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

331–340 of 643 posts

Re: IPv6 traffic crosses the 50% mark

#331

Post by basilikum »

p4bl0 wrote: post #96

It amuses me to see that according to the map, France is best in class or close to be, while just a few weeks ago, my ISP in France stopped providing me IPv6 connectivity… The story is that at the beginning I had IPv6, and a shared dynamic IPv4 behind a CGNAT, I asked for a rollback to a full duplex static IPv4 and for three years I had both a static personal IPv4 and an IPv6. A few weeks ago my router went down and…

You might be interested in https://tunnelbroker.net/ and https://route64.org/ although the later looks a little shady and I haven't tried them.

A cheap VPS or one with spare bandwidth with > /64 that is properly routed (some providers do NDP for some reason) and a Wireguard tunnel would also get you a simple DIY solution.

Re: IPv6 traffic crosses the 50% mark

#332

Post by nottorp »

stackghost wrote: post #35
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…

Is there a reason why adoption has been so abysmally slow? Like surely all the big players have updated their networking equipment by now, and surely every piece of enterprise-grade kit sold in the last 20 years has supported v6. The only arguments I've ever heard against ipv6 that made any sense are that: 1: it's hard to remember addresses, which is mayyyyybe valid for homelab enthusiast types, but for medium scale…

> But both of these are really only valid for DIY homelab enthusiast types. I honestly have no idea why other people resist ipv6.

Simple. The "homelab enthusiast types" are those that usually push new technologies.

This is one they don't care about, so they don't push it. Other people don't care about any technology if it's not pushed on them.

Re: IPv6 traffic crosses the 50% mark

#333

Post by RiverCrochet »

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…

> It has barely hit 50% and it's already plateauing. This adoption rate is ridiculous despite basically all network interfaces supporting it

It's fine. IPv4 and IPv6 can be used at the same time. There's no hurry. Network interfaces support anything as long as both sides agree (nothing stopping you from building your own IPX network over MPLS).

People can move to IPv6 when the IPv4-as-real-estate speculators get out of control, and if IPv6 prevents IPv4 rental prices from going haywire, then it's served a useful purpose.

I saw a news article that said something about India considering moving to IPv6-only? That's going to be interesting if the rest of the world moves to IPv6 and the U.S. doesn't.

> End users shouldn't need to set up NAT64/6to4 tunneling. It should be ISPs doing that to prepare for the transition.

100%

Re: IPv6 traffic crosses the 50% mark

#334

Post by toast0 »

ggm wrote: post #204
ankit_mishra wrote: post #162

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I'm wondering the same thing for India. Not the top but looks surprisingly surprisingly high. Perhaps I'm reading the data wrong.

Reliance Jio deployed cheap native v6 and tool massive market share. They single-handedly moved the market. It's been discussed on the apnic blog and at meetings heaps

Adding on. Jio was a late entrant, so they could not get significant ipv4 address space without great expense. They deployed as mostly v6 with a tiny CGNAT. They also had an extensive 'pre-release' offering at zero cost to subscribers which got them a huge number of subscribers and clout to encourage internet services to offer ipv6.

Re: IPv6 traffic crosses the 50% mark

#335

Post by moduspol »

bluGill wrote: post #225
imoverclocked wrote: post #11

Earlier quoted context omitted.

ISPs often fail to do this because there is always someone in the hierarchy who says, "nobody is demanding it."

I with I knew how to get through that I want it. I'm supposed to be a tech guy - that means I need experience with the latest tech in my house

I switched my home ISP from cable (which supported IPv6) to fiber (which doesn't) and I've had a nagging disappointment ever since. But I guess consumers aren't really demanding it enough.

Re: IPv6 traffic crosses the 50% mark

#336

Post by icedchai »

menotyou wrote: post #327
icedchai wrote: post #313

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Ok, so most of the time you are trackable by your public IPv4. The situation is not much better.

Let's say when your ipv6 prefix changes it is almost the same situation. Only that ipv4 bundles all traffic of all devices on one ip which obfuscates a bit. But having the ipv6 prefix change you get a pile of problems (DNS, firewall), you don't have with ipv4.

The IPv6 prefix changes are disruptive, I agree. My prefix has been stable for a couple years, but on another ISP it would change every few months and was certainly annoying.

Re: IPv6 traffic crosses the 50% mark

#337

Post by GoblinSlayer »

jeroenhd wrote: post #227
literalAardvark wrote: post #183

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I've been there. Management was fine with the testing but it added too much overhead for nearly no benefit to us. One more thing to troubleshoot at 3 am, one more thing to teach to a disinterested tier 1 support team, one more thing for Chrome to be weird about, hundreds more rules to manage in a hostile load balancer, logging tools that don't understand ipv6. Turned it off. End customer asked why the site got a litt…

One of the big challenges with IPv6 remains that many of the knows-just-enough-about-networking people, like support staff, often never received any IPv6 training (or, for that matter, even enough IPv4 training that they don't need to Google things that come up in real life). Another is that the weird, awful, everyone-hostile corporate "solutions" often break IPv6 in stupid ways (like load balancers and logging tools…

A networking dude (he clutched his smartphone all the time) typed "spedtes" in my browser and was deeply confused when the server wasn't found. He tried several times more with slightly different spelling to the same effect, he literally couldn't even what went wrong.

Re: IPv6 traffic crosses the 50% mark

#338

Post by lxgr »

moduspol wrote: post #330
lxgr wrote: post #244

Earlier quoted context omitted.

The requirement is to support IPv6 only networks with IPv4 transition mechanisms. It does not preclude contacting v4-only servers.

And the higher level libraries mostly do it for you, too, even if you directly specify IPv4 addresses in your code (due to NAT64 [1]). I think it only even requires special work from you as a developer if you're using low-level or non-standard libraries. [1] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/NAT64

The problematic low-level libraries are standard, and effectively impossible to fully deprecate since they're decades old and part of the socket API.

I think currently Apple still helps you with these via "bump in the stack" (i.e. they can translate internal v4 structures and addresses into NAT64-prefixed v6 at the kernel level), but they probably don't want to commit to doing that forever.

Re: IPv6 traffic crosses the 50% mark

#339

Post by CupricTea »

growse wrote: post #19
rtdq wrote: post #13

And still, in the year of our lord 2026, GitHub does not support IPv6. https://github.com/orgs/community/discussions/10539

A non-trivial minority of the time, they don't support IPv4 either!

GitHub is at the point where it immediately rate limits me if I try to look at a project's commit history without being logged in, as in the first time I even open a single URL to the commit history, I get "Too Many Requests" from GitHub thrown at me. I don't know if my work's antivirus stack is causing GitHub to be suspicious of me, but it's definitely egregious.

Re: IPv6 traffic crosses the 50% mark

#340

Post by pbhjpbhj »

IshKebab wrote: post #159
michh wrote: post #147

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Perhaps a little tin foil hatty and definitely not the only reason but Microsoft owns Github and also makes a boatload of money off of Azure. Incumbent cloud providers like Azure have a major advantage in terms of having plenty of IPv4 addressing available whereas a new entrant to that market would have to buy or lease that space at a premium. Thus, these companies have an incentive to keep IPv4 a necessity.

IPv4 is going to be a necessity for many many decades no matter what Microsoft do. Even when IPv6 is at 99%, people aren't going to want 1 in every 100 people to not be able to access their site at all. It'll need to be like 99.9% before we start seeing serious IPv6-only services.

Meanwhile big gaming companies when Linux users are 5% of Steam users: 'eff off'.
Post reply on HN