Now currently I’m not in the workforce, but in the past from my work experience, apprenticeship and temp roles, I’ve always seen ipv4 and not ipv6!

Hell, my ISP seems to exclusively use ipv4 (unless behind nats they’re using ipv6)

Do you think a lot of people stick with the earlier iteration because they have been so familiar with it for a long time?

When you look at a ipv6, it looks menacing with a long string of letters and numbers compared to the more simpler often.

I am aware the IP bucket has gone dry and they gotta bring in a new IP cow with a even bigger bucket, but what do you think? Do you yourself or your firm use ipv4 or 6?

  • davel@lemmy.ml
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    16
    ·
    edit-2
    2 months ago

    I think djb was right, over twenty years ago: The IPv6 mess

    The IPv6 designers made a fundamental conceptual mistake: they designed the IPv6 address space as an alternative to the IPv4 address space, rather than an extension to the IPv4 address space.

    There was an alternative proposal that was backward-compatible with IPv4, but I’ve forgotten the name now.

      • davel@lemmy.ml
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        2
        ·
        2 months ago

        That wasn’t it. I wanna say “IPvX”, but my web search comes up empty, so it must have been something else.

  • nutsack@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    14
    ·
    edit-2
    2 months ago

    a teammate implemented it because he thought it would be a good resume project. it added more maintenance work to a lot of pieces, forever. there is no measurable benefit to the business

  • esc27@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    12
    ·
    edit-2
    2 months ago

    IPv6 is now twice as old as IPv4 was when IPv6 was introduced. 20 years ago I worried about needing to support it. Now I don’t even think about it at all.

  • PotentialProblem@sh.itjust.works
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    11
    ·
    2 months ago

    Company currently uses IPv6! For awhile firewall rules kept biting us as we’d realize something worked in ipv4 but not IPv6 but now I forget it’s even a thing really.

    I once paid for a vpc host that was exclusively IPv6 and was shocked how many things broke. I was using it for a discord bot and the discord api didn’t even properly support IPv6 …

  • Xanvial@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    9
    ·
    2 months ago

    Just annoyed when I need to specify port when using IPv6. Needs to add square bracket to workaround ambiguity of colon is kinda bad. How can they decide to use colon instead of another special character??

  • PetteriPano@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    7
    ·
    2 months ago

    IPv6 was “just around the corner” when I was studying 20+ years ago. I kept a tunnel up until the brokers shut down.

    I’ve been hosting some big (partly proprietary) services for work, and we’ve been IPv6 compatible for a decade.

    My ISP finally gave me native IPv6 earlier this year, which gave me the push to make sure my personal hosting does IPv6 as well. Seems like most big players services support it today. It’s nice to not have the overhead that CGNAT brings.

    IPv6 got a bit of a bad reputation when operating systems defaulted to 6to4 translation but never actually managed to work.

  • TORFdot0@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    5
    ·
    2 months ago

    A lot of networks were designed with ipv4 and NAT in mind. There really isn’t a cost benefit to migrate all your DHCP scopes, VLANs, Subnets, and firewall rules to IPv6 and then also migrate 1000’s of endpoints to it.

    Much cheaper to just disable ipv6 entirely on the internal network (to prevent attacks using a rogue dhcpv6 server etc) and only use ipv6 on your WAN connections if you have to use it.

    • tc4m@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      2
      ·
      2 months ago

      Off topic, but I love Hurricane Electric’s website. Simple, but not ugly. Straight to the point. I find it quite charming in contrast to the hyper designed, but barely functional sites of other companies. (fuck you HPE)

  • Evotech@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    3
    ·
    2 months ago

    We mainly use ipv4, but recent laws that all public sector websites are to use IPv6, we have had to update our stack.

    Now we can do IPv6 public endpoints with ipv4 backends.

  • asim0v@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    4
    arrow-down
    1
    ·
    2 months ago

    We disable IPv6 often when troubleshooting a network issue. Nothing that I have seen requires IPv6, and turning it off solves more issues than we would expect even today. It’s not the first thing I’m going to try, but I’ll often do it if I have to reboot anyway.

    I also uninstall Dell Optimizer and Dell Optimizer Service on sight regardless of the issue because that evil will cause problems eventually. Best to just eradicate it on sight.

  • sylver_dragon@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    2
    ·
    2 months ago

    Widespread IPv6 adoption is right there with the year of the Linux desktop. It’s a good idea, it’s always Coming Soon™ and it’s probably never going to actually happen. People are stubborn and thanks to things like NAT and CGNAT, the main reason to switch is gone. Sure, address exhaustion may still happen. And not having to fiddle with things like NAT (and fuck CGNAT) would be nice. But, until the cost of keeping IPv4 far outweighs the cost of everything running IPv6 (despite nearly everything doing it now), IPv4 will just keep shambling on, like a zombie in a bad horror flick.

  • quafeinum@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    1
    ·
    2 months ago

    We are going full v6 with SIIT-DC (rfc7755) with our next hardware refresh. Our mother site doesn’t but we don’t care what they do as that’s not our problem