The real question is -- how much of them are bot traffic?
We knew bot traffic is more than half of the internet, right?
Google Hits 50% IPv6
281–290 of 496 posts
Re: Google Hits 50% IPv6
#282Earlier quoted context omitted.
Of all the things to regulate why bother with this one? It's not like IPv6 is better for the environment or useful to the consumer.
> Of all the things to regulate why bother with this one? It's not like IPv6 is better for the environment or useful to the consumer. If I'm with a small-time ISP that has to use CG-NAT because they don't have the cash to buy/lease enough IPv4 addresses to give one to each CPE WAN interface, then using things like Xbox/PS multiplayer/P2P gaming is no longer possible. Want to host a Minecraft server? Too bad. Are thos…
I did port forwarding in 2010 for a Minecraft server. Basically every router supports it.
It wasn't meaningfully more difficult than setting up the server.
Re: Google Hits 50% IPv6
#283Earlier quoted context omitted.
::1, ::2, ::3, ::4... exactly how hard can that be? Or if you're feeling playful, ::b0d, ::bed, ::dad, ::b1d...
The prefix is too long and it's not the same at every site. When I'm at a different location, the biggest problem is usually figuring out if they use 192.168.0 or 192.168.1 :)
lucky you, IPV6 indeed uses the same prefix everywhere: fe80::
Re: Google Hits 50% IPv6
#284I would love to stop paying AWS for public ipv4 addresses.
But simply it is impossible to go full ipv6, as many of isps of the clients do not support it.
Currently there is no pressure to the isps to move to ipv6. In fact the incentives are OPPOSITE! They love charging for static IPs.
Re: Google Hits 50% IPv6
#285I have it switched off on most networks and servers including my home network. I just don't need it here and I have zero to do with asia. I wish they had just made an IPv5 though. With e.g. 6 bytes instead of 4. 65535 times the current internet should be plenty. I feel like IPv6 is overengineered and I'm glad it didn't take off yet. I like being able to memorise IP addresses, it really helps testing. If I ever do swi…
I dont think its that over engineered for what its capable of.
Re: Google Hits 50% IPv6
#286Earlier quoted context omitted.
A changeover to your IPv5 would be just as agonizing as the changeover to IPv6. A system with a larger address space is fundamentally uninteroperable with one with a smaller address space as there is nowhere to put the extra bits in the old protocol. The lack of motivation to move to the new protocol would also be just the same. And as for memorization: do you actually memorize MAC addresses for your interfaces? The…
Yeah but that ridiculous overdimensioning is something I object to. There's more IPs than is needed to give each grain of sand on this planet its whole IPv4-sized internet. That's just overkill. And the problem seems to be solving itself as the world is turning its back on globalism. China and North Korea already have separated themselves. Iran too. China still uses the same address space but it's not like there's op…
> Yeah but that ridiculous overdimensioning is something I object to. There's more IPs than is needed to give each grain of sand on this planet its whole IPv4-sized internet. That's just overkill.
People also thought that 4 byte wide IPv4 Adresses would be large enough. It's really hard to estimate how much you will need. And because numbers are effectively a free resource, it is better to overestimate.
IPv6 also gives you shortcuts to write addresses. You can abbreviate the longest run of zeroes with `::` and leading zeroes within a hextet can be omitted. This makes IPv6 address notation elastic.
Re: Google Hits 50% IPv6
#287Earlier quoted context omitted.
Well yeah, because they can't. Maybe if they could, they would do it more. You probably wouldn't want to host a permanent website from home, although some people do, but you could share a file. It would be popular with game servers, too.
>You probably wouldn't want to host a permanent website from home, although some people do, but you could share a file. bittorent has been around for decades and nobody used it. They emailed files to themselves instead, or used dropbox. This all happened before the ipv4 shortage and people getting moved to CGNAT.
Nobody used BitTorrent? LoL
ISPs had/have whole groups trying to stomp it out.
And it was a nightmare due to NAT even then.
It just got worse with CGNAT.
Re: Google Hits 50% IPv6
#288Earlier quoted context omitted.
depends on how you look at it. Right now it's very much a tragedy of the commons. IPv6 not being supported in many places means the internet is more centralised, less likely to use proper p2p tech- because it's a lot harder to make it work rather than throwing up a TURN box and relaying everything. "The latency? Who cares? IPv6 sometimes breaks right now" - because nobody is testing it, so why should people be the fi…
Maybe the solution is to make IPv4 prohibitively expensive.
Or even just expensive.
Re: Google Hits 50% IPv6
#289Just to add to the 'but the ISPs do not' anecdotes, it has been six months since someone last commented so it is probably time to mention this again on Hacker News: * https://havevirginmediaenabledipv6yet.co.uk/ A major ISP in the U.K., that said in a public statement on World IPv6 Day in 2011 that > As well as our core and access networks being capable of supporting IPv6, we're rigorously testing our entire network…
After several decades, IPv6 has proven itself as a supplement to IPv4 .
[deleted]
Re: Google Hits 50% IPv6
#290Interesting to see the per-country rates[1]. France is up to 85%, apparently! [1] https://www.google.com/intl/en/ipv6/statistics.html#tab=per-...
The great news is that India is at 75%, otherwise the price pressure for ipv4 addresses would be insane