence of irregularities from blade cutting that sometimes cause astigmatism and other problems. Finally, because the procedure uses a thinner flap, patients with thin corneas who would not be good candidates for the conventional microkeratome surgery can now have LASIK.
During the CustomVue™ procedure, also known as custom LASIK, Dr. Julie Lee uses the WaveScan Wavefront® System, created by VISX®, to create a detailed three dimensional image of the cornea before performing the LASIK procedure. The WaveScan® technology produces a WavePrint® map much like a fingerprint, which is unique to your eye. The WaveScan® digital information is then transferred to the VISX® STAR S4 excimer laser, allowing Dr. Julie Lee to reshape the cornea with an unsurpassed level of accuracy and precision.
The VISX® STAR S4 excimer laser system has both active and passive tracking mechanisms that allow Dr. Julie Lee to deliver this level of accuracy and precision. The ActiveTrak™ system tracks the eye's movements in three dimensions throughout the procedure, allowing fine-tuned mid-surgery adjustments that make precise results possible. Additionally, iris registration technology records unique landmarks on the iris in order to align the laser properly for treatment. The eye can rotate several degrees between mapping and surgery, but with iris registration this is no longer a concern.
The results from custom LASIK are impressive. This level of accuracy and precision provides you with the potential to achieve a level of vision that very often surpasses what can be achieved with glasses or contacts. With the CustomVue™ procedure, 98 percent of patients are able to achieve 20/20 vision or better without contacts, according to FDA studies.
Most individuals 18 years of age if strictly myopic and over 21 years old with myopia, hyperopia, and/or astigmatism are candidates for laser vision correction. A patient's vision must be stable for at least a year before undergoing laser vision correction.
Individuals who have degenerative or autoimmune diseases, or who have a condition that slows healing, are not good candidates for laser vision correction. Pregnant women and nursing mothers should wait until they are no longer pregnant or nursing before having laser vision correction. Patients with severe dry eyes or with a previous history of herpes corneal infection are not good LASIK candidates.
If you are interested in reducing your dependence on contacts or glasses, contact Dr. Julie Lee today for a comprehensive evaluation.
Though laser vision correction may be expensive, a variety of excellent financing options are available to our patients. Through CareCredit®, you can arrange a payment plan that works for you.


A small but mighty human force in the Everglades is doing more for Florida with skilled hands and good will than all the misguided billionaires with their causes and cash poking into Florida's election business.
But wait! If a billionaire wants to redeem himself and make a real difference in Florida, read on. I'd like to introduce him to the Swamp Apes.
The Swamp Apes are newly returned military veterans from Afghanistan and Iraq. They're still suffering from residual war trauma. They're home, on friendly soil, but with a sense of mission unaccomplished, they're doing a job few are prepared to do -- hunting down Burmese pythons in Everglades National Park.
And, quite honestly, these veterans could use a benefactor. They could use a billionaire. A lowly millionaire, even -- somebody with a taste for philanthropy and a need to leave a legacy -- to support their important work. Right now they receive no money but supply all the equipment and resources they need themselves. Most of the money comes out of Tom Rahill's pocket.
Rahill, 57, founded the Swamp Apes six years ago. His idea was to help vets overcome their post-traumatic stress disorder (PTSD) by enabling them to spend time in the wild. He's found a way to kill two birds with one stone -- provide vets the wilderness experience and help them complete a mission for the country they pledged to serve. Rahill finds it powerful medicine.
During an interview with ABC News, Rahill explained his theory of why the Swamp Apes succeed where other python hunters have failed. Two things, he said. It's their military training. They are focused, aware, comfortable keeping their wits even in extreme conditions. Also, it's the PTSD. It works to their advantage. One symptom of PTSD is hyper-vigilance. In the Everglades, where pythons blend like almost no other creature, vigilance is vital.
Rahill claims not only does the park benefit, but the veterans do, too. He claims there is a body of evidence, including a 2013 study published in the journal Military Medicine, that suggests time spent in the wild helps victims of PTSD surmount their trauma.
These are men who were told to defend the U.S. against all enemies. Need for a mission is still ingrained in them and the plight of the Everglades has given them one.
Right now the 30-or-so veterans who make up the Swamp Apes are all that stand between the certain death of native wildlife and the voracious Burmese python.
I know you know about this, I've written about it before and so have other Florida media. Burmese pythons, an estimated 100,000 of them in the park alone, are devouring every creature that moves, including native Florida alligators. This is no exaggeration. Racoons, opossums, bobcats, deer, great blue herons, wood storks all have disappeared -- really and truly disappeared, leaving behind an eerie and desolate ecosystem.
Everglades National Park spokesperson Linda Friar says the Swamp Apes are perfect for the job. Even though the park doesn't permit hunting, it has authorized the 30 "agents" -- all Swamp Apes -- to find and capture pythons. What makes the job so difficult is, snakes captured in the park have to be captured alive, can't be removed from the park and must be turned over to park biologists who euthanize them.
Frankly, I can't see why they shouldn't be killed on the spot jungle style -- a dart to the head. It's quick, humane and puts hunters in far less danger. But the bureaucratic nonsense in the federal government would stagger a billygoat, and nobody I can find is doing anything to get the rules changed. Rahill says since 2008, the team has captured 150 snakes. The goal next year is to bag at least 200.
Remember, we're talking about 100,000 pythons in Everglades National Park. Two hundred won't cut it.
Here's my point. If federal rules on python kills aren't going to change, if the feds insist on the laborious practice of bringing 'em back alive -- then we need to quadruple the number of "agents." We need to expand the Swamp Apes severally.
To cut the python population so that Everglades wildlife has a chance to survive, the park is going to have to give the Swamp Apes a department of their own. This is where a benefactor comes in -- someone who can set up a trust to keep a program of 120 to 200 hunters funded.
Rahill told ABC News his expenses now run about $20,000 a year for equipment, gas and other necessities. "It's all out of pocket for me," he said. "It's grown to a point where I can't afford it." Rahill is in the process of getting the Swamp Apes registered as a 501c3, in order to accept charitable donations.
Situations like this, a decimation of precious Florida wildlife by an exotic species left to overrun and destroy the Everglades ... this is what drives me so crazy. I think aboutthe amount of money we spend to do things in the Everglades that do little more than appease politicians preening for votes and shut up enivornmentalists with huge egos and an army of litigators.I remember all themoney Florida spent on bad land deals and repeated studies and torn-down-then-rebuilt reservoirs. Isee money pouring in from as far away as California to affect elections and ballot issues -- millions of dollars every week.
And now I'm thinking about Amendment 1, the Florida Water and Land Conservation Initiative. If itpasses, we will pay hundreds of millions each year for more land, a phenomenal amount of land, to leave unattended.
Ridding our national park of Burmese pythons, thousands of the creatures in a year, not hundreds of them, maybe that's a do-able goal. Maybe with the help of a benefactor -- a Tom Steyer, a Paul Tudor Jones, a Sheldon Adelson to the rescue -- we could make a statement, and do this comparatively small thing with the big result and save one of our greatest natural treasures.
You want to get a more personal feel for the Swamp Apes? They have a Facebook page.