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
I'm very happy that Verizon FIOS just rolled out IPv6 here in Northern Virginia I get quite a few visitors via IPv6 on my sites as well.
Didn't someone on LET want to ban non IPv6 offers?
I'm perfectly happy with ipv4 from time4vps and don't care if they implement ipv6.
whats this necessity nonsense?
I like Ipv6 as much as the next man but someone needs to justify the 'necessity' beyond IPv4's running out please?
Who is even using Time4VPS?
Didn't got a Kimsufi? has /64 IPv6 Subnet, best ever.
Gut feeling: time4vps rolls out ipv6 with the KVM launch.
It's 2016 and a Half. (disclaimer: speculation.)
Snapshots, YASS.
Yes I agree, IPv6 is totally unnecessary if you don't count that one huge issue that it was designed to solve
As for me, I don't want ipv6 on my time4vps VPS.
+1. Build a useful feature first
I am not looking to pick a pointless fight, but if you have IPv4 then IPv6 is redundant, saying that it is pretty much a necessity with no further information is a bit weak imo.
IPv6 is a business decision right now, not a necessity, if your petition had genuine use cases to illustrate why it is a necessity from a customer stand point and a fair percentage of them agree then fair enough.
I offer IPv6 primary services myself so I do get it, but to be honest with around 5000 IPv6 primary containers deployed with only NAT IPv4 as a 'supplement' IPv6 use is still under 2% which if anything shows it absolutely is not necessary.
But that was really the point of my question, just interested in why you think it is when hardly anyone actually uses it as a primary and globally its a pile of shit quite frankly.
The logic in not having v6 if your upstream has it is... well... yea, there is none.
I argue and argue and argue but some people are just not interested, even if you provide them tunnel, config and IP space as a one-stop solution for free.
Does it make sense?
Nope.
I really don't see any reason that people are not using IPv6 today. IPv4 is not necessarily at all if everything is IPv6 enabled.
My justification is that if your backend applications are connected with IPv6 network, it's a huge save of IPv4 cost. Think about it when you have hundreds or even thousands of nodes world wide.
Great to hear that you care.
I'm not one of them.
All my applications and databases are connected with IPv6 network.
All the time. We actually don't need IPv4 addresses for some services.
Like the databases, and application servers that do not directly talk to the legacy IPv4 users.
A /128 is enough for a VPS.
can be done on existing IPv4
But you could just as easy use IPv4 like 98% of others
But if they were on IPv4 they would work just fine as well.
What cost? there is no cost.
What does cost money is the time it would take a company in man hours to implement IPv6 and potentially add more equipment and complexity.
Again, I am not looking for a pointless fight, I push IPv6 myself but no one uses it and I am yet to hear a use case that shows it is necessary.
You suggest him to spend time and effort migrating his infrastructure back to IPv4? Just to be able to also add a Time4vps box in there?
Right, you're already fighting it -- spreading your anti-IPv6 FUD giving excuses for providers to delay adopting it.
So you are actually arguing that customers should waste even more time retooling their setup for IPv4, multiplied by however many customers are in the same position, just so a provider can avoid implementing something they should have implemented a decade ago and will certainly have to get done in the next decade anyways?
Ok I am out, this complete lack of reason or logic is the problem imo.
You really have no chance at convincing anyone if all you can do is take the school yard stance of I want it and anyone that disagrees is wrong.
Your response was literally "why should the provider put in the effort when all his cutomers can instead"
You're the one who hurled reason and logic out of the thread
^ few customer maybe
next time if provider dont support IPv6 dont purchase from them, it will save your time and provider time
This. Also if you really want them to support ipv6, tell them that you are not buying exactly because of the lack of ipv6.
There is only real reason for a busyness to implement ipv6 - money. It costs them money to implement ipv6, it might cost them money if they don't implement it. They have to find the balance of these costs and decide whether and when it is worth it for them to implement ipv6.
There's nothing wrong with customers added for features
Naa, buts is ok, agree to disagree.
I am genuinely interested in a use case that proves necessity, not just 'want'
No, it's not possible for me. All my database servers are without any IPv4 addresses. We saved a lot of money by removing IPv4 addresses.
Again, IPv4 costs more money.
Right, but if they were on IPv6 they would work just fine as well, too.
IPv6 addresses are virtually free, whereas IPv4 addresses have significant cost. I don't understand why you said there is no cost.
We already implemented IPv6 and we are all happy with IPv6. After implementing IPv6, we simply cannot find any reason that we ever need IPv4, with the only exception to support legacy IPv4 users.
I fully understand that. In your world, IPv6 is nothing, but in other people's world, it's something.
You picked a horse and now you're acting like an Apple fanboy. What's next? Arguments about how IPv6's smaller screen size is an advantage when you hold it with one hand?
@elgs I understand your perspective, IPv6 is great, it should be the future, I just don't see it happening.
If there was none, they would.
If residential ISP's adopted it as primary and put some marketing twist on it we would be laughing at those still on IPv4.
But they wont because they don't have to and it would cost way to much money.
Agreed.
Old ISP may not, but new ISP will. It will be much easier for anybody to become an ISP as IPv6 is virtually free and unlimited in number.