3 ms·

I'm interested in any new successful startups going full IPV6 from the beginning. Once we cross that bridge, where your internal IPV4 knowledge is equivalent to

by 1970-01-01 9mo ago

I'm interested in any new successful startups going full IPV6 from the beginning. Once we cross that bridge, where your internal IPV4 knowledge is equivalent to token ring knowledge, there's nothing else to watch.

awestroke 9mo ago
Github still refuses to switch on support for ipv6 traffic for some reason, so you can't interact with github then
- Andrex 9mo ago
  There has to be a tech reason (beyond the normal) for that, right? What could it be?
  - immibis 9mo ago
    [dead]
speedgoose 9mo ago
It would be a strange and unnecessary risk to take for a startup in my opinion.
- patmorgan23 9mo ago
  It's really not a risk, as long as you dual stack your edge.
oasisbob 9mo ago
Exclusively IPv6 without any transitional mechanisms would be difficult to succeed with. However, there are network upstarts like Jio (India) which made huge v6 investments from day one which use 464xlat for subscribers to access v4-only resources.
- immibis 9mo ago
  Also every mobile phone network ever (with a handful of exceptions) is IPv6-only, with a slow translation layer to reach v4 sites. Your app or website literally runs faster if you use IPv6.
- 1970-01-01 9mo ago
  >Exclusively IPv6 without any transitional mechanisms would be difficult to succeed with. That's my point; why is it still difficult? What exactly are the pain points for a fully commercialized native IPV6-only business, and why do we think it will be easier to maintain the status quo?
  - tormeh 9mo ago
    Many wired networks are IPv4-only, so you've excluded a bunch of consumers. It'd be like not supporting the Edge browser.
  - patmorgan23 9mo ago
    There are still lots of customers with IPv6, if you go completely and totally v6 only then you limit your potential customer base. Now going v6 internally with a dual stack edge makes sense, Meta has done this.
  - pixl97 9mo ago
    Because a few large companies are holdouts. Github for example. Some AWS backend stuff. Many smaller ISPs that represent a very long tail. Most of it is not any particular difficulty for you, but because of someone else.
massysett 9mo ago
Relatedly: wouldn't there be many applications for which ipv4 isn't needed? For example, Walmart has electronic eink shelf tags they can update remotely. Each one needs a unique address. I wouldn't think it needs ipv4. It doesn't have to connect to the SpaceJam website. I would think that as time goes by, the number of these new devices would swamp the number of old ones that need ipv4. v4 would still be around and might even seem important to the fogies using web browsers on laptops...meanwhile the street lamp has five ipv6 addresses and no ipv4 ones.
- kalleboo 9mo ago
  An example of this is Matter, the new industry standard for IoT devices. It uses IPv6 addressing, so if you want your IoT devices bridged onto your LAN, your LAN needs to support IPv6. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Matter_(standard) https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Matter_(standard)
Aloisius 9mo ago
While definitely not a startup, the National Archives made https://clintonwhitehouse1.archives.gov/ https://clintonwhitehouse1.archives.gov/ and https://clintonwhitehouse2.archives.gov/ https://clintonwhitehouse2.archives.gov/ IPv6-only. While I don't think a couple administration's website archives are enough to drive adoption, one could imagine there might be some government resources that might. Sadly browsers don't seem to warn users that they couldn't connect because of the lack of IPv6 (and doing so would be difficult for IPv6-only DNS servers), so it just looks like a regular connection failure.
SchemaLoad 9mo ago
One interesting development is the Matter standard for controlling smart home devices is v6 only. Every lightbulb, switch, sensor etc gets a v6 address and can be individually communicated to without having a manufacturers hub translating in the middle.

awestroke 9mo ago

Github still refuses to switch on support for ipv6 traffic for some reason, so you can't interact with github then

Andrex 9mo ago
There has to be a tech reason (beyond the normal) for that, right? What could it be?
- immibis 9mo ago
  [dead]

speedgoose 9mo ago

It would be a strange and unnecessary risk to take for a startup in my opinion.

patmorgan23 9mo ago
It's really not a risk, as long as you dual stack your edge.

oasisbob 9mo ago

Exclusively IPv6 without any transitional mechanisms would be difficult to succeed with. However, there are network upstarts like Jio (India) which made huge v6 investments from day one which use 464xlat for subscribers to access v4-only resources.

immibis 9mo ago
Also every mobile phone network ever (with a handful of exceptions) is IPv6-only, with a slow translation layer to reach v4 sites. Your app or website literally runs faster if you use IPv6.
1970-01-01 9mo ago
>Exclusively IPv6 without any transitional mechanisms would be difficult to succeed with. That's my point; why is it still difficult? What exactly are the pain points for a fully commercialized native IPV6-only business, and why do we think it will be easier to maintain the status quo?
- tormeh 9mo ago
  Many wired networks are IPv4-only, so you've excluded a bunch of consumers. It'd be like not supporting the Edge browser.
- patmorgan23 9mo ago
  There are still lots of customers with IPv6, if you go completely and totally v6 only then you limit your potential customer base. Now going v6 internally with a dual stack edge makes sense, Meta has done this.
- pixl97 9mo ago
  Because a few large companies are holdouts. Github for example. Some AWS backend stuff. Many smaller ISPs that represent a very long tail. Most of it is not any particular difficulty for you, but because of someone else.

massysett 9mo ago

Relatedly: wouldn't there be many applications for which ipv4 isn't needed? For example, Walmart has electronic eink shelf tags they can update remotely. Each one needs a unique address. I wouldn't think it needs ipv4. It doesn't have to connect to the SpaceJam website. I would think that as time goes by, the number of these new devices would swamp the number of old ones that need ipv4. v4 would still be around and might even seem important to the fogies using web browsers on laptops...meanwhile the street lamp has five ipv6 addresses and no ipv4 ones.

kalleboo 9mo ago
An example of this is Matter, the new industry standard for IoT devices. It uses IPv6 addressing, so if you want your IoT devices bridged onto your LAN, your LAN needs to support IPv6. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Matter_(standard) https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Matter_(standard)

Aloisius 9mo ago

While definitely not a startup, the National Archives made https://clintonwhitehouse1.archives.gov/ https://clintonwhitehouse1.archives.gov/ and https://clintonwhitehouse2.archives.gov/ https://clintonwhitehouse2.archives.gov/ IPv6-only. While I don't think a couple administration's website archives are enough to drive adoption, one could imagine there might be some government resources that might. Sadly browsers don't seem to warn users that they couldn't connect because of the lack of IPv6 (and doing so would be difficult for IPv6-only DNS servers), so it just looks like a regular connection failure.

SchemaLoad 9mo ago

One interesting development is the Matter standard for controlling smart home devices is v6 only. Every lightbulb, switch, sensor etc gets a v6 address and can be individually communicated to without having a manufacturers hub translating in the middle.