New on LowEndTalk? Please Register and read our Community Rules.
All new Registrations are manually reviewed and approved, so a short delay after registration may occur before your account becomes active.
All new Registrations are manually reviewed and approved, so a short delay after registration may occur before your account becomes active.
Comments
Many things can be ipv6 only there are enough 6-to-4 and 4-to-6 services out there. Soon will be easier to use.
I remember Microsoft had their Teredo tunneling solution with Windows 7 somewhat working, but they've started deactivating their nodes since the beginning of 2014. Something like that is a semi-useful TEMPORARY solution, but in no way is it a proper solution. Not all consumer gear passes 6-in-4 tunnels properly (my cable gateway at home doesn't handle it properly), and it's actually somewhat tricky to set up. Enterprise setups can also have issues. Every computer would have a publically accessible IPv6 address, meaning web-filtering would get a LOT harder. Ideally, FTTH solutions would be the easiest way to get IPv6 deployment fully. DOCSIS supports IPv6 as of DOCSIS 3.0 (and the DOCSIS 2.0+IPv6 patch/hack). Looks like DSL supports it when a compatible router is used as well. Overall though, it's still a mess. Let your ISP know you want IPv6 though. Let them KNOW you want it and they might start work on it (if your service is through a smaller ISP maybe. Big ISPs would say "meh. who else do you have to go to?"). But yeah, it's a mess...
Some ISPs (Time Warner Cable and rumors of Comcast as well) are currently offering local IPv6 addresses, but they still aren't running public IPv6 for regular consumers yet.
Also, T-Mobile (cellular) does local IPv6 with a shared IPv4 (similar to LES) so they can fill more cellular users per each IPv4. Which makes me truly curious as to how AKAMAI managed to justify 4 million IPv4s.
Please look up what stereotype means.
Looks like some of us take pride in living up to it instead
People who label realists as assholes lack vision. (:
ISP support is not the worst problem, it's CPE support that is the real nightmare. IPv4 will be around and relevant long after IPv6 support starts to become more universal. The transition part of IPv6 was based on unrealistic assumptions.
Yes, but why would a host want to reduce their revenue?
If their costs indeed come down due to no need to pay for IPv4 to their upstream provider, they will get some room to reduce the prices for the end-user, while keeping their actual revenue at the same level. Whether that actually happens depends on other factors, such as greed and presence/absence of competition.
Not much use thinking about all that right now, I'd say IPv6-only VPSes becoming the norm is easily 10-15 years ahead.
Meanwhile, I wouldn't expect a lot LES-priced offers popping up at the same 3 EUR/year (due to the high overhead of payment processing systems and in general, having a lot of ultralow-ARPU customers is not something everyone wants). Instead, as IPv6 becomes more common and known (and with the rest of technology improving), there should appear some IPv6-only offers at the popular $15/year level, with specs like 512 MB of RAM KVM, ~20GB disk, 1TB b/w.
Currently one important factor that makes providers hesitant in offering v6-only plans is "people don't know what it is, will buy simply because it's cheap, then complain/chargeback". Hence as I said it is important for IPv6 to gain some more recognition, with more people learning about it and getting some hands-on experience.
I think you're looking at it from a consumer standpoint.
From the perspective of a business, it doesn't make sense to reduce net on opex reduction. Businesses want to increase revenue, not keep it flat.
Sure, some businesses desperate for cash/customers (i.e. those that market primarily on price) might do such a thing, but I don't see it being a universal truth.
As I said they will gain some headroom to reduce prices if needed, whether they will do it, that's another question.
Besides, there will be an enormous transition period, when v4-only, v6-only and v4+v6 VPSes will all coexist on the market. And no one will buy an IPv6-only VPS if it costs the same as the one from a competitor which also includes IPv4. So IPv6-only will be cheaper than IPv4-only or IPv4+IPv6.
Not everyone uses price as the sole metric for a purchasing decision.
I agree that there will be some number of desparate hosts involved in the race to the bottom that will factor this in. I don't see it being a general trend.
ARIN claims they are having a power outage right now and that's why you can't login to their system. Ironic timing.
As stupid as it might sound I've asked my ISP (FTTH) and they just shooed me away with an excuse "When others implement it we will implement it, there's no need for it now".
And I guess this will be the way a lot of ISPs plan to work until they run out of their own blocks, which might never even happen. So it just goes round, we don't implement it because others don't implement it; others don't implement it because we don't implement it.
I believe major transitions to IPv6 will only happen when the cost of maintaining IPv4 starts to eclipse the revenue generated from it. Until then, the Internet will be a global patchwork quilt. We're years, if not decades, away from ubiquitous deployment.
Wholesale forklift upgrades are generally a really terrible idea. Yet, this this what the designers of IPv6 essentially envisioned. Logical ideas don't necessarily have rational roots.
lol, what I thought. Dealing with the best...
No, Akamai asked ARIN if they wanted Windows updates to still work
Some men just want to watch the world burn
Lol...your joking right. 64 46 is a joke for most things. Average user just can't or won't deal with that nonsense and it's a very poor half assed bandaid solution to begin with.
Although I get your point and agree with it, the content hoster usually implements thsse solutions as opposed to you implying the user would have to.
Explain to me how one goes about avoiding the use of static IPv4s (ie...the whole point of doing this) as the content hoster.
I am waiting for Google to pull services from IPv4. That will be the turning point. If ISP's can't provide a connection to Google then people will be angry and leave. If forces their hands.
Governments should also be forcing ISP's to move to at least a dual-stacked IPv6 infrastructure through regulatory and licensing channels. I know certain vendors in some European countries are not allowed to bid for government contracts unless they are fully IPv6 capable.
I have also made the suggestion that @mpkossen make it a rule that all advertised offers on LEB/LET requires IPv6 connectivity from the start of 2016. The more sites that offer IPv6 then the more ISP's will be forced to move to it.
That would certainly hasten things, but I can't see them throwing away a current revenue stream.
DNS > Cloudflare IPv4 > IPv6 VPS
I'm sorry (not really) but that's just extremely ignorant and pointless. Sure, IPv6 is coming closer and closer, but we still have another 4 million+ IPv4 addresses to go! Why should hosts be forced to transition to IPv6 and not be allowed to advertise on LET unless following such an absurd delegation, when ISPs don't plan on moving for a while. You want to force ISPs to transition to IPv6 already? Why? To make it harder on everyone else to remember a complicated address? There's no point in doing this for at least the next 10 years. We have plenty of IPv4s to distribute, and no need to force everyone into IPv6 and make our lives more complicated than they already are.
You don't buy a cow for a glass of milk.
You mean Akamai's?
My life is complicated because there's such limited IPv6 support.
I can't reach part of my servers most of the time because outside of my home, I have no native IPv6 connectivity.
From RIPE's page:
Akamai can keep their /10 because ARIN still has exactly 1.00 /8 block left.
I'm pretty sure those belong to Akamai too. ARIN just hasn't updated the page.
You've got to be kidding me.
Well, nevermind what I said earlier. Let's push onward for IPv6 already. :P
Still, how the hell did they manage to justify so many IPs?
I am really curious why do they even need that large ip allocation ? lol ....