[devwastaken]

ISP's and networks love clients being behind NAT, so they can't directly host to the outside world and can't rely on a static address. Ipv4 is a scarce resource, therefore it's valuable. Various people don't want that to go away. The only way we're going to get ipv6 everywhere is when the feds start requiring it.

The internet being a world resource should be of significant concern to every country. The limited number of ipv4 resources is a weakness of the U.S. and othe western countries. As is the lack of "cyber security".

[est31]

Note that IPv6 doesn't necessarily have static addresses either. Also note that IPv6 support on the client side is gradually increasing. With current trends we'll reach the 100% in the next decade. At a certain point, some services will go IPv6 only.

[devwastaken]

Yes, but it makes static addressing far more affordable, and justifiable. Especially in city board meetings where an issue like that is raised.

Ipv6 is effectively supported everywhere but the ISP. Again, it's intentional, the only reason they'll change is federal requirements. It's the only reason the ISP here does 25/4. Because broadband requirements. They didn't change anything to do it either, they just flipped the switch. Costed them maybe a couple thousand in labor.

[qwertox]

> Ipv4 is a scarce resource, therefore it's valuable.

I don't know how valid this argument is in this context. Most ISP clients nowadays are connected 24/7, so they are using an IPv4 anyway. They might as well keep the same IP over a larger period of time.

Vodafone Cable and Telekom VDSL, both in Germany, only change your IP if they have to. You'll usually have the same one for many months.

Also, the NAT you're referring to is the one which runs on the customer's hardware, and usually the customer has the option to set up port forwarding.

All this is in the IPv4 / Dual Stack context.

[kuschku]

In many countries, it’s common to have hundreds, even thousands of customers behind a single carrier-level CGNAT. This obviously prevents a lot of functionality from working.

In Germany, we’ve got enough IPv4s that every customer can have their own one, while e.g. in Asia CGNAT and IPv6 are long common.

[qwertox]

You won't get behind a CGNAT if you're connected via IPv4. As far as I know CGNAT is almost exclusively used for DS-Lite users.

[Dagger2]

There are sadly a ton of ISPs that do CGNAT on a v4-only service. Smaller or newer ISPs like WISPs often do it, or ISPs for apartment blocks or student accommodation, but it's hardly limited to those.

Germany in particular has a couple of large ISPs that give you a choice of either their new platform (DS-lite = v6 + CGNATed v4) or their old platform (v4-only). That's a choice made by those ISPs... and unfortunately it's one that causes a lot of people on those ISPs to end up blaming v6 for problems caused by CGNAT.

[qwertox]

Thanks for pointing this out.

[betaby]

Plenty of ISP in Europe do CGNAT without DS-Lite. Literally modems only gets IPv4 from 100.x.x.x range and that's it.

[lizknope]

I have had a cable modem and now fiber for 20 years. My IP address only ever changed after a power outage that lasted multiple hours. I have probably had about 10 IP address over those 20 years.

My sister and parents are similar. None of our IP addresses have changed in the last 2 years. I know because all of our houses are connected for remote backups and file sharing and I limit access by IP address. I have not had to update my firewall rules in 2 years.