Remix.run Logo
alt227 2 hours ago

IPv6 was superceded by NAT a long time ago. It will die a slw and quiet death which is why it is now being ignored by training facilities and experts worldwide.

DrewADesign 2 hours ago | parent | next [-]

Digital Ocean didn’t even have an ipv6 address on by default in the droplet I created last week. It’s just a switch to flip, but I’ll bet the support costs of hobbyists/enthusiasts not realizing they needed to also write firewall rules, make sure ports weren’t open for databases and things like that for ipv6.

PaulHoule 2 hours ago | parent | next [-]

It's a "just doesn't work" experience every time that I try it and I don't experience any value from it, it's not like there isn't anything I can connect to on IPv6 that I can't connect to on IPv4.

My ISP has finally mastered providing me with reliable albeit slow DSL. Fiber would change my life, there just isn't any point in asking for IPv6.

Also note those bloated packets are death for many modern applications like VoIP.

Spooky23 2 hours ago | parent | next [-]

Exactly. Spectrum delivers good IPv6 service in my area. I tried it when I upgraded my gateway. All of my devices are assigned 4 IPv6 IPs, hostnames are replaced by auto assigned stuff from the ISP, and lots of random things don’t work.

I went from being pumped to learn more to realizing I’m going to invest a lot of time and I could not identify and tangible benefit.

dpark 44 minutes ago | parent | prev [-]

> those bloated packets are death for many modern applications like VoIP.

Huh? The packet sizes aren’t that much different and VOIP is hardly a taxing application at this point anyway. VOIP needs barely over dial-up level bandwidth.

akerl_ 2 hours ago | parent | prev [-]

My memory of IPv6 is getting waves of support tickets from people who took their (already questionable) practice of blocking ICMP on IPv4, blocked ICMPv6, and then got confused when IPv6 stopped working.

apatheticonion 23 minutes ago | parent | prev | next [-]

AWS charges for ipv4 addresses but ipv6 addresses are free. ipv4 with NAT doesn't supercede ipv6, it just extends its life.

MBCook 2 hours ago | parent | prev | next [-]

It was?

Isn’t it what all the cell phones networks use these days? And most ISP’s?

They may hand the end user device a IPv4 address but don’t they actually use IPv6?

alt227 2 hours ago | parent [-]

Yes as I said in a sibling post the telcos are the only ones using it, and that is the only reason that graphs like the google client one exist. That is only because it already exists and is cheaper than using NAT when you have hundreds of millions of clients.

IPv6 only ISPs will never leave the mobile space.

kstrauser 2 hours ago | parent [-]

“The largest ISPs are the only ones using it” is another way of describing it as ubiquitous.

alt227 2 hours ago | parent [-]

I disagree. If they were the largest ISPs then adoption would already be over 50% instead of stalling below it.

I would say its more "Wireless only ISPs are the only ones using it"

kstrauser 2 hours ago | parent | next [-]

> I would say its more "Wireless only ISPs are the only ones using it"

So… the largest ISPs.

Recent number show about 94% of Americans have cell phones and 92% of American households have Internet connections. In raw numbers, that’s about 300M cell phones and 111M households.

If zero fixed ISPs support IPv6, that’d still be about 75% of total Internet connections that do.

patmorgan23 22 minutes ago | parent | prev [-]

Name a large isp not using V6

nine_k 2 hours ago | parent | prev | next [-]

This is not even funny to read, given huge networks like T-Mobile USA being IPv6-only.

cyberax an hour ago | parent [-]

They are using IPv6 as a fancy transport protocol for IPv4 NAT.

cornholio 3 minutes ago | parent | next [-]

That's a bit like saying AC electricity was just a fancy way of delivering what customers really wanted, DC energy.

I'm sure that DC customers used their Edison DC equipment for decades after the grid went AC only; but in the long run the newer, flexible, lower overhead system became the default for new equipment and the compatibility cludges were abandoned.

orangeboats an hour ago | parent | prev | next [-]

By being IPv6-only they are effectively making their users to preferentially connect over native IPv6 though.

Personal anecdote, but once you have IPv6 setup properly (meaning your devices prefer IPv6 over IPv4) 70-80% of your internet traffic will be IPv6.

The NAT64 is really just there for the holdouts.

ectospheno 39 minutes ago | parent [-]

I run dual stack at home with dns64/nat64. I average 50/50 traffic v4/v6. Web browsing gets skewed v6 but large file transfers and some streaming pushed it back to 50/50 overall. My family would revolt if I went v6 only so I'm not sure I'd say its just there for holdouts. Major annoyances include any old device and my hue bridge.

nine_k an hour ago | parent | prev [-]

No; most sites I reach from the phone seem to be reached via IPv6. E.g. hitting whatismyip.org exposes an IPv6 (though mentions an IPv4 because they're trying to discover that, too). Some sites do not support IPv6; for those indeed there's a XLAT464 service.

sgjohnson an hour ago | parent [-]

464XLAT is for dealing with IPv4 literal addresses in a v6 only network. Non-literals can be addressed with DNS64 & NAT64

anon7000 2 hours ago | parent | prev | next [-]

What are you even basing that on? Here are some facts:

- You have to pay money to get a static IPv4 address for cloud machines on eg AWS. Anything needing a static IPv4 will cost more and more as demand increases. NAT doesn’t exactly fix that.

- Mainstream IoT protocols have a hard dependency on IPv6 (eg Matter/Thread). Not to mention plenty of 5g deployments.

- Many modern networks quietly use IPv6 internally. I mean routing is simpler without NAT.

So it almost definitely won’t die. It’s more likely it’ll slowly and quietly continue growing behind the scenes, even if consumers are still seeing IPv4 on their home networks.

hdgvhicv an hour ago | parent | next [-]

IPv4 addresses have been dropping in price for a few years and are cheaper in real terms than at my point in the last 15

throw0101a 18 minutes ago | parent [-]

> IPv4 addresses have been dropping in price for a few years and are cheaper in real terms than at my point in the last 15

More IPv6 deployments may (ironically?) help reduce IPv4 prices as you can get IPv6 'for free' and have Internet connectivity (and not have to worry about exhaustion in any practical way). Doing CG-NAT could reduce the number IPv4 addresses you need to acquire.

cyberax an hour ago | parent | prev [-]

Matter/Thread use private IPv6 addresses so it's just an implementation detail. Nobody is exposing light switches to the public Internet.

patrickmcnamara 2 hours ago | parent | prev [-]

https://www.google.com/intl/en/ipv6/statistics.html

alt227 2 hours ago | parent [-]

People love this graph and regularly tout it as if it explains full internet usage. Especially when they dont bother to add any explanation or comment alongside it.

This graph is mainly due to the fact that telcos use IPv6 for mobile devices, nothing more. Over time you will see that graph flatline and peter out as mobile device uage reaches critical mass.

zokier 2 hours ago | parent | next [-]

In US even desktops have 45% adoption rate: https://radar.cloudflare.com/explorer?dataSet=http&groupBy=i...

afaik every single major US fixed line ISP is rolling out ipv6.

WorldMaker an hour ago | parent | prev | next [-]

It seems more the other end of the stick: the IPv4 side of the graph is mainly held up due to corporations. The consumer internet continues to switch, but corporate VPNs are going to continue to drag down the numbers until corporations get charged enough for IPv4 address space that bottom lines start to notice.

patrickmcnamara 39 minutes ago | parent | prev | next [-]

It was simply to point out that you are objectively incorrect. No commentary was necessary. My phone and home broadband both use IPv6 primarily.

lazide 2 hours ago | parent | prev [-]

Every major ISP in the US, India, and most of the rest of Asia that I’ve seen is handing out and using IPv6 now too.

Hell, chances are if you got a new router (like any new client) for your ISP, you’d be on v6 too.

alt227 2 hours ago | parent [-]

Yep, and even with all those countries with their billions of mobile devices IPv6 use still hasnt even reached 50%.

Pretty much all ISPs hand out both IPv6 and IPv4 addresses to their clients, this is nothing new. When they start only issueing IPv6 IPs is when it would start truly taking off, but it will never get to that point and it will never happen.

gmanley an hour ago | parent | next [-]

It feels like you are constantly moving goal posts here. Your original statement was it will die a slow and quiet death. Are you now saying that this mobile use case will start to switch back to IPv4? It may not kill IPv4, like was initially planned, but it's not going away.

Aloisius an hour ago | parent | prev | next [-]

According to APNIC labs, IPv6 adoption in India is ~79% and in China it is ~53%.

Those are the only two countries that could plausibly have billions of mobile devices and they appear to have reached 50%.

India: https://stats.labs.apnic.net/ipv6/CN?c=IN&x=1&v=1&p=1&r=1&w=...

China: https://stats.labs.apnic.net/ipv6/CN?c=CN&x=1&v=1&p=1&r=1&w=...

lazide 2 hours ago | parent | prev [-]

Looks like it’s right at 50% and rapidly increasing.

[https://www.google.com/intl/en/ipv6/statistics.html]

What exactly are you going on about? 5-10 years for the old devices to be EOL’d, and we’ll likely be at 95%.

nine_k an hour ago | parent [-]

Devices maybe, software won't :-\ (We're going to see ever-diminishing pockets of IPv4 around for a loooong time, much like we still see pockets of Cobol.)

lazide an hour ago | parent [-]

pick a lane?