[Eril-l] IPv6 survey results

[Electronic Resources in Libraries discussion list]

IPv6 survey

We received over 200 responses to our recent IPv6 survey, so thank you to all who completed our questionnaire.

The breakdown of responses is as follows:
Libraries*           81%
Publishers         35%
Platforms           1%
Other                   1%

*We've included all content subscribing organisations as "libraries" for the purposes of this analysis.

Geographical breakdown (Libraries)
Country
Percentage
Country
Percentage
Armenia
<1%
Italy
2%
Australia
2%
Japan
1%
Brazil
<1%
Korea
<1%
Canada
4%
Lebanon
<1%
China
<1%
Netherlands
1%
Czech Republic
1%
New Zealand
1%
Denmark
2%
Norway
1%
Egypt
<1%
Spain
1%
Finland
2%
Sweden
3%
France
2%
Switzerland
3%
Germany
8%
Taiwan
1%
Ghana
<1%
United Kingdom
8%
Hungary
<1%
USA
49%
India
<1%


We promised we'd share the results for the benefit of the scholarly communications community so here's what we learned:

IPv6
52% of respondents in all categories are already using IPv6 addresses (55% of publishers and 42% of libraries). This is evidence that IPv6 addresses are now firmly established. We received a large percentage of responses from USA based libraries, however, interestingly 62% of the libraries that say they are using IPv6 are based outside of the USA.

Publishers

  *   From the publisher replies 63% of respondents are hosted on 3rd party platforms, 37% are self-hosted.
  *   54% of the publisher respondents are able to provide access to content via IPv6. Of those publishers not currently able to provide access to content via IPv6 addresses, 62.5% are working towards providing this functionality.
  *   64% of hosted publishers are able to provide access to content via IPv6 addresses, as opposed to 38% of self-hosted publishers.

Libraries
>From the library replies 42% of library respondents are already using IPv6 addresses, 45% are not using IPv6 and 13% don't know whether or not IPv6 addresses are in use at their institution.

We also asked some additional questions about the use of various industry identifiers and got the following results:

Industry identifiers
The use of industry identifiers is quite different for the different types of responders, with Ringgold being the most established identifier among publisher responders and ROR being most established among library responders. It appears that ISNI and GRID IDs are used more by libraries than by publishers. We are particularly gratified to see the PSI Org ID becoming well established within both communities.

[cid:image001.png at 01DB2BAB.FF2DB870]

Publishers
ROR
26%
ISNI
11%
GRID
6%
Entity
31%
Ringgold
52%
PSI
31%


Libraries
ROR
30%
ISNI
15%
GRID
8%
Entity
30%
Ringgold
19%
PSI
20%

Notes
1 Unfortunately, the sample size of responses from platforms is not large enough to report any results.
2 Industry identifier percentages do not add up to 100% as respondents could pick multiple options.

We hope this information is helpful. Please reach out to us if you have any questions.

Kind regards,
Debbie Wilton
Director, Marketing and Library Liaison
PSI Ltd
Email: debbie at PSIregistry.org<mailto:debbie at PSIregistry.org>

[cid:image002.png at 01DB2AD9.DEC7FDC0]

-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.eril-l.org/pipermail/eril-l-eril-l.org/attachments/20241113/74f9cf71/attachment.htm>
-------------- next part --------------
A non-text attachment was scrubbed...
Name: image002.png
Type: image/png
Size: 52279 bytes
Desc: image002.png
URL: <http://lists.eril-l.org/pipermail/eril-l-eril-l.org/attachments/20241113/74f9cf71/attachment.png>
-------------- next part --------------
A non-text attachment was scrubbed...
Name: image001.png
Type: image/png
Size: 88376 bytes
Desc: image001.png
URL: <http://lists.eril-l.org/pipermail/eril-l-eril-l.org/attachments/20241113/74f9cf71/attachment-0001.png>