|
|
|
|
|
by J-Kuhn
1206 days ago
|
|
I agree, IPv4 has its problems. That is why we transition to IPv6. Dual Stack doesn't "solve" anything. You still run IPv4. With all the downsides, especially every machine will still need an (RFC 1918) IPv4 address. (Microsoft is running out of their internal 10.0.0.0/8: https://www.arin.net/blog/2019/04/03/microsoft-works-toward-...) The goal of the IPv6 transition is to disable IPv4. NAT64+DNS64 or 464XLAT allows us to disable IPv4 on devices before the entire internet is ready. |
|
For internal networks, IPv6 seems like an obvious choice. If you already have company wide subnets, you may as well set up some ULAs/GUAs and use IPv6 internally. Full IPv6 may be better but people worry about adversaries mapping internal networks for some reason so NAT66 may be necessary to placate those fears.
The problems you still keep around by using some kind of dual stacking (DS-Lite being the cheapest) ensures compatibility with servers and entire countries that haven't even begun upgrading their networks yet. You incur the IPv4 penalty, for sure, but only towards services that don't have IPv6. This provides an incentive for the world to move on without breaking existing infrastructure entirely.