I know that IPv6 was created in 1998 as a future-proofing, to make sure that there will be enough IP addresses in the works for large networks. IPv4 uses 32 bits and is represented with denary (0-9) while IPv6 uses 128 bits, so there are far more possible addresses, and it is represented using hexadecimal (0-9 then A-F).

What I’m wondering is why IPv4 is still so common, even though the number of devices connected to the internet have skyrocketed with more computers, laptops, smartphones, game consoles, embedded systems, etc. all connected! If it was thought that there would be too few available addresses in 1998, surely that has to be a bigger problem in the modern day?

Additionally, why didn’t IPv6 replace v4, even after nearly three decades of existing? Is it a technological limitation, cost, or something else?

And online I see many sysadmins online (!) complaining about IPv6 being more difficult to work with. Is this because the addresses are harder to remember, are adaptations of the protocol by manufacturers all different (similar to USB-C), or is there some other problem with IPv6? Or is this a case of a loud angry minority, especially in chat forums where people tend to have more polarised views?

Many devices do support IPv6, but it’s not universal like IPv4, despite the standard existing since 1998 and having many advantages. Why is this?

  • dhork@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    14
    ·
    10 hours ago

    I think people are missing a main point here. There is nothing wrong with IPv4, it works. It just can’t scale globally anymore, it doesn’t have enough space.

    If you are running a worldwide network with millions of nodes, IPv6 is essential. But for things that are smaller than that, it becomes less essential. But what’s the best metric for adoption, how many small offices or home labs adopt it? Or how many large, worldwide networks?

    • dbtng@moist.catsweat.com
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      19
      ·
      10 hours ago

      When IPv6 was created, NAT technologies had not yet really developed yet. That development stretched out the utility of IPv4 and allowed it to be perfectly sufficient even today. Back then, you bought a public IP for every node on your network. Seems crazy now, because you can put an entire enterprise behind one IP.

      IPv6 was created to allow that same provisioning concept of every node having a public IP. Well, we don’t really need that anymore. So we relegate IPv6 usage to machines like cell phones, but if a human has to utilize the address, we give em an IPv4.

      • SmoothLiquidation@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        10
        ·
        9 hours ago

        IPv6 was created to allow that same provisioning concept of every node having a public IP. Well, we don’t really need that anymore.

        I’m my home lab I don’t want every node to have an external IP. I like that NAT forces me to provision holes for specific purposes and between reverse proxy and limited port forwarding I get all of the functionality that I need.

        I know I can get similar security using firewall rules and DNS but it is hard to want to replace something that just works.