• @zouden
    link
    English
    281 year ago

    I’ve still never used ipv6. It just never offered anything I needed.

    • @Giooschi
      link
      English
      471 year ago

      If you live in the USA you don’t suffer from the problem it solves because you have ~5 IP v4 addresses per capita (totaling to 41% of all the IP v4 addresses), and likewise many european countries have ~2 per capita (although there are expeptions like Italy and Spain which are a bit under 1 per capita). However many other countries don’t have such luxury, for example in india there’s one for every 36 people, which is obviously not enough and thus they have to either use NAT everywhere or switch to IPv6.

      • Oliver Lowe
        link
        fedilink
        English
        201 year ago

        I’m in Indonesia right now. Stuff can be randomly offline or blocked because they think I’ve already accessed or am spamming something. Even little things like New York Times saying “you’ve reached your free limit for today” but I didn’t even have internet access for a couple of days!

      • @zouden
        link
        English
        31 year ago

        There isn’t 5 addresses per person in the US. They use NAT like everyone else. I think you know this though.

        • nfh
          link
          English
          81 year ago

          No the number is public. The IPv4 addresses allocated to the US are about 1.524 Billion, and there are ~332 million people in the US. Most of those IPv4 addresses are allocated to servers in datacenters, but individual people having a public IP for their house is really common. Yeah, your devices are behind NAT, but you can get one. To their point, in countries like India, people outnumber IPv4 addresses so much this isn’t possible. Just getting people there online in a way they can interact with the IPv4 Internet is tricky to do well.

          • @zouden
            link
            English
            11 year ago

            They are allocated in levels though, so you can’t just get an individual unused address if the top level has been allocated to IBM or Cisco or the DoD. It’s not democratic.

      • @EatMyDick
        link
        English
        -351 year ago

        Have you tried being less poor?

    • @[email protected]
      link
      fedilink
      English
      91 year ago

      Same. I’m hearing it’s a must-have for like 15 years now. It still obviously isn’t a real must-have.

      • @[email protected]
        link
        fedilink
        English
        18
        edit-2
        1 year ago

        This is because ISPs keep piling on workaround after workaround in order to scale their use of IPv4, which is working but not without some disadvantages. Also, like other commenters mentioned, the western world have an unfair advantage in IPv4 addresses allocation and thus people living there don’t really see any meaningful shortage of IPv4. People in other countries don’t have this luxury and have to rely on IPv6 and shitty CGNAT in order to stay online.

      • ono
        link
        fedilink
        English
        151 year ago

        Depends on where you are. It’s a must-have in parts of the world that don’t have enough IPv4 addresses.

      • @zouden
        link
        English
        101 year ago

        I remember hearing that it meant every device could have a unique IP. But we still have NAT…

        • @orangeboats
          link
          English
          21 year ago

          You don’t have NATs in the IPv6 world…

    • @[email protected]
      link
      fedilink
      English
      51 year ago

      You may have.

      For example, T-Mobile in many places gives you an IPv6 address and uses CG-NAT for IPv4 — meaning you don’t have your own IPv4, but you do have a few quintillion “real” IPv6’s to yourself.