4 ms·

You wouldn't be doubling your workload. Most of your work applies equally well to both protocols without any additional effort, and even if you can't remove v4

You wouldn't be doubling your workload. Most of your work applies equally well to both protocols without any additional effort, and even if you can't remove v4 completely you can often ignore it for some things, which saves you some workload.

iso1631 5y ago
If I want to communicate with v4 hosts I have to support v4. If I want my v4 clients to talk to me I have to support v4. What can I drop? I still need an IP, distributed by DHCP, I still need the subnets, I still need to manage the routing internally, I still need to have boundary nat, both out and in, I still need to have A records in DNS. I have to do all of that in v6 land (perhaps my user interface will allow me to manage the firewall rules together, but I'm still doubling my testing). On top of that, if I change my ISP, I have to renumber my entire internal network rather than just change the public IPs. It's not even common practice to have a v6 only network and nat from v4 to v6 at the edge, and more crucially it seems from this thread that v6 removed it's v4 compatability layer (so I can't type "ping 1.2.3.4" and have it translate that to "ping -6 ::ffff:1.2.3.4", with my 6:4 gateway handling the nat Until people start using v6 only, where's the benefit in increasing my workload?