Why is there no love for IPv6?
Why don't many people prefer to use IPv6? Doesn't it work the same as IPv4? As far as I know, IPv4 has a limitation of 4 billion addresses, which is why IPv6 was invented. So why isn't it widely adopted?
Success is not just a destination; it's a journey of growth, learning, and resilience. 🚀🌱
Tagged:
Comments
Cause many ISPs still don't support IPv6.
That's cause most servers still supports IPv4.
That's cause many ISPs still don't support IPv6.
That's cause... wait, it's the chicken and egg problem all over again!
So basically unless most of the big company says they'll stop using IPv4 and only allow IPv6 traffic, this isn't happening anytime soon.
Reminds me of the whole SSL thing google/chrome did back in the 2000s which forced almost all websites to get SSL certs.
Websites have ads, I have ad-blocker.
Because most people are still living in 2024, not 2036 !
blog | exploring visually |
Agree.
Big changes only happen under duress.
Especially since it doesn't provide immediate value for companies.
Some don't make the effort because it costs them more than it brings in.
They prefer to pay for IP addresses, which used to be free. In the end, it's the users who pay.
And unfortunately they're not yet expensive enough for IPv6 to become the standard.
And not everyone is equally affected by the shortage of IPv4 addresses. Sure, if you want a VPS, you'll need an IP address to go with it, but if you only want shared hosting or email hosting, the IP address can easily be shared, so there isn't much incentive for shared/email hosting providers to move to IPv6 (or even offer IPv6 support at all). Unfortunately, most users are still happy enough to buy IPv4-only services, but that means that they can't then move to IPv6 themselves.
BTW, I recently bought some shared hosting (which was advertised with IPv6 support and 99.99% network uptime), turned out IPv6 didn't work at all. Support couldn't really be bothered getting IPv6 to work, so I asked for my money back. Another shared hosting provider (who also claimed to support IPv6) only managed to get IPv6 working after a few attempts from support.
Oh, even for VPSes IPv6 support isn't always on par with IPv4 support. Issues I have seen are lack of reverse DNS for IPv6 (when offered for IPv4), or the DNS servers handling reverse DNS for IPv6 only being reachable via IPv4 (but not IPv6).
It's really sad that IPv6 (even if advertised) is mostly seen as just best effort.
Most people probably do, they just don't realise it. If you've got IPv6 connectivity from your ISP it will be the default try for most OSes. Nearly all new players in the broadband market in the UK use IPv6 primarily and CG-NAT for IPv4. I would guess this would be a similar case elsewhere with established players hoarding their allocations.
Having switched recently from an IPv4 only cable ISP (and having to use a HE tunnel to actually give me IPv6), I'm surprised how many mainstream services do actually use IPv6 these days. Ordinarily I don't look or care unless there's a problem.
IPv6 adoption really is happening, it's just growing slowly and organically, IPv4 will surely never die, but who cares.
Lots of people DO complain that GitHub is IPv4 only, can only be time before... oh yes Microsoft, maybe not.
This is a very interesting video on the last decade of IP addressing and the projections for the future.
It can only change, if someone power off the relevant servers and or provide an end date.
"People" does not care or even know what they run, as long as they get to Youtube and Tiktok they do not give a shit.
But anyway, adoption is happening, over 40% of all traffic is ipv6 and it's growing rapidly. It will take time, there is nothing harder than teaching geeks something new, but as generations shifts ipv6 will be the new "normal". I've been running ipv6 as my primary protocol for over a decade and it's extremely rare that I experience any kind of problems, the only thing I can think of right now is github.
https://www.google.com/intl/en/ipv6/statistics.html
https://aws.amazon.com/blogs/aws/new-aws-public-ipv4-address-charge-public-ip-insights/
With each day IPv4 usage becomes more and more expensive
Check our KVM VPS (flags are clickable): 🇵🇱 🇸🇪 | Looking glass: 🇵🇱 🇸🇪
@GeekWanderer
THX for the video, the most interesting part in my opinion, is from minute 25:46
Q: "Why is there no love for IPv6?"
My Answer is that we really not need it. The guy in the video explained it much better than I ever could.
There are still hundred of /24 IPV4 out there sitting unused. And every device on the planet does not need a unique IP Address.
If it has a unique ip address and you do not want NAT, then you will have to protect all those devices from external HACK and software running today on consumer devices is far from hack proof, so they are better away behind NAT.
Phones, fridge, micro, and consumer devices need NAT, not unique addresses.
Hype on IPV6 is mostly temporary as much of the traffic thru it is not filtered, as soon as it will be, the hype will dye out.
Host-C - VPS Services Provider - AS211462
"If there is no struggle there is no progress"
I'd bet that by 2036 we all would have had dropped the effort of global adoption of IPv6.
Agree and disagree.
Yes, technically, if IPv4 addresses were better used, we'd potentially have enough IPv4 addresses for services that really need a dedicated IP.
But that's not the case today, as ips subnets are distributed. It's too late for that.
So we're in an era where we're paying for IP addresses. Which is not normal.
So we need IPv6!
two more weeks until ipv4 runs out.
it's still hilarious how goyim think ISP adopting IPv6 will make them get one for free. lol you'll be paying extra for it, and you'll pay another fee for a
/128too.Fuck this 24/7 internet spew of trivia and celebrity bullshit.
My ISP hands out free /48 ipv6, but you have to pay if you want a ip4 without cgnat.
Most ISP's around here have been running ipv6 for a decade and I've never heard of a single one charging extra for it.
My ISP does not provide IPv6 for home users. The IP addresses from the IPv6 tunnel are not clean enough, causing captchas to keep popping up and Google to detect the wrong region (shifted to China but ads free).
Neither paying 1600 USD / YR for a LIR is normal, I can say that we are actually pay-ing for IP's, even if they are IPV6.
I have been hearing this for the past decade or so......
@rcy026 has a perfect point, people could not care less for ipv4/6/9 as long as the stuff works.
Last year, 2023, my IPV6 routes were different from IPV4, today they follow the same path as IPV4 in upstream. This is my case, and I will not generalize it with other providers here that have much better connections or more uplinks.
Whatever benefit from IPV6 was regarding fewer hops or better speed, that gap is starting to narrow down.
As there are a fix limit of Transport Providers out there, there is no "speed" benefit from either using 4 or 6 in my opinion.
The only benefit is that you do not do NAT + Port Forward. I agree, that there are some use cases where individual public IP is needed.
Might something change in the future regarding how we use ip's? probably.
My biggest concern regarding IPV6 is filtering and think of filtering as protecting the inside network, in my case the customers. In 4 it was simple, in 6, not so...
Host-C - VPS Services Provider - AS211462
"If there is no struggle there is no progress"
Remember - NAT is not a firewall!
Check our KVM VPS (flags are clickable): 🇵🇱 🇸🇪 | Looking glass: 🇵🇱 🇸🇪
money
for now.
Fuck this 24/7 internet spew of trivia and celebrity bullshit.
They absolutely need to hand out at least a single /64, otherwise SLAAC won't work.
What they might charge for is for a static prefix. My ISP gives me a /56 but it is dynamic.
They've been doing so for close to 10 years now, and I promise you they will continue.
You see, consumer ISP's are companies, they are driven by profit. Most consumer ISP compete by price, consumers simply want the cheapest deal available that provides them with what they want, which is internet access. So, any ISP with half a brain understands that they need to keep costs down to be able to sell their product cheaper then the competition.
IPv6 provides the same functionality as IP4, but at a lower cost. It really is that simple. IPv6 costs nothing, while IP4 is getting increasingly more expensive every day. ISP's do not spend millions of dollar on CGNAT solutions because they think it's funny, they do it because they have to. So IP4 is expensive, IPv6 is not. 10-15 years ago it was different, you needed routers and equipment that supported IPv6 which meant extra cost. Today you can not buy a router without support for IPv6, they simply do not exist, so if you have routers you already have IPv6. So basically, you chose between free IPv6 or IP4 that costs a shitload of money. Most ISP's are not run by idiots so they figured this out a long time ago. Any ISP that does not provide IPv6 to it's customers will be left behind and go out of business. Maybe not today or tomorrow, but I promise you that in 10 years time any ISP trying to stick with IP4 only will be gone.
The widespread adoption of IPv6 is a gradual process. While IPv4 exhaustion is inevitable, workarounds like NAT and the costs and complexities involved with full IPv6 transition continue to slow progress for many organizations.
By eye, I'd say IPv6 traffic outweighs IPv4 by about 2 to 1, measured on my router. Need to gather some longer term data to get more concrete numbers.
(and of course a chunk of the lingering IPv4 traffic will be to places like Github...)
I hope this is true, but not for my ISP. They refuse to do IPv6 and happily deploy 6RD.
The all seeing eye sees everything...