[panny]

I don't want IPv6. Why would I? It's like a permanent global cookie. You're uniquely tagged and identifiable on every website you visit.

>it's in their best interest to ensure users can't host services without them.

They'll just keep blocking port 25. IPv6 won't change anything with regards to self hosting.

[farfatched]

My OS gives me IPv6 privacy addresses out-the-box which rotate every few hours.

[throwawaypath]

The prefix is your globally unique identifier. "Privacy addresses" provide zero privacy.

[ButlerianJihad]

“Privacy addresses” are named because in the beginning, your auto-generated IPv6 would incorporate your hardware MAC address verbatim, and many people consider the MAC address to be PII.

[throwawaypath]

Hard to believe the committee thought that was a good idea.

[kstrauser]

> You're uniquely tagged and identifiable on every website you visit.

Almost every modern OS enables IPv6 privacy extensions, ie address randomization, by default.

[tengwar2]

On the last 64 bits, yes. On mobile phones, the first 64 bits may be fixed. This was something I argued against when I was at Vodafone Group, but didn't get any traction. That was a while back, but I'd assume that this is still the case, and that mobile phone addresses can be used for tracking.

[throwawaypath]

The prefix is your globally unique identifier. "Privacy addresses" provide zero privacy.

[kstrauser]

Just like IPv4, then. Ultimately some part of the address has to identify the physical router.

[throwawaypath]

No, not just like IPv4. My IP address is 192.168.0.23 right now, as are millions of others. Add in CG-NAT from my ISP and I do not have a globally unique identifier.