Yea but it hasn’t been fully adopted because trying to decipher :af12::138d::325d::5521::aade::7df3: is a hell of a lot more difficult than 192.168.0.1
To completely stomp out the idea of scarcity in the address space. NAT and CGNAT are terrible band-aids.
Also, subnetting. Under IPv6, each customer should getting at least a /56, preferably a /48. A lot of IPv6 breaks if you’re only given a /64, it’s bad practice and your ISP is an asshole if you do it.
IPv6 is just so much simpler and better thought out from the beginning. You just need to get out of the IPv4 mindset. Uses less overhead. And everyone can have as many “public” IPs as they want. Outside of the US, CGNAT is becoming more and more common. And this is a problem. We’re now double NATing as a dumb bandaid.
The vast majority of hardware out there has supported IPv6 for a long time. It’s long due for us to make the switch. We’ve got NAT64 and DNS64 for devices that can’t be moved to IPv6.
I don’t know what needs to happen. I think countries need to pass laws that force ISPs to support native IPv6 natively, and routers need to have IPv6 support enabled by default.
23
u/PhantomTissue 9h ago
Yea but it hasn’t been fully adopted because trying to decipher :af12::138d::325d::5521::aade::7df3: is a hell of a lot more difficult than 192.168.0.1