[hinata08]

In my opinion, that should be a legal issue.

Nowadays, you shouldn't be allowed to advertise "internet access" if ipv6 isn't supported.

Ipv6 is the current protocol. And some sites don't have ipv4. (Amazon charging an extra for ipv4 is another sign that ipv4 should be a protocol for particular use cases, not for "the internet")

And it should be the same for software and connected hardware. No ipv6 ? That's not a product that works over the internet.

On a personal side, what I host is only working on ipv6, as my ISP has stable ipv6 but not ipv4, and for the convenience of configuration.

And even cheapo internet plans on mobile and landline support ipv6 by default nowadays. (The government pushed for it)

[msm_]

> On a personal side, what I host is only working on ipv6, as my ISP has stable ipv6 but not ipv4, and for the convenience of configuration.

For me it's the other way around - I disable IPv6 on all my servers and only host anything on IPv4. I know it's frowned upon in networking circles, but IPv4 "just works" for me, and I want to reduce attack scope and maintenance burden (I had some problems with IPv6 messing things up, or my ipv6 firewall misconfigurations).

[Borg3]

Exacly that! I do the same. Accessing of internal resources hosted on LAN? No problem, just make overlay VPN network.

Need to host something via HTTP? mod_proxy to the rescue.

IPv6 is junk protocol, overengineered. I hope IPv6 will be used for all those internet consumers and IPv4 will stay where its place to be, interesting R&D projects :)

[ta1243]

> Ipv6 is the current protocol

It's A protocol

> And some sites don't have ipv4

Yet there are far more sites that don't have ipv6 access.

What's the ipv6 address for hacker news?