7 ms·
This. Running dual stack networks is harder and more expensive to manage, secure and troubleshoot. The faster we get to single stack ipv6 only, the better.
by simon_vetter 11y ago
This. Running dual stack networks is harder and more expensive to manage, secure and troubleshoot.
The faster we get to single stack ipv6 only, the better.
- teacup50 11y agoSingle stack IPv6 is just not happening; there's just WAY TOO MUCH STUFF out there that only speaks IPv4.
- Retr0spectrum 11y agoWe just need to wait for all that stuff to become obsolete.
- icebraining 11y agoYeah, but you can have that only at the edges, using ipv4-to-ipv6 proxies to connect to the Internet.
- teraflop 11y agoYep; this is what T-Mobile already does if you set your phone's APN to "IPv6 only".
- simoncion 11y agoSimilarly, my cable modem (which is distinct from my router) only gets an IPv6 address from Comcast.
- simon_vetter 11y agoThat's only a management interface tho, the modem will still happily forward ipv4.
- simon_vetter 11y agowhat icebraining said: use a nat64+dns64 at the edge of your network and make all your endpoints ipv6 only. If you're an ISP, you could probably put multiple nat64 boxes in the core so that all your customers benefit from it and can gradually switch ipv4 off (since they can transparently reach ipv4 endpoints through the nat64 gateway). Then there are a few applications that don't handle ipv6 properly (i.e. skype), and Apple's decision of mandating ipv6 support is meant to fix just that. Then there is 4XLAT, ds-lite and others which allow for a single stack ipv6 network and carry ipv4 on top of it to the endpoints which need it.