Join the discussion
Write your take first — we'll ask for email only when you're ready to publish.
- Hacker News
- Interesting to see the per-country rates[1]. France is up to 85%, apparently!
[1] https://www.google.com/intl/en/ipv6/statistics.html#tab=per-...
by mmwelt - The great news is that India is at 75%, otherwise the price pressure for ipv4 addresses would be insaneby whatever1
- Anyone know why there is a high frequency signal on top of the long term trend in that graph?
https://www.google.com/intl/en/ipv6/statistics.html#tab=per-...
by stcg - The more mobile traffic, the more IPv6. Have a look at India, it is not as if everyone has a fibre connection running IPv6.by Leonard_of_Q
- Cloudflare sees over 40%, and it hasn't gone up in the last year even with the overall traffic increase. Personally, as the APNIC article also says about their own observations, I guess the overall adoption is somewhere in between.
https://radar.cloudflare.com/adoption-and-usage#ipv4-vs-ipv6
But we have to remember that this reflects the adoption on the client side. With many high profile services still IPv4-only, the fraction of IPv6 flowing on the public Internet might be much lower.
I wonder what incentives are needed to push this forward, because it's not the same incentives as years ago for sure. We've long since exhausted new IPv4 allocations.
by CrLf - I believe one big anti-incentive is rate limiting, especially nowadays. With IPv4 getting a range ban is somewhat effective, way less effective on ipv6 (theres a reason HE tunnelbroker is marked bad nowadays, discord bots doing music load balance over ips on tunnelbroker for pulling youtube audio data.. they ban a /64 but you balance over a /48 or bigger). I believe this was the main reason Discord disabled IPv6 (not sure if thats still the case, but it was back in the day since bans and api rate limiting was ip based).by Fabricio20
- If we're looking at the portion of traffic, most of the big bandwidth heavy services (the video streaming sites and CDNs) are on IPv6, the long tail of IPv4-only services tend to be lower bandwidth stuff.by kalleboo
- I wonder if there will ever come a day when IPv6 will provide a better web experience than IPv4.
At the moment pretty much every website is reachable via IPv4 but a lot not via IPv6. Will there be a day when this turns around?
- I would expect online video games to be a more important driver.
- It already does. With IPv6, you don't go through some CGNAT box, that could misbehave or just break (and since the biggest chunk of content is available through IPv6, this may not be a priority). Also, a shared IPv4 can be banned by various sites if one of the owner misbehaves. This issue is not present with IPv6.
More on this: https://vincent.bernat.ch/en/blog/2024-why-ipv6
by vbernat - Faster webrtc establishments and other negotiated connections. CGNAT means more relayed than P2P connections so it should be possible to have more direct traffic for services that want to save that bandwidth.by telesilla
- > a better web experience than IPv4
That's already the case. IPv6 is often faster because most ISPs these days use cgnat for IPv4.
by mritzmann - Google hits 50% IPv6, very good for accessing websites.
But my TP-Link router blocks by default inbound IPv6 connections, without any option to configure it, still bad for pure IPv6 bidirectional streaming, gaming or services on home networks.
by coldstartops - Not that it really matters because almost all the consumer roiter manufacturers are pretty bad, but TP-Link is really, really bad. I would highly recommend not using any of their hardware.by ddtaylor
- Most people will never touch their router config, so the defaults are important. Default-deny inbound is better than allow. But it's surprisingly dumb that the router won't even let you configure it to allow, you sure there's no option to disable the firewall?by mahboi
- > But my TP-Link router blocks by default inbound IPv6 connections
I selfhost web and email over my Wireguard VPN using a free VPS (at OCI but I did it with AWS Lightsail too, though it wasn't free but cheap). This can work for you too or you can use easier to configure solutions like Tailscale. This way, your home isn't exposed directly to the Internet.
by newsoftheday - Put OpenWRT on the thing and you'll be able to do what you want. Experience the joy of adding not port forwarding rules for IPv4 but more or less identical (same ports) access rules for IPv6.by Leonard_of_Q
- All these systems are a reflection of the time that they were designed. IPv6 is 30 years old. At that time a lot of threats just didn't exist. One of my favorite is the decision to default to /64 blocks. There was a time when the designers believed that you'd use your 48 bit MAC address as part of this. Now we know that's a PII nightmare and nobody does it. Yet we're still stuck with the 128 bit addresses that came from that.
To your point, IPv6 sought to replace NAT with just having enough addresses but interestingly, that created a problem. If you used NAT and had a service on your computer request a port for incoming connections, that showed intent on behalf of the owner of that service. IPv6 doesn't have that intent, which forces home router makers do block addresses by default because you don't want most PCs on the Internet such that an external agent can scan your PC. You may end up with an unintended service on the open Internet.
So is the bigger address range better? Technically, maybe? But you have to consider defaults and intents of users. And that can take a good technical solution to a bad solution or at least create a whole bunch of problems.
by jmyeet - FTA:
>Individual economies such as India, Viet Nam, and Saudi Arabia exhibit adoption curves that differ markedly from the global average. As the APNIC Labs data shows, this global trend does not necessarily reflect the experience of individual economies.
>APNIC’s own measurement records a 42% worldwide IPv6 capability (Figure 2). That’s a substantial difference, which also needs clarifying."
The nuance is that IPv6 is growing faster in developing countries with poorer economies. I'm guessing this is because building modern IPv6 network from scratch is cheaper & more efficient than acquiring scarce and expensive IPv4 addresses. This is a major advantage for newer providers in growing economies.
So while the Google is showing it at 50%, APNIC's weighted global measurement shows it at 42%.
by Jerry2 - I would love to stop paying AWS for public ipv4 addresses.
But simply it is impossible to go full ipv6, as many of isps of the clients do not support it.
Currently there is no pressure to the isps to move to ipv6. In fact the incentives are OPPOSITE! They love charging for static IPs.
by whatever1 - To be fair if Google stopped supporting it that’d be a pretty good incentive for the ISPs to get in line.by budoso
- Specifically on weekends, which seems to indicate that it's the corporate/business network side of things that is not bothering with implementing it.by throw0101a
- You frame "not bothering" as if its a checkbox with "enable IPv6" to check and all done...
Put all work into reorg, for what? Some numbers to change? Why when IPv4 works?
by Scroll_Swe - The real milestone is when it's over 50% all the time.by xacky
- Meanwhile T-Mobile/Odido in the Netherlands is still not supporting IPv6 despite promising to have been working on it for years.
Ubiquity gateways also seem to not support it sadly. It would be awesome if they supported something like Hurricane Electric’s tunneling.
by spockz - Huh? Ubiquity has dropped support? I can't believe that, even the older EdgeRouter series supported it.by kuschku
- by newsclues
- They support it. I have it enabled with Spectrum. No file modification necessary; all configurable from the UI.by mtucker502
- > Meanwhile T-Mobile/Odido in the Netherlands is still not supporting IPv6 despite promising to have been working on it for years.
While T-Mobile US has been IPv6-only since ~2018:
by throw0101a - Every ISP has to pay Hurricane Electric for their tunnels, that's why it's free to you. If enough people start using HE tunnels, ISPs will get native IPv6.
But you can't use HE tunnels because every website you visit will block you. You also can't use them from CGNAT or if your home router doesn't have a DMZ.
by inigyou