4 ms·

I always think that too many web servers have IPv4 addresses. People don't seem to realise that CDNs - which everyone surely runs behind - will happily proxy I

I always think that too many web servers have IPv4 addresses. People don't seem to realise that CDNs - which everyone surely runs behind - will happily proxy IPv4 traffic to IPv6, so you don't need an IPv4 address to serve web traffic - only your CDN does.

wongarsu 5y ago
Sure, but IPv4 just works. IPv6 mostly works, but isn't universally supported, is the less tested configuration, and "disable IPv6" seems to still be one of the best solutions for mysterious network problems. It just doesn't make sense to use anything other than IPv4 as long as you get a free IPv4 address with every server. Which is why I'm very happy over this move by Hetzner. More monetary incentive to move away from IPv4 is exactly what we need to break the cycle of "nobody uses IPv6, so nothing supports it, so nobody uses it"
- jeroenhd 5y ago
  > and "disable IPv6" seems to still be one of the best solutions for mysterious network problems It's not really a solution to the problem, it's usually just ignoring the problem and hiding the symptoms. I'm surprised Hetzner is the first to do this, it's an obvious move with the sharp rise of IPv4 addresses. Most companies don't need IPv4 anyway, because their infrastructure usually ends up at a caching proxy or CDN regardless. Your backend API servers will usually also be talked to by other servers, which usually also run from a place with widespread IPv6 addresses. I can see a (bleak) future where consumers are all om CG-NAT and everything but the frontend is running IPv6 as a cost cutting measure.
  - lazide 5y ago
    Most of the world works by hiding symptoms until something forces the issue. Often it never happens, so we’re all good (as it were). Sometimes it doesn’t, then everyone starts pointing fingers. Many people are pretty adept at making sure the fingers don’t point at them.
  - detaro 5y ago
    They are not the first. cheaper IPv6-only plans have been a thing with other providers for a while.
  - hansel_der 5y ago
    > It's not really a solution to the problem, it's usually just ignoring the problem and hiding the symptoms. sounds like business as usual
- anonymfus 5y ago
  >It just doesn't make sense to use anything other than IPv4 as long as you get a free IPv4 address with every server. But you don't any more, and prices are increasing fast: https://docs.hetzner.com/general/others/ipv4-pricing/ https://docs.hetzner.com/general/others/ipv4-pricing/
axelthegerman 5y ago
Agreed! For public access I'd still prefer IPV4 but if it's for myself or an internal service for one of my other servers, why not IPV6

wongarsu 5y ago

Sure, but IPv4 just works. IPv6 mostly works, but isn't universally supported, is the less tested configuration, and "disable IPv6" seems to still be one of the best solutions for mysterious network problems. It just doesn't make sense to use anything other than IPv4 as long as you get a free IPv4 address with every server. Which is why I'm very happy over this move by Hetzner. More monetary incentive to move away from IPv4 is exactly what we need to break the cycle of "nobody uses IPv6, so nothing supports it, so nobody uses it"

jeroenhd 5y ago
> and "disable IPv6" seems to still be one of the best solutions for mysterious network problems It's not really a solution to the problem, it's usually just ignoring the problem and hiding the symptoms. I'm surprised Hetzner is the first to do this, it's an obvious move with the sharp rise of IPv4 addresses. Most companies don't need IPv4 anyway, because their infrastructure usually ends up at a caching proxy or CDN regardless. Your backend API servers will usually also be talked to by other servers, which usually also run from a place with widespread IPv6 addresses. I can see a (bleak) future where consumers are all om CG-NAT and everything but the frontend is running IPv6 as a cost cutting measure.
- lazide 5y ago
  Most of the world works by hiding symptoms until something forces the issue. Often it never happens, so we’re all good (as it were). Sometimes it doesn’t, then everyone starts pointing fingers. Many people are pretty adept at making sure the fingers don’t point at them.
- detaro 5y ago
  They are not the first. cheaper IPv6-only plans have been a thing with other providers for a while.
- hansel_der 5y ago
  > It's not really a solution to the problem, it's usually just ignoring the problem and hiding the symptoms. sounds like business as usual
anonymfus 5y ago
>It just doesn't make sense to use anything other than IPv4 as long as you get a free IPv4 address with every server. But you don't any more, and prices are increasing fast: https://docs.hetzner.com/general/others/ipv4-pricing/ https://docs.hetzner.com/general/others/ipv4-pricing/

axelthegerman 5y ago

Agreed! For public access I'd still prefer IPV4 but if it's for myself or an internal service for one of my other servers, why not IPV6