31–40 of 94 posts
I'd like to use IPv6, but since turning it on by default breaks a lot of things- I'm leaving it off for now.
Hypothesis: Mass adoption of IPv6 is blocked by the ugliness/inconvenience of the IPv6 address format, hence "end-users" (developers) don't like adopting IPv6. As long as this UX issue does not get solved, IPv6 adoption is only going to happen on an individual level when any given business' significant income stream is at immediate risk of being disrupted. Depending on how many of these individually affected business…
* My home and small business Internet provider does not support IPv6, despite them talking about deploying it for about 10 years now. Actually here in the Netherlands I have never encountered a mainstream consumer ISP that supports IPv6.
* I don't have any users that are on exclusively on IPv6. All my users have access to IPv4.
* IPv6 does not bring me any visible benefits, like faster performance.
Hypothesis: Mass adoption of IPv6 is blocked by the ugliness/inconvenience of the IPv6 address format, hence "end-users" (developers) don't like adopting IPv6. As long as this UX issue does not get solved, IPv6 adoption is only going to happen on an individual level when any given business' significant income stream is at immediate risk of being disrupted. Depending on how many of these individually affected business…
I don't know. IPv6 is ugly, yeah, but not any more ugly than other long random strings that we just copy-paste all the time, like API keys. For me, not adopting IPv6 has these reasons: * My home and small business Internet provider does not support IPv6, despite them talking about deploying it for about 10 years now. Actually here in the Netherlands I have never encountered a mainstream consumer ISP that supports IPv…
I think some hosting providers are wasting a bit of the address space. For an example I have 15 linodes each with their own public IP, but I actually only need one or two of the IPs to be accessed publicly for the loadbalancers, the rest I actually prefer not to be routable from the public.
IPs are still cheap enough to "waste" - the only real motivator is going to be ipv4 price being too high which we're quite far off of
Earlier quoted context omitted.
I don't know. IPv6 is ugly, yeah, but not any more ugly than other long random strings that we just copy-paste all the time, like API keys. For me, not adopting IPv6 has these reasons: * My home and small business Internet provider does not support IPv6, despite them talking about deploying it for about 10 years now. Actually here in the Netherlands I have never encountered a mainstream consumer ISP that supports IPv…
You go ahead, and try relaying an IPv6 address over the phone from one of your end users.
I had IPv6 setup at one point, but a lot of things using it are broken. Some sites/services/software repos will just refuse to connect- and after a few minutes of debugging I realize it's probably v6. Turning off IPv6 usually fixes the problem. I'd like to use IPv6, but since turning it on by default breaks a lot of things- I'm leaving it off for now.
Couldn't read the article on the phone due to excessive amount of pop ups on the page.
I am actually not really sure if those people really believe that IPv6 will EVER replace IPv4, which in my opinion will never happen.
Looks like it's growing rather steadily.
Hypothesis: Mass adoption of IPv6 is blocked by the ugliness/inconvenience of the IPv6 address format, hence "end-users" (developers) don't like adopting IPv6. As long as this UX issue does not get solved, IPv6 adoption is only going to happen on an individual level when any given business' significant income stream is at immediate risk of being disrupted. Depending on how many of these individually affected business…