Hacker News Board Hacker News, browsed like a classic message board
Live data from Hacker News

IPv6 traffic crosses the 50% mark

google.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

81–90 of 643 posts

Re: IPv6 traffic crosses the 50% mark

#81

Post by crote »

zokier wrote: post #69
pastage wrote: post #50

Earlier quoted context omitted.

You can solve this issue if you have one server with ipv6/ipv4 you can run NAT with Jool and connect ipv6 only servers to that. Like Android does. I wish hosting providers would give you a local routed ipv4 on ipv6 servers with a default NAT server. It is not that expensive I move 10Gbps "easily" and they could charge for that traffic.

> I wish hosting providers would give you a local routed ipv4 on ipv6 servers with a default NAT server. You mean like AWS NatGW https://docs.aws.amazon.com/vpc/latest/userguide/vpc-nat-gat...

Those are still per-customer and require you to dedicate an entire IP address to it. That's overkill for a server which mostly talks over ipv6 but needs to connect to an ipv4-only service like Github once in a blue moon.

Re: IPv6 traffic crosses the 50% mark

#82

Post by jabl »

dtech wrote: post #42
waynesonfire wrote: post #37

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> It has barely hit 50% and it's already plateauing. That makes sense. The majority of IPv6 deployment is mobile. The next wave of adoption requires ISPs start offering residential IPv6. Once this happens, router manufacturers will innovate around the IPv6 offering as a differentiator, making it easy to deploy by end-users. IPv6 wifi APs will then become ubiqutious and so forth across other services. Has to start wit…

ISPs in the US and Europe mostly have been offering IPv6 for a while now

Unfortunately my ISP here in Europe is not one of those offering IPv6.

Re: IPv6 traffic crosses the 50% mark

#83

Post by usui »

lmm wrote: post #49
usui wrote: post #5

It has barely hit 50% and it's already plateauing. This adoption rate is ridiculous despite basically all network interfaces supporting it. I thought I would see IPv6 take over in my lifetime as the default for platforms to build on but I can see I was wrong. Enterprise and commercial companies are literally going to hold back internet progress around 60 to 75 years because it's in their best interest to ensure users…

I think we'll hit a tipping point soon, just like with Python3 - for years and years it seemed almost stalled, then it became easier to start with python3 than python2 and suddenly everyone migrated.

This seems like wishful thinking. Python3 vs. Python2 seems different than IPv6 vs. IPv4.

Re: IPv6 traffic crosses the 50% mark

#84

Post by farfatched »

jabl wrote: post #73

Are any ISP's or corp intranets doing IPv6-mostly style networks yet: https://www.ietf.org/archive/id/draft-link-v6ops-6mops-00.ht... That seems to be a promising approach.

According to https://www.ipv6.org.uk/wp-content/uploads/2023/11/13_IPv6-M... , Google is.

The author of the RFC is the author of the slides.

Re: IPv6 traffic crosses the 50% mark

#87

Post by kalleboo »

zokier wrote: post #16
usui wrote: post #5

It has barely hit 50% and it's already plateauing. This adoption rate is ridiculous despite basically all network interfaces supporting it. I thought I would see IPv6 take over in my lifetime as the default for platforms to build on but I can see I was wrong. Enterprise and commercial companies are literally going to hold back internet progress around 60 to 75 years because it's in their best interest to ensure users…

> End users shouldn't need to set up 6to4 tunneling. It should be ISPs doing that to prepare for the transition. Which is what ISP are doing with 464XLAT deployments. IPv6-mostly networking and IPv4-as-a-service are things that are happening in real world right now.

Yeah in Japan my ISP even lets me choose which IPv4 provider I want to use, as the fiber network is IPv6-native and IPv4 is "just another service" like IPTV.

Re: IPv6 traffic crosses the 50% mark

#88

Post by emj »

zokier wrote: post #69
pastage wrote: post #50

Earlier quoted context omitted.

You can solve this issue if you have one server with ipv6/ipv4 you can run NAT with Jool and connect ipv6 only servers to that. Like Android does. I wish hosting providers would give you a local routed ipv4 on ipv6 servers with a default NAT server. It is not that expensive I move 10Gbps "easily" and they could charge for that traffic.

> I wish hosting providers would give you a local routed ipv4 on ipv6 servers with a default NAT server. You mean like AWS NatGW https://docs.aws.amazon.com/vpc/latest/userguide/vpc-nat-gat...

30 USD/month and 0.045 USD/GB for ingress it is ok if you are big. It is a cheap service to build yourself. I do feel the pain of it being hard to get IPv4 minimal connectivity on ipv6 only hosts, i.e. for me a 1 USD/GB would be fine.
Post reply on HN