It's also worth noting that a lot of the pay4botnet sites masquerading as stress testing services can't/won't do ipv6, which offers slightly more availability with ipv6 linked or dual-stack services - at least for now.
An IPv6-only VPS that costs less
11–20 of 82 posts
Re: An IPv6-only VPS that costs less
#12Sounds like an interesting solution for back end servers and compute clusters. Your front end or control server has IPv4 to talk to the world, but all your database and back end compute servers that only talk to the front end server can be IPv6 servers to save money.
If you use Cloudflare (and maybe other CDNs though I don't know any) they can proxy you an ipv4 address to your ipv6 only backend, so you don't really need your own ipv4.
Re: An IPv6-only VPS that costs less
#13Sounds like an interesting solution for back end servers and compute clusters. Your front end or control server has IPv4 to talk to the world, but all your database and back end compute servers that only talk to the front end server can be IPv6 servers to save money.
True, but private networking solves that issue too.
Re: An IPv6-only VPS that costs less
#14My opinion: IPv6 is used by nobody, nobody cares about IPv6 except for us tech nerds and in five years it will still be nowhere. But still, nice if you want to try it out and test with it.
I'm seeing increasing numbers of IPV6 connections to our services. I wouldn't be surprised if it grows very rapidly now.
Re: An IPv6-only VPS that costs less
#15My opinion: IPv6 is used by nobody, nobody cares about IPv6 except for us tech nerds and in five years it will still be nowhere. But still, nice if you want to try it out and test with it.
> nobody cares about IPv6 except for us tech nerds
Nobody cares that your app is written in Rails of NodeJS. People care that it works and does what matters to them. IPv4 is doomed to not work at some point so we "tech nerds" have to care and do something about it.
> IPv6 is used by nobody
From the top of my mind, many of the french ISPs have IPv6 ready on the customer side, a radio button click away, while some are even on by default. I can readily assume that today, every worthwhile machine connected to a LAN supports at least IPv6 local scope. Also, every single Mac out there uses an IPv6 VPN (over IPwhatever) when (at least) Back to my Mac is active (ifconfig utun0).
> in five years it will still be nowhere
Unless you settle for impractical definitions of "nowhere" as "not ubiquitous", it is definitely there already. IPv6 does solve real problems today, locally and globally.
Re: An IPv6-only VPS that costs less
#16My opinion: IPv6 is used by nobody, nobody cares about IPv6 except for us tech nerds and in five years it will still be nowhere. But still, nice if you want to try it out and test with it.
I don't think so. Many people already use it even though they don't know they're using it.
It will be a deal in 1-2 years. The world rotates fast these days.
Re: An IPv6-only VPS that costs less
#17For reference, that shaves between 1 and 2€/month and makes a small instance 17% cheaper: https://www.gandi.net/hosting/iaas/prices
Re: An IPv6-only VPS that costs less
#18Anybody has experience with Gandi VPS? Let's say compared to Linode or DigitalOcean?
Re: An IPv6-only VPS that costs less
#19We designed Brightbox Cloud with the scarcity of public IPv4 addresses in mind since day one. Running out of addresses shouldn't be a surprise to anyone! http://brightbox.com/blog/2012/01/11/ipv6-servers/
We're not as cheap as gandi though, heh :)
Re: An IPv6-only VPS that costs less
#20My opinion: IPv6 is used by nobody, nobody cares about IPv6 except for us tech nerds and in five years it will still be nowhere. But still, nice if you want to try it out and test with it.
If you intend to host your service behind something like CloudFlair it doesn't matter that some users don't have IPv6 yet: they'll contact the cache service via IPv4 and it'll contact your servers as needed via IPv6. The end user doesn't have to care, or even know at all, and you have just made a saving by not having to pay for IPv4 addresses.
People will start to care when IPv6 takeup hits critical mass and we start seeing services optimised for it. When people start seeing services they want to use not working as well through layers of NAT, they start asking their ISPs why they are having a problem and their friends on other ISPs aren't. Maybe at some point services will start charging a premium for IPv4 access (so IPv6 users aren't subsidising those who haven't moved forward yet) like on retail business did for IE6/7 users (http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/technology-18440979) then people will care. That seems extreme though and might alienate users, less severe option would be to serve more adverts.
There are some places where things are already heading towards being IPv6 only. A friend of mine noticed this when out east for a work related trip, the hotel he was in provided Internet access but IPv6 only internally. They provided a 6-to-4 gateway so IPv4 only sites worked fine (with everyone from several places looking to be coming from the same address) but your device had to speak IPv6 to connect to the network in the first place (which his phone didn't).