4 ms·

> T-Mobile US is IPv6-only on handsets… N=1 but T-Mobile US appears to be IPv6 enabled, not IPv6-only: https://i.imgur.com/ZPi398P.jpeg https://i.imgur.com/ZPi

> T-Mobile US is IPv6-only on handsets… N=1 but T-Mobile US appears to be IPv6 enabled, not IPv6-only: https://i.imgur.com/ZPi398P.jpeg https://i.imgur.com/ZPi398P.jpeg

throw0101a 2y ago
> N=1 but T-Mobile US appears to be IPv6 enabled, not IPv6-only: https://i.imgur.com/ZPi398P.jpeg https://i.imgur.com/ZPi398P.jpeg "On handsets". If you look at the HTML source of that page you'll see: <p id="ipv4-head" class="public-ipv4-address"> My Public IPv4 : <span id="ipv4">Detecting...</span> </p> </div> <div class="ip-address-details-inline ip-address-ipv6"> <p id="ipv6-head" class="public-ipv6-address"> My Public IPv6 : <span id="ipv6">Detecting...</span> </p> * https://www.whatismyip.com https://www.whatismyip.com The "Detecting" is replaced by JavaScript (see "commons-[hash].js") that goes out and tries to hit some hostnames: $ dig +short -t a api.whatismyip.com 34.117.39.86 $ dig +short -t aaaa api.whatismyip.com $ dig +short -t a apiv6.whatismyip.com $ dig +short -t aaaa apiv6.whatismyip.com 2600:1901:0:d110:: > T-Mobile in the United States was running out of IPv4 addresses and needed an IPv6 transition strategy. Their solution was 464XLAT and IPv6-only. * https://www.internetsociety.org/deploy360/2014/case-study-t-mobile-us-goes-ipv6-only-using-464xlat/ https://www.internetsociety.org/deploy360/2014/case-study-t-... The fact that some services on the Internet are (sadly) IPv4-only means they had to use a technology to allow connectivity, which is why you're seeing an IPv4 address: it's not on your handset but the translation box. Also, I simply menion T-Mobile as one example, but given they have 32% marketshare in the US: * https://www.statista.com/statistics/199359/market-share-of-wireless-carriers-in-the-us-by-subscriptions/ https://www.statista.com/statistics/199359/market-share-of-w... that means that one-third of all Americans with (smart)phones are using IPv6-only, without being allocated an IPv4 address, everyday: 125 million people. Verizon Wireless has a similar situation: > Verizon Wireless proactively deployed IPv6 even though they had an existing IPv4 network. Per reports, they had at least 70 internal instances of the same private address space, and found themselves spending effort and money on the resulting network complexity; IPv6 deployment was a solution that simplified their network and reduced the cost of operating it. Over 80% of traffic from Verizon Wireless to major online content providers now uses IPv6. * https://www.internetsociety.org/resources/2018/state-of-ipv6-deployment-2018/ https://www.internetsociety.org/resources/2018/state-of-ipv6... They initially (2014) had private IPv4 addresses on handset and NAT44ed them: not sure what they're doing in 2024. So that's another ~125 million people. 250 million people using something daily would qualify as a thing being "ready" in my mind.

> T-Mobile US is IPv6-only on handsets… N=1 but T-Mobile US appears to be IPv6 enabled, not IPv6-only: https://i.imgur.com/ZPi398P.jpeg https://i.imgur.com/ZPi398P.jpeg

throw0101a 2y ago

> N=1 but T-Mobile US appears to be IPv6 enabled, not IPv6-only: https://i.imgur.com/ZPi398P.jpeg https://i.imgur.com/ZPi398P.jpeg "On handsets". If you look at the HTML source of that page you'll see: <p id="ipv4-head" class="public-ipv4-address"> My Public IPv4 : <span id="ipv4">Detecting...</span> </p> </div> <div class="ip-address-details-inline ip-address-ipv6"> <p id="ipv6-head" class="public-ipv6-address"> My Public IPv6 : <span id="ipv6">Detecting...</span> </p> * https://www.whatismyip.com https://www.whatismyip.com The "Detecting" is replaced by JavaScript (see "commons-[hash].js") that goes out and tries to hit some hostnames: $ dig +short -t a api.whatismyip.com 34.117.39.86 $ dig +short -t aaaa api.whatismyip.com $ dig +short -t a apiv6.whatismyip.com $ dig +short -t aaaa apiv6.whatismyip.com 2600:1901:0:d110:: > T-Mobile in the United States was running out of IPv4 addresses and needed an IPv6 transition strategy. Their solution was 464XLAT and IPv6-only. * https://www.internetsociety.org/deploy360/2014/case-study-t-mobile-us-goes-ipv6-only-using-464xlat/ https://www.internetsociety.org/deploy360/2014/case-study-t-... The fact that some services on the Internet are (sadly) IPv4-only means they had to use a technology to allow connectivity, which is why you're seeing an IPv4 address: it's not on your handset but the translation box. Also, I simply menion T-Mobile as one example, but given they have 32% marketshare in the US: * https://www.statista.com/statistics/199359/market-share-of-wireless-carriers-in-the-us-by-subscriptions/ https://www.statista.com/statistics/199359/market-share-of-w... that means that one-third of all Americans with (smart)phones are using IPv6-only, without being allocated an IPv4 address, everyday: 125 million people. Verizon Wireless has a similar situation: > Verizon Wireless proactively deployed IPv6 even though they had an existing IPv4 network. Per reports, they had at least 70 internal instances of the same private address space, and found themselves spending effort and money on the resulting network complexity; IPv6 deployment was a solution that simplified their network and reduced the cost of operating it. Over 80% of traffic from Verizon Wireless to major online content providers now uses IPv6. * https://www.internetsociety.org/resources/2018/state-of-ipv6-deployment-2018/ https://www.internetsociety.org/resources/2018/state-of-ipv6... They initially (2014) had private IPv4 addresses on handset and NAT44ed them: not sure what they're doing in 2024. So that's another ~125 million people. 250 million people using something daily would qualify as a thing being "ready" in my mind.