4 ms·
IPv8 is just a reactionary response to IPv6 not being "IPv4 with larger addresses" like people who know IPv4 well would prefer. There would be no reason to ado
by clhodapp 2mo ago
IPv8 is just a reactionary response to IPv6 not being "IPv4 with larger addresses" like people who know IPv4 well would prefer.
There would be no reason to adopt it if IPv6 were adopted.
- hdgvhicv 2mo agoYet IPv6 hasn’t been adopted. For decades. Because it wasn’t implemented transparently at the OS. I can’t plug in to my ip6 only network and reach an ip4 address because end user OSes don’t implement clat transparently, even today in 2026, let alone 20 years ago.
- adw 2mo ago> Yet IPv6 hasn’t been adopted. news to literally anyone on a mobile internet connection (which is most internet connections!)
- alexpotato 2mo agoI learned recently that France IPv6 adoption is also very high.
- hdgvhicv 2mo agoI’m on 4g My v6 endpoint is unreachable. My v4 one is fine.
- ahmetozer 2mo agoYes you can able to see IPv6 at your browser, but actualy there is always middlewhere sofware level (NLB, ALB, NAT) to reach real backend server, which creates bottle neck. For large scale enterprises this creates issue, even for cloudproviders, I have encountered bottle neck at some Major cloudprovider which causes snowball impact to whole cluster retry mechanisms and 4 hours outage for us and some other customers :D if the 2 enterpise has machine to machine IPv6 connectivity, this is will not happend.
- jrmg 2mo agoYet IPv6 hasn’t been adopted. Well over half of Google’s traffic is IPv6 in the USA, and it’s recently become over 50% of all Google’s traffic worldwide at weekends. https://www.google.com/intl/en/ipv6/statistics.html#tab=per-country-ipv6-adoption https://www.google.com/intl/en/ipv6/statistics.html#tab=per-... https://www.google.com/intl/en/ipv6/statistics.html https://www.google.com/intl/en/ipv6/statistics.html
- dotwaffle 2mo ago> Yet IPv6 hasn’t been adopted. For decades. I'd argue it has, but that's not the point. IPv4 is pretty much mandatory for most users of the internet. Yes, individual users probably neither know nor core whether they're on IPv4 or IPv6, but it's so difficult to run IPv6-only that you just wouldn't bother. Trying to teach someone about how to use ULA vs. GUA only leads to headaches. In fact, I'd go so far as to say the reason why the internet became so ubiquitous was because of NAT -- static internal addressing is pretty much fundamental to an easy-to-use experience. Having multiple addresses on a host only makes things far more confusing, so people don't bother, because IPv4 just works.
- torginus 2mo agoImo the insistence on 'no NAT' has killed IPv6, as it made talking to legacy IPv4 nodes very awkward. If it could interop well with v4, then the transition wouldn't be all or nothing. And it turns out the simplicity of 'no NAT' still buys you nothing. It's very common for modern systems to run multiple network interfaces with connections having to be juggled between them. In that case, connection and session management falls to a higher level protocol, often in the application.
- clhodapp 2mo agoHrm, but the insistence is more "NAT should not be a practical requirement in a pure IPv6 network", not "No NAT ever for any reason". NAT-based compatibility strategies are widely deployed in the real world (most cell carriers and Google's IPv6-mostly corporate network use NAT to allow communication with the IPv4 world from IPv6 only devices).
- Dagger2 2mo agoNAT is accepted for transition purposes; for example NAT64 makes it trivial to connect from v6-only clients to v4 servers, and is used by some large ISPs (e.g. T-Mobile in the US) to avoid running v4 inside their access network.