Hacker News new | ask | show | jobs
by spacebanana7 750 days ago
Is anyone aware of why those decisions not to adopt IPv6 were made? Presumably there've been discussions at both companies about it.
1 comments

> Is anyone aware of why those decisions not to adopt IPv6 were made?

Because they have all the IPv4 address they need and so do not see a shortage, unlike those that are not mega-corps and are struggling:

> I work for a Native American tribe in the PNW. We scrambled to get the reservation reliable internet in the later part of 2019. We managed to cover most of the reservation with wi-max and wifi with a fiber back haul configuration. We are now slowly getting more stable and reliable fiber to the home(FttH) service installed to as many homes as we can, but it is slow process covering the mostly rural landscape doing all the work in house.

[…]

> We learned a very expensive lesson. 71% of the IPv4 traffic we were supporting was from ROKU devices. 9% coming from DishNetwork & DirectTV satellite tuners, 11% from HomeSecurity cameras and systems, and remaining 9% we replaced extremely outdated Point of Sale(POS) equipment. So we cut ROKU some slack three years ago by spending a little over $300k just to support their devices.

* https://community.roku.com/t5/Features-settings-updates/It-s...

* https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=35047624

Anyone who (a) got in early on the IPv4 address land grab, or (b) has buckets of cash, can 'safely' ignore IPv6.