3 ms·
It seems to me that there are disadvantages to widespread IPv6 adoption for some big companies. For example, storage providers like Dropbox or Google Drive woul
by awelkie 9y ago
It seems to me that there are disadvantages to widespread IPv6 adoption for some big companies. For example, storage providers like Dropbox or Google Drive would take a hit if I were able to send files via a direct connection to a friend's computer, which is possible with IPv6. Right now, the best way to send large files is to upload them somewhere and then send a link (dynamic DNS is also possible, but certainly not as easy to set up as simply being granted a globally routable IP address). Another example is for ISPs or anyone who sells static IP addresses (e.g. AWS); IPv6 means severely decreasing the scarsity of a resource that they own and profit from, which I'm sure they wouldn't like.
To generalize, I think IPv6 represents more freedom for end-users in the form of better p2p services, but I think it also represents a loss in profit for some large companies. These companies play a roll in the IPv6 rollout, so maybe it's not surprising that the rollout has been slower than expected.
- bfred_it 9y agoThere are plenty of methods for direct transfer already, I don't think a different IP (with its likely non-trivial setup) would make much of a difference for Dropbox. Keep in mind that would you describe would require both computers to be on at the same time, and that often doesn't happen either. Dropbox would be here to stay even in an IPv6 world.
- awelkie 9y agoOf course it would. I'm saying easy p2p transfer may reduce the usage of Dropbox, not obsolete it.
- euyyn 9y agoGoogle's been a big pusher of IPv6 for years.