Hypothesis: Mass adoption of IPv6 is blocked by the ugliness/inconvenience of the IPv6 address format, hence "end-users" (developers) don't like adopting IPv6. As long as this UX issue does not get solved, IPv6 adoption is only going to happen on an individual level when any given business' significant income stream is at immediate risk of being disrupted. Depending on how many of these individually affected businesses represent major infrastructure providers (such as public clouds), the individual moves to IPv6 might together bring about a globally noticeable effect.
---
Who here actually feels any sort of pain, as an internet technologist, or as business owner, from "still" being on IPv4? I know that I do not.
I don't know. IPv6 is ugly, yeah, but not any more ugly than other long random strings that we just copy-paste all the time, like API keys. For me, not adopting IPv6 has these reasons:
* My home and small business Internet provider does not support IPv6, despite them talking about deploying it for about 10 years now. Actually here in the Netherlands I have never encountered a mainstream consumer ISP that supports IPv6.
* I don't have any users that are on exclusively on IPv6. All my users have access to IPv4.
* IPv6 does not bring me any visible benefits, like faster performance.
I work for an ISP so I have some perspective on this issue. We do offer static IPv6 addresses to our customers, but only upon request (by default they get one static IPv4).
If we had demand for it, I'm pretty sure we'd start including an IPv6 subnet by default. It doesn't cost us much, it's just more bookkeeping really. If anything, it could be a turn-off to our customers who might not be used to configuring their router with an IPv6 subnet (the 'ugliness' problem you're talking about, but also just unfamiliarity).
I think IPv6 adoption will happen when cloud providers start running out of IPv4 space. If AWS has to drastically raise its prices for IPs, or simply announces they're running out, then AWS customers will have to start evangelizing IPv6 to their own customer bases.
Eventually an IT guy in an office says, "I heard Slack is only going to support IPv6 soon, we need it!". So the ISPs start doing it.
>: Mass adoption of IPv6 is blocked by the ugliness/inconvenience of the IPv6 address format, hence "end-users" (developers) don't like adopting IPv6. As long as this UX issue does not get solved, IPv6 adoption is only going to happen on an individual level when any given business' significant income stream is at immediate risk of being disrupted.
it's a 128 bit number. no matter how you encode it, the ux is going to suck.
At home, I get IPv6, but I get assigned a different network every 24 hours, so it not that useful to, say, access my home server remotely. It works smoothly, though.
At work, we had some problems with Windows' Network Location Awareness where a domain controller thought it was on a public/non-trusted network unless IPv6 was turned off in the network settings. So we actually had at least a little pressure not to enable v6. :-|
Long address in not the only problem of IPv6. Mass adoption is also slowed by complexity of IPv6. There is rationale for this complexity (more features, more flexibility), but in most networks this complexity comes with little or no practical benefits.
I don't see an answer to 'how bad' in the article. I thought I'll get some recent numbers but instead i got... some generic text that was valid even 3 years ago?
There has been an answer to your question in this thread for 14 minutes. However only users with showdead on can see it, because Arc has erroneously flagged it as evil. Screenshot/proof of what I currently see: https://i.imgur.com/Y7iM30E.png
HN does get spam, but the text and links don't look like the currently-buried comment does. I can't see it being /that/ hard to train an RNN, what with this being a comp-sci discussion forum...
--
Oh, about the bar being brown/black in my screenshot - I set the bar color to that of the upvote/karma text, as I don't care to see that information (I start commenting for points, not to contribute meaningfully - it's true). Unfortunately Arc doesn't realize it should make the color of the links lighter so I can see them, so I've had to work hard to learn where the "threads" link is sitting so I can access comment replies.
Bit inconsistent letting me change the background color but not the text color. I can understand it, but still. Getting to the root cause, it would be nice to have an option to completely disable karma score display.
In the organisation I work for we had IPv4/IPv6 dual stack. Due to IPv4 exhaustion my whole department was shoved behind an NAT, which given the circumstances I find it normal as there is no need for 400+ workstations to have public IPs. The weird thing is that after the switch to NAT IPv6 connectivity was lost. When asking why IPv6 was lost I was told "what do you need it for?".
In the meantime I have residential IPv6 since 2011. I really believe corporate networks are one of the main causes of delay in massive IPv6 adoption. And given the inertia I'm not really expecting them to change soon.
My ISP doesn't support IPv6 and it's been complicated to get IPv6 running properly at my hosting providers too. My hosting provider uses DHCP to propagate routing information, and I had a lot of issue with it going down, thus losing IPv6 connectivity. In the end I just disabled IPv6 on all the node I manage, it has no benefit except increased complexity.
The problem is the lack of insensitive to do the conversion.
I actually tell my ISP when they call me to upgrade that I will not upgrade to a higher package unless that package has IPv6 enabled. I am probably the only person who does this.
What I did instead was set up a HE.net tunnel so I can actually have IPv6 (albeit with a smaller MTU, but you're unlikely to notice). What I gain is the ability to run my own little services at home again, no NAT punching! no complicated rules.. I have a salt master that connects to my IPV6 enabled VPS' (which is all of them, thankfully), I have all my mail listening on VPS's with IPv4 and IPv6 which take in my mail and deliver it to a harddisk at my house essentially. Anything S2S can happen directly.. and it's nicer even on IPv6 enabled networks that I happen to be on when travelling (Mobile operators are increasingly IPv6)..
But it's unreliable to be IPv6 only, I can only access my home from other wifi networks at a ratio of about 1:20..
But I long for the day where it's ubiquitous and I can shit on wifi operators for not supporting it.. that day will come.
I mean last year IPv6 adoption more than doubled and is sitting at around 22%~ of all traffic.. so that's something.
This sounds more like poor DHCP configuration on your side? DHCP going down doesn't remove anything unless your client decides to time out it's current address configuration - of which there's no incentive to do on a server.
Moreover if routing was being propagated by DHCP, why was that not the case for IPv4 as well which would presumably be using it ?
> The ultimate solution to IPv4 exhaustion is, of course, the complete transition of the Internet to IPv6, however, this will take time and until then there will be (by definition) networks and sites which only support IPv4. This requires other networks and sites, even if they support IPv6, to maintain IPv4 connectivity, which in turn requires some number of IPv4 addresses. For that reason, IPv4 exhaustion certainly is an issue to be understood and dealt with, especially by those who are building new networks and services.
IPv4 exhaustion is going to get really bad if we don't move to IPv6 soon.
IPv4 exhaustion means no more personal server boxes at home. The US has huge chunks of IPv4 allocation. In Vietnam, it's not as fun. IPv4 addresses have really exhausted. I just learned by accident that the ISP there they do a thing called the "carrier grade NAT" to get around that.
I was baffled I couldn't open a port on my router to seed some Linux images despite setting up the NAT correctly (remotely). After scratching my head for a while I noticed the IP address that the router reported was not the public IP when I Googled "what is my IP address." Then I sent an email to FPT, the ISP - one of the biggest ISPs in Vietnam saying "Hey guys - I believe I'm behind a NAT... I can't open a port to do stuff. Can you assist me?" To my surprise, after 15 minutes they sent an email back, saying "Oh yeah, we know that, we have given you a public IP. Thanks for trusting our service." I was double baffled by their service. Then because of that, I also asked for IPv6. 10 minutes later - "IPv6 has been enabled on your account. Thanks for using our service." What the hell?
While my ISP in the US (Spectrum/TW) has just given me a hell of a hard time because they sent me a buggy modem that would restart 3+ times a day. And in 4 months with a countless number of calls, 10 tech people sent to my house, no one knew what TF was going on. Now suddenly, it doesn't crash anymore, but they disabled IPv6 altogether, no words given. No one in their tech support knew that IPv6 was disabled because it crashes their router and they just gave me bullshit answers. I just found out about the "Puma chipset IPv6 crash" ordeal by Googling. Again, Spectrum was as helpful as a rock. I don't know how do they have so many people sending me mail spams weekly and calling and harassing me to sign up for their TV service, yet the service sucks so much.
I feel like AWS and the Cloud in general have to be helping with this issue, because people no longer need to lock down individual IPs or ranges of IPs to get work done. Without the need to lock down an IP that you may or may not need to use, and with load-balancers that are able to expose boxes on a private subnet, the demand for IPv4 should be going down.
That is if the number of Internet users don't grow and since it is so easy to spin up an instance even for just $5 a month these days, many people are rather willing to spin up more than they would have physically to use more IPv4 addresses.
But seeing how attaching an extra IP to an instance is so cheap everywhere, it seems there's no immediate threat to lack of address spaces but I'd like to know about a proper research.
I actually disagree on this point. The rapid deployment and horizontal scaling that cloud recommends implicitly (failure domains, microservices as small isolated single purpose units et al.) also promote the consumption of IPv4 address space.
The other thing is Docker and Kubernetes are not supporting IPv6 today so that definitely locks a lot of the more modern cloud deployments to IPv4, even if it's S2S communication which could have been IPv6 only (since you would control both ends) otherwise... so that's another thing.
However, new network layer technologies like "Layer-3 all the way to the server" are allowing providers to use their entire IPv4 allocation by having BGP pushing /32 routes internally and this has been the biggest helper in my opinion, no longer do you have a static /24 allocation and a bunch of dead space that can't be freed easily.
Of course people who are new to OPs/Dev haven't really seen this much- but I would probably venture more than 50% of ipv4 space is locked into allocations that are mostly empty.
-- I also think there is still an increasing population of internet users and VPS/Cloud providers give a cheap and easy way to be online too.. $5 for a VPS in most cases.
Google was incorporated in September 1998. RFC 2640 was published in December 1998. Google's IPv6 tracker [1] has ~20% of their traffic coming in as IPv6. In the time that it's taken for Google to become one of the largest companies in the world, IPv6 is still uncommon.
I think search engines are very well positioned to massively help IPv6 addoption. For example, they could limit the number of search hits to an IPv4 only site. A mom an pop page without IPv6 is fine, a top 1000 site is inexcusable in 2018 and contributing to the vicious circle.
On the user facing side, they could inform consumers when they are connecting from IPv4 only networks, to realy drive home the point that they are receiving a sub-par service. It might not be true today, but in the long run it's true for the internet as a whole, stuck in IPv4. And if people perceive IPv6 as desirable, they will prefer it given the choice even if they don't understand exactly what it is, just like they prefer a 4G service to a 3G one.
What incentive would Google and Microsoft have to do this? IPv4 exhaustion costs them too, in routing performance and manpower to manage a scarce resource. Also, reliable end to end connectivity is an enabler for the type of technologies they push, limiting telco control over their users. Massive growth markets are trumped by lack of IP space, the whole of Afrinic only has a few /8. That means African carriers will do massive NAT.
An embarrassing admission, but one that is potentially useful for this conversation: I have a Cisco CCNA cert that I got in 2009 but never used. (Got a job that didn’t put most of the knowledge to use, and the cert collected dust.) IPv6 was on the exam. I’ve forgotten all about how to use it.
For me it is just not as intuitive. Maybe others think the same, slowing adoption? I didn’t find it intuitive when studying for the exam, but I got it enough to pass.
Basic networking knowledge I still have. I can tell you how to set up a DHCP and DNS server, and how NAT works on your router. I can tell you about ARP tables, VPNs, VLANs, firewalls, and subnets. I can’t begin to tell you about the equivalents on v6.
Maybe I’m just getting old. Maybe it would come to me once I started using it again. Or maybe it’s just not as intuitive.
Could IPv4 address exhaustion be staved by opening some of the currently unused /8 blocks? For instance, Apple has the entire 17.0.0.0/8 block. If IPv4 addresses are really becoming scarce and demand is going up, seems like Apple could dole out /24 or /16 bit blocks to RIRs and make some money - which they obviously like to do. So why aren't they doing it? Maybe someone more familiar with the economics of IP has an idea.
I agree with people blaming whole situation on ugly format of IPv6. I also believe that increase to 128bit address was unnecessary and harmful. We could have just added another two segments, have 48 bits total and it would probably be enough. It would also be much easier for people to switch from 127.0.0.1 to 0.0.127.0.0.1 than to ::1.
We've done so much learning about good UX, backwards compatibility and smooth upgrade paths in the years since IPv6 was first thought of and specified that I suggest there is a group of people out there (or on here) who can sensibly come up with an "IPv4.1" draft that can represent a smooth upgrade path from where we are right now, towards an extensible internet addressing format/protocol. It would have at least the following properties:
- IPv4-formatted addresses would continue to work as today
- address space can be extended by adding bits to the existing IPv4 format, and 0 bits do not need to be typed out etc (in mathematical notation there's also no need to write 0001.200 if we just mean 1.2)
(It feels like there should be a couple more fundamental properties to be stated here, but I can't think of any more right now.)
I think some hosting providers are wasting a bit of the address space. For an example I have 15 linodes each with their own public IP, but I actually only need one or two of the IPs to be accessed publicly for the loadbalancers, the rest I actually prefer not to be routable from the public.
> The ultimate solution to IPv4 exhaustion is, of course, the complete transition of the Internet to IPv6, however, this will take time and until then there will be (by definition) networks and sites which only support IPv4.
Off-topic: I've always wondered why English speakers (or perhaps just Americans?) use "by definition" arguments so much (also just saying that things are by definition so and so).
People never seem to use "by definition" arguments and such in Finnish for example.
Definitions of mathematical objects aside, things in concept space are not eternal and can shift around.
Is the usage a cultural thing? A quirk of language? Just some random trivial thing that just is and doesn't have any particular reason to it? :p
One problem to moving to IPv6 is that most of the firewalls I've looked at either don't support it at all or the support is very weak. I know that IPFire doesn't support it and I couldn't find any information on Smoothwall IPv6 support. I think that pfSense supports it but I don't know how well.
Come on people, it's 2018 and your building a network application. I'm thinking a top priority would be IPv6 capabilities. Apparently, I'm wrong.
Nothing is going to change unless there is a real issue by not having ip v6 which will force users to jump to the ISPs which do support it and abandon the ones who don't.
My understanding is that there is a real cost for ISPs to make IP v6 available, but zero need to (upgrade of thousands of pieces of hardware equipment - is that still true?). There is no consequences for not doing so.
I had IPv6 setup at one point, but a lot of things using it are broken. Some sites/services/software repos will just refuse to connect- and after a few minutes of debugging I realize it's probably v6. Turning off IPv6 usually fixes the problem.
I'd like to use IPv6, but since turning it on by default breaks a lot of things- I'm leaving it off for now.
I've been dreaming of a small-scale "cloud" hosting startup, and one of the biggest concerns is actually IPv4 availability.
I was hoping that this article would shed some light on the feasibility for a new company to grab a /20 or so. Does anyone around here have some insight?
The most important slowdown on IPv6 adoption is vat replacement of small local services and servers in lieu of centralized ones provided by ISPs amd a few Fortune 500 companies.
[+] [-] seeekr|8 years ago|reply
---
Who here actually feels any sort of pain, as an internet technologist, or as business owner, from "still" being on IPv4? I know that I do not.
[+] [-] FooBarWidget|8 years ago|reply
* My home and small business Internet provider does not support IPv6, despite them talking about deploying it for about 10 years now. Actually here in the Netherlands I have never encountered a mainstream consumer ISP that supports IPv6.
* I don't have any users that are on exclusively on IPv6. All my users have access to IPv4.
* IPv6 does not bring me any visible benefits, like faster performance.
[+] [-] apeace|8 years ago|reply
If we had demand for it, I'm pretty sure we'd start including an IPv6 subnet by default. It doesn't cost us much, it's just more bookkeeping really. If anything, it could be a turn-off to our customers who might not be used to configuring their router with an IPv6 subnet (the 'ugliness' problem you're talking about, but also just unfamiliarity).
I think IPv6 adoption will happen when cloud providers start running out of IPv4 space. If AWS has to drastically raise its prices for IPs, or simply announces they're running out, then AWS customers will have to start evangelizing IPv6 to their own customer bases.
Eventually an IT guy in an office says, "I heard Slack is only going to support IPv6 soon, we need it!". So the ISPs start doing it.
[+] [-] gruez|8 years ago|reply
it's a 128 bit number. no matter how you encode it, the ux is going to suck.
[+] [-] krylon|8 years ago|reply
At work, we had some problems with Windows' Network Location Awareness where a domain controller thought it was on a public/non-trusted network unless IPv6 was turned off in the network settings. So we actually had at least a little pressure not to enable v6. :-|
[+] [-] citrin_ru|8 years ago|reply
[+] [-] gwbas1c|8 years ago|reply
But, you're right about IPv6 being extremely complicated. Back when I first heard about IPv6, I suspected it was going to fail in the marketplace.
[+] [-] baybal2|8 years ago|reply
[+] [-] nottorp|8 years ago|reply
[+] [-] micheldlebeau|8 years ago|reply
[+] [-] exikyut|8 years ago|reply
There has been an answer to your question in this thread for 14 minutes. However only users with showdead on can see it, because Arc has erroneously flagged it as evil. Screenshot/proof of what I currently see: https://i.imgur.com/Y7iM30E.png
HN does get spam, but the text and links don't look like the currently-buried comment does. I can't see it being /that/ hard to train an RNN, what with this being a comp-sci discussion forum...
--
Oh, about the bar being brown/black in my screenshot - I set the bar color to that of the upvote/karma text, as I don't care to see that information (I start commenting for points, not to contribute meaningfully - it's true). Unfortunately Arc doesn't realize it should make the color of the links lighter so I can see them, so I've had to work hard to learn where the "threads" link is sitting so I can access comment replies.
Bit inconsistent letting me change the background color but not the text color. I can understand it, but still. Getting to the root cause, it would be nice to have an option to completely disable karma score display.
</Irritated but ultimately harmless 1:30AM rant>
[+] [-] spystath|8 years ago|reply
In the meantime I have residential IPv6 since 2011. I really believe corporate networks are one of the main causes of delay in massive IPv6 adoption. And given the inertia I'm not really expecting them to change soon.
[+] [-] kuon|8 years ago|reply
The problem is the lack of insensitive to do the conversion.
[+] [-] dijit|8 years ago|reply
I actually tell my ISP when they call me to upgrade that I will not upgrade to a higher package unless that package has IPv6 enabled. I am probably the only person who does this.
What I did instead was set up a HE.net tunnel so I can actually have IPv6 (albeit with a smaller MTU, but you're unlikely to notice). What I gain is the ability to run my own little services at home again, no NAT punching! no complicated rules.. I have a salt master that connects to my IPV6 enabled VPS' (which is all of them, thankfully), I have all my mail listening on VPS's with IPv4 and IPv6 which take in my mail and deliver it to a harddisk at my house essentially. Anything S2S can happen directly.. and it's nicer even on IPv6 enabled networks that I happen to be on when travelling (Mobile operators are increasingly IPv6)..
But it's unreliable to be IPv6 only, I can only access my home from other wifi networks at a ratio of about 1:20..
But I long for the day where it's ubiquitous and I can shit on wifi operators for not supporting it.. that day will come.
I mean last year IPv6 adoption more than doubled and is sitting at around 22%~ of all traffic.. so that's something.
[+] [-] XorNot|8 years ago|reply
Moreover if routing was being propagated by DHCP, why was that not the case for IPv4 as well which would presumably be using it ?
[+] [-] gwbas1c|8 years ago|reply
That's what I heard in college in 1999.
[+] [-] jimmies|8 years ago|reply
IPv4 exhaustion means no more personal server boxes at home. The US has huge chunks of IPv4 allocation. In Vietnam, it's not as fun. IPv4 addresses have really exhausted. I just learned by accident that the ISP there they do a thing called the "carrier grade NAT" to get around that.
I was baffled I couldn't open a port on my router to seed some Linux images despite setting up the NAT correctly (remotely). After scratching my head for a while I noticed the IP address that the router reported was not the public IP when I Googled "what is my IP address." Then I sent an email to FPT, the ISP - one of the biggest ISPs in Vietnam saying "Hey guys - I believe I'm behind a NAT... I can't open a port to do stuff. Can you assist me?" To my surprise, after 15 minutes they sent an email back, saying "Oh yeah, we know that, we have given you a public IP. Thanks for trusting our service." I was double baffled by their service. Then because of that, I also asked for IPv6. 10 minutes later - "IPv6 has been enabled on your account. Thanks for using our service." What the hell?
While my ISP in the US (Spectrum/TW) has just given me a hell of a hard time because they sent me a buggy modem that would restart 3+ times a day. And in 4 months with a countless number of calls, 10 tech people sent to my house, no one knew what TF was going on. Now suddenly, it doesn't crash anymore, but they disabled IPv6 altogether, no words given. No one in their tech support knew that IPv6 was disabled because it crashes their router and they just gave me bullshit answers. I just found out about the "Puma chipset IPv6 crash" ordeal by Googling. Again, Spectrum was as helpful as a rock. I don't know how do they have so many people sending me mail spams weekly and calling and harassing me to sign up for their TV service, yet the service sucks so much.
[+] [-] craig1f|8 years ago|reply
[+] [-] h1d|8 years ago|reply
That is if the number of Internet users don't grow and since it is so easy to spin up an instance even for just $5 a month these days, many people are rather willing to spin up more than they would have physically to use more IPv4 addresses.
But seeing how attaching an extra IP to an instance is so cheap everywhere, it seems there's no immediate threat to lack of address spaces but I'd like to know about a proper research.
[+] [-] dijit|8 years ago|reply
The other thing is Docker and Kubernetes are not supporting IPv6 today so that definitely locks a lot of the more modern cloud deployments to IPv4, even if it's S2S communication which could have been IPv6 only (since you would control both ends) otherwise... so that's another thing.
However, new network layer technologies like "Layer-3 all the way to the server" are allowing providers to use their entire IPv4 allocation by having BGP pushing /32 routes internally and this has been the biggest helper in my opinion, no longer do you have a static /24 allocation and a bunch of dead space that can't be freed easily.
Of course people who are new to OPs/Dev haven't really seen this much- but I would probably venture more than 50% of ipv4 space is locked into allocations that are mostly empty.
-- I also think there is still an increasing population of internet users and VPS/Cloud providers give a cheap and easy way to be online too.. $5 for a VPS in most cases.
[+] [-] YouKnowBetter|8 years ago|reply
Keeping (private) v4 working is hard enough.
Even drafting a project budget for v6 makes management go balistic. - firewall & IDS upgrades
- firewalls rules
- accountablity
- dynamic DNS
- employee education
- toolchain updates
- upgrades of software
- functionality tests
Not all companies employ NY or Google level engineers who "just roll out v6" on a Sunday afternoon.
[+] [-] ranger207|8 years ago|reply
[1] https://www.google.com/intl/en/ipv6/statistics.html
[+] [-] cornholio|8 years ago|reply
On the user facing side, they could inform consumers when they are connecting from IPv4 only networks, to realy drive home the point that they are receiving a sub-par service. It might not be true today, but in the long run it's true for the internet as a whole, stuck in IPv4. And if people perceive IPv6 as desirable, they will prefer it given the choice even if they don't understand exactly what it is, just like they prefer a 4G service to a 3G one.
What incentive would Google and Microsoft have to do this? IPv4 exhaustion costs them too, in routing performance and manpower to manage a scarce resource. Also, reliable end to end connectivity is an enabler for the type of technologies they push, limiting telco control over their users. Massive growth markets are trumped by lack of IP space, the whole of Afrinic only has a few /8. That means African carriers will do massive NAT.
[+] [-] SlowBro|8 years ago|reply
For me it is just not as intuitive. Maybe others think the same, slowing adoption? I didn’t find it intuitive when studying for the exam, but I got it enough to pass.
Basic networking knowledge I still have. I can tell you how to set up a DHCP and DNS server, and how NAT works on your router. I can tell you about ARP tables, VPNs, VLANs, firewalls, and subnets. I can’t begin to tell you about the equivalents on v6.
Maybe I’m just getting old. Maybe it would come to me once I started using it again. Or maybe it’s just not as intuitive.
[+] [-] AckermanMD|8 years ago|reply
[+] [-] d3ckard|8 years ago|reply
[+] [-] devdas|8 years ago|reply
[+] [-] seeekr|8 years ago|reply
- IPv4-formatted addresses would continue to work as today - address space can be extended by adding bits to the existing IPv4 format, and 0 bits do not need to be typed out etc (in mathematical notation there's also no need to write 0001.200 if we just mean 1.2)
(It feels like there should be a couple more fundamental properties to be stated here, but I can't think of any more right now.)
[+] [-] kawsper|8 years ago|reply
[+] [-] ekns|8 years ago|reply
Off-topic: I've always wondered why English speakers (or perhaps just Americans?) use "by definition" arguments so much (also just saying that things are by definition so and so).
People never seem to use "by definition" arguments and such in Finnish for example.
Definitions of mathematical objects aside, things in concept space are not eternal and can shift around. Is the usage a cultural thing? A quirk of language? Just some random trivial thing that just is and doesn't have any particular reason to it? :p
[+] [-] Corrado|8 years ago|reply
Come on people, it's 2018 and your building a network application. I'm thinking a top priority would be IPv6 capabilities. Apparently, I'm wrong.
[+] [-] dorfsmay|8 years ago|reply
My understanding is that there is a real cost for ISPs to make IP v6 available, but zero need to (upgrade of thousands of pieces of hardware equipment - is that still true?). There is no consequences for not doing so.
[+] [-] ReverseCold|8 years ago|reply
I'd like to use IPv6, but since turning it on by default breaks a lot of things- I'm leaving it off for now.
[+] [-] ymse|8 years ago|reply
I was hoping that this article would shed some light on the feasibility for a new company to grab a /20 or so. Does anyone around here have some insight?
[+] [-] AstralStorm|8 years ago|reply