Why are people still using IPv4
Just as an experiment, I've tried to switch all of my networks to IPv6-only configurations.
This is the comfiest setup i have enjoyed so far. I get IPv6 /48 from all my ISPs, every home/house/office i have has a RFC4193 network and they are all bridged together with wireguard. Link-local networks make sure i don't ever lose connection to a host. This is a dream coming true.
I am unconfiguring every IPv4 on every WAN i have. My life has became enlightened.
Comments
What solution do you use to access the IPv4-only web?
Happy customer at AlexHost, AxusHost, Bakker-IT, Host-C, Ionos, Veesp + NanoKVM ftw.
I don't
My local ISP doesn't give me an IPv6 address, so there ya go.
Yay for Comcast.
That's because I am hoarding your IPv6 until you give my socks back!!!
The Yeti has left the building.
ipv4 is Legend
Maybe if you used a lower quality fabric softener, they wouldn’t be so comfortable!
Hey!!!! Back off my Snuggles!!!
The Yeti has left the building.
Third World countries have little IPv6 connectivity.
IPv6 is for poor people who cannot afford expensive top quality IPv4.
Now I know US is third world country as they have little ipv6 connectivity.
I love IPv6 but it’s still not time for me to switch to IPv6 only.
Too many networks still do not fully support IPv6, e.g. home routers running with cellular data. Each provider has it‘s own APN configuration. If are a beginner with 0 experience, there is a high chance you won’t have working IPv6 on your router…
Then there are beginner ISPs who do not have enough staff, not enough know-how to set up an IPv6 network properly…
(My ISP gave me multiple static IPv4 but no IPv6 at all x), WireGuard is my only way of getting IPv6 connectivity x))
Unify doesn’t like IPv6 either lol.
IPv4 just works, even if slower and clunkier, causing more NAT, more routing.
iPv6 is good to get better routes, that's it.
Most games still need IPv4, unlikely that old games get patched for IPv6, so yea.
Free NAT KVM | Free NAT LXC
We barely have any ISPs supporting IPv6 here in Spain, I'd say from the big ones only Digi (Romanian ISP) which is very recent and that's it. Orange/Jazztel tried implementing it and failed miserably, not sure about others.
I've never gotten any better routes with IPv6, and I have a lot of VPSs. From my experience, I must disable IPv6 on all of them for basic stuff to work (apt, pip, ...), else I have do deal with issues and some providers just don't want to fix it, specially the ones that give IPv6 as a "bonus".
Try Akile with Debian 12 and check if it works, try Greencloud on their VN location and try apt updating, unless you disable IPv6, won't work. And I'm sure some other providers that I use and I'm not aware have issues too, I just nuke IPv6 with a script at this point.
Avoid incompetent hosting providers, not IPv6
Check our KVM VPS plans in 🇵🇱 Warsaw, Poland and 🇸🇪 Stockholm, Sweden
Reasons:
Unless its purely for personal use it isn't viable yet. >50% of visitors to sites don't have ipv6 support, and on the user side many websites don't support it yet, even major players. So dual stack is really the only option atm
i had problem configuring ipv6 on my router. In the end, I give up and realized that i don't like complicated things. LONG LIFE IPV4!!!
Skill issue bro
Yeah maybe i had skill issue or software issue?
My local isp give me /64 address, and i'm trying many hours why I can't get the ip. My conclusion is it looks like my router doesn't like /64 , so I leave it.
How old is your router?
3-4 years old. Still good
This image is true, but even if we forgive it for being entirely content-focused, it excludes at least one of service that is more popular than most of them, TikTok. China's top content-based services, generally, are even less likely to support IPv6 than the English-speaking counterparts. It will be interesting to see if this gap widens or narrows in the coming years.
Dataplane.org's current server hosting provider list
Unless ISPs start deploying IPv6, hosting providers won't do their job, as it's pretty much useless.
Should I go with Movistar to get IPv6 on mobile data, and none on fiber, or Digi to get IPv6 on fiber but not on mobile data?
(Digi gives GC-NAT by default unless I pay an extra 1€/m, and their shared IPs are super crowded)
ipv6 is great but no best
I use exclusively IPv9 thanks to @yoursunny 👍
microtronixdc.com - Colocation, Dedicated Servers, Full-Rack options, VPS. John 3:16 - Jesus Saves!!
Massive Network Bandwidth options with Fiber throughout, up to 100Gbps connections! Always-On DDoS Mitigation for all traffic!
Does GitHub work with ipv6 now ?
Want free vps ? https://microlxc.net
I use IPv6.version.Yeti.1_45-23
The Yeti has left the building.
Because most ISPs here in Pakistan doesn't provide a IPv6 Address.
Hello world.
It's on the chart of IPv6 sinners .....
I think they're the canary, once folks here can clone from GitHub on v6 we can pull the plug on v4 and move on
prem!
There are still too many ipv4 only.
https://stats.labs.apnic.net/ipv6/
Zmw nb hlfo uiln lfg gszg hszwld gszg orvh uolzgrmt lm gsv uolli
Hszoo yv orugvw—mvevinliv!
Comcast has been doing native IPv6 for at least a decade...
DM us for private tracker invite.
Who knows? I'm even using one of their own modems, too (the XB7).
Then again, their website also says that my city has the upgraded upload speeds, too, and yet I get 1200/35 instead of the 1200/200 that is supposedly offered in my city (and yes, of course I have confirmed provisioning, it's just not yet on my node).
At lot of times, IPv6 is just best effort instead of properly supported.
That's the thing. Just because a ISP supports it in one region doesn't mean they support it everywhere in the whole country, specially since there is no incentive to do so. Even though they have to invest in IPv6 infra, no one is willing to pay them extra for IPv6 feature and most dont even know/care about it as long as they can access tiktok/instagram/facebook/twitter.
same reason why people are still driving cars with internal combustion engines
I bench YABS 24/7/365 unless it's a leap year.
Not for long... Atleast in Singapore, they are banning sales of new ICE cars from 2030s and since all vehicals in SG can be used for only 10 years (lookup Singapore COE on google) by 2040s there should be almost all electric cars in Singapore. Some European countries are also enforcing similar rules.
i believe this may need to be reversed, following what Mercedes is doing as well. Will Singapore and EU ban Mercedes and Toyota totally by 2030?
Also look at US, when Tesla was doing well, oh EV greenwashing perfect and all. Now Chinese brands have overtaken US on almost every aspect; cost, quality, battery technology, market share, they then change their stance to oh, not so low carbon footprint after all.
come to think of it, maybe a little like IPv4 vs v6, just much more subtle.
I bench YABS 24/7/365 unless it's a leap year.
Toyota may be banned from SG as they refuse to make EVs.
Same here. Build your dream (BYD) is the most popular brand here and it is Chinese through and through.
Low cost + low quality = most Chinese products.
Lol, you got that right! ISPs and DCs just refuse to switch to IPv6 as they need to spend more money for it with zero benifits or returns on investment (ROI). So might as well stick to what works and majority of people wont even care. So why bother?
Because IPv6 is expensive. Not for us but for the infrastructure builders. They will transfer the bills to us anyway.
Infact, EV's history is longer than that of internal combustion engines, and the current battery technology is not enough to support people’s full switch to electric vehicles. The plan to fully switch to EV is a joke at the beginning. The deadline will change and change again just like other "plans".
Those goverment do not need to deny the EV plan if they just wanna against China. What they need is just Tax and discount, and this is what they are doing. According to my observation, China is slowly kicking out from the world supply chain. This seems to be a certain consensus between China and other countries. Political needs to be price in to the cost, and it is expensive.
China hopes that the world will turn to EVs, because China has lagged behind in the development of internal combustion engines for too many years. EV is a new thing and they can have a fair start point with others. But so far, there is no absolute winner on the market. Everything is just begining and this will be a match of the century. I'm not sure whether EV will be the final winner, because the battery is greatly affected by the weather, and also the basic infarstructure (There are many countries do not have good power supply).
Tesla is not selling car, they sell "dreams". It is impossible to have such a stock price for a car company.
Action and Reaction in history
You need to ask for one by enabling dhcpv6 on your router.
DM us for private tracker invite.
there is still alot of countries ISP does not support IPv6 connectivity
TemasekTech - AS139859 and AS209187
Building Cloud Technology with Global Network
Official Website - https://www.TemasekTech.com
This is an argument I've heard a lot of times but I don't really buy it. How is ipv6 expensive?
Most routers built the last 20 years or so support ipv6 so whatever kind of hardware you use in your infrastructure it almost certainly already supports ipv6.
Ip's are way cheaper with ipv6 so that's not an extra cost, in fact, it saves you money.
A lot of big providers spends millions of dollars on cg-nat in their infrastructure, also a cost that you will not have with ipv6.
Some people claim that the cost of hiring people that know ipv6 would make it more expensive, but seriously, if you are big enough to talk about building infrastructure and your network people do not already know ipv6, then you are in way over your head.
I can not find a single area where ipv6 would be more expensive than ip4 so I just don't get it. Someone please enlighten me.
I do not know if this is just a local thing, but in Scandinavia and most parts of Europe the really big carriers are switching to ipv6 to actually save money. Most mobile carriers here already run ipv6 only networks and have done so for a decade, I cant even remember the last time I saw my phone pick up a ip4 when using 4G or 5G.
Perhaps, some people wants to keep their jobs.
DM us for private tracker invite.
Because IPv6 sucks ass.
Infact, EV's history is longer than that of internal combustion engines. And the current battery technology is not enough to support people’s full switch to electric vehicles.> @rcy026 said:
Then this will be very good business for pitching. Congrats you find a way to be rich.
Action and Reaction in history
And how is that? Do you mean that I should pitch this to the major providers?
That's kind of moot, they have known this for 20 years or so. You would have to be incredibly stupid to work in IT on that level and not have heard of ipv6 by now.
So are you saying for ISPs, by buying IPv6 infra, they can get rid of IPv4? How does that work? That will only cause their customers to not be able to access servers using only IPv4 and they will move to ISPs that provide IPv4 IPs.
Moreover many of the ISPs still do not provide individual IPv4 IPs to their end users, sticking to NAT IPs. Even in SG, one of the telco that I have used provide only NAT IPs to it's users. So the actual IP cost isn't that much.
So the main issue is still the same chicken and egg problem. ISPs do not move to IPv6 cause most DCs do not support IPv6. Most DCs do not move to IPv6 cause most ISPs do not support IPv6.
You have still failed to show any reason for ISPs to move to IPv6. An incentive to use IPv6 when IPv4 are still affordable (at least for now). If you want to use IPv6 only for your router & server, go ahead. However when IPv4 IPs becomes too EXPENSIVE to afford, IPv6 will take off. So the best we can do is use both IPv4 and IPv6 till that time...
NAT was developed as a temporary technology, not a permanent solution. It's not designed with new technologies and protocols in mind. It's a superficial, temporary solution to a problem that does not address or resolve the underlying cause of the problem.
Not to mention confusing network topology with multiple NAT layers, which add nothing but problems (incoming connection port forwarding, maintenance, diagnostic where certain requests come from, hard to troubleshoot, limited number of ports, etc.). That's not a solution, it's a band-aid.