Posted by petercooper 1/20/2026
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.
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?
its correct in other tables.
It's obvious to anyone that looks at the two formats that any kind of hacky workaround like NAT gateways will be preferable indefinitely to actually adopting the monstrosity that is IPv6.
- TURN and STUN trivially bypass this side-effect, and a side effect of that is a third party has to often be involved, which can be collecting data later leaked or used against you.
- The monstrosity of NAT is that it's the core thing that drives centralization - because of NAT any two Internet hosts generally have to involve a third party to communicate, a third party which again, can be collecting data later leaked or used against you.
If you don't care about the security implications of the above, then you don't really care about the "firewall" either.
[0]: `<meta content="initial-scale=1,width=device-width" name="viewport">`
<meta name="viewport" content="width=device-width,initial-scale=1">IPv6 has failed at being better, being accessible, or both. Rather than punish people for failing to adopt something that isn't better or easy to get, either improve IPv6 so that it's actually attractive or admit defeat and start work on the next version that people will genuinely want.
The moment you start thinking "Let's make what people have now worse until they move to this other thing they don't want" its an admission that whatever you're pushing people to is shit.
I don't agree that it has. IPv6 is clearly better (no collisions between address space and thus no NAT requirement), and it's perfectly accessible to anyone who actually tries. I'm not by any means a top tier network guy but even to me IPv6 is dead easy to setup. The problem with the v6 transition is that people have very inaccurate views on one or both of those points (usually they falsely believe NAT provides security benefits, or they falsely believe IPv6 is a difficult thing to implement). I'm not sure how to fix this widespread misinformation but that is the problem from what I've seen.
Maybe one day in the distant future, IPv4 collisions/shortages will be an actual problem for most people. If that happens, those people will naturally make the switch. Until then, why would they?
It turns out a bunch of people actually like NAT. They like it so much that they pushed for solutions like NAT66 so that they can keep it even after switching to IPv6.
If IPv6 offered substantially better security/privacy, speeds, reliability, or introduced some new killer feature people didn't even know they wanted until they learned about it there wouldn't be any reason to try to force people to move to v6. Because it doesn't do any of that, and most people are happy with IPv4, they'll stick with what has been working for them.
I think there needs to be a push for IPv6-first networks for companies. ISPs in the US are pretty good about IPv6. But network engineers learned IPv4, and don't want to change what works, so companies lag behind. Changing existing networks is hard, but IPv6 is good candidate for new networks. This includes writing docs and eventually the education so IPv6 is the default.
And I have the same texture too! I hadn't observed it until your message
I have it both under Firefox or Chromium, and whether my tabs are vertical or not. It's just the website's background.
[0] Yes, I am aware that that's simply not possible for most folks. I used to be most folks, so I definitely know.
In either case, if you end up with internet resources you can trawl through sites like https://bgp.services/ to find a cheap VPS provider near you that supports peering. I run my own AS and advertise 3 network blocks (2 IPv4 + 1 IPv6) out of 2 different DCs for several hundred $ per year all in all (including renewal fees, VPS, taxes, etc).