On 2019-08-14 03:03 AM, Per Jessen wrote:
My guess - many of the larger access providers have yet to feel the pain. You have mentioned it yourself, your IPv4 address virtually never changes, versus my example of hosts on a Swiss mobile network changing every other day. The latter suggests a higher contention ratio.
Yet my ISP is 100% ready for IPv6. In addition to my Internet connection, my cell phone (same company) is also IPv6 only. In order to access IPv4 only sites, it uses something called 464XLAT to convert to IPv4. Several other companies in my area are also offering IPv6, but not the big one, the phone company. They've been offering IPv6 on the Internet for over 3.5 years and had a pilot program, with 6to4 & 6rd tunneling for years before that.
We will have dual-stack for years to come. No public server will go IPv6-only, unless in restricted or controlled environments, not on the world-wide internet. So even when those larger providers do start with IPv6 deployment, they cannot give up on IPv4.
No doubt dual stack will be around a long time. However, the move to IPv6 should have started years ago for everyone. There are also some parts of the world where no IPv4 addresses are available, so there are some IPv6 only servers in those areas.
A full class A network is not to be laughed at. Enabling it in Linux is a good thing. [1] The regional internet registries (RIPE, ARIN et al) are being very tight with what remains of IPv4 addresses.
Yep. According to what I read a while ago, they're not handing out anything bigger than a /24. I also recall reading that they won't release addresses to anyone that does not have IPv6 up & running and also that some are being reserved for transistion purposes.
A rough calculation says the total is a mere 5% of a full class A.
And a class A is only 0.39% of the total IPv4 address space. All this is doing is very slightly delaying the inevitable.
[1] An interesting question might be - how many applications will have a problem with that 0.0.0.0/8 range? Usually all zeros have meant all addresses or no address. Or default route.
Yep, that's something that has to be considered. Bottom line, why bother with this, when the proper solution is to move to IPv6. On top of this, is the problems caused by all the hacks to get around the shortage. We have NAT which causes problems, so we have STUN servers, so that VoIP and games can work through NAT, etc. If people would put as much effort into moving to IPv6 as is done with creating hacks and work arounds to the IPv4 address shortage, we'd have done the job years ago. -- To unsubscribe, e-mail: opensuse+unsubscribe@opensuse.org To contact the owner, e-mail: opensuse+owner@opensuse.org