In the meantime
You could settle for:
Domain registrar Name.com has added IPv6 support to both its registrar and DNS services, with its registrar platform offering support for the DNS security extensions known as DNSSEC from next week. Sean Leach, Name.com's chief technology officer, tells The Reg that registrar customers can now submit both IPv4 and IPv6 …
You could settle for:
I guess redhat isn't the only company el reg does pr for.
IPV6 has been around longer then some myspacers & yet still a majority of the backbones we have do NOT fully support it and by fully I mean they may support it 30-40% if at all.
So it's worthless unless you want to slim back your connectivity.
I see ARIN is now granting those that pay it "rights" to sell old ipv4 space. I remember following this awhile ago and I believe arin said they wouldn't do this but I guess $$$$$$ will get you anything.
You're right, we should never attempt to transition to newer tech. And you definitely can't use both during the transition...
Remember this is the tech industry and our MBA overlords don't like to pay for things until it's an emergency. Even if that means everything costs twice as much.
Remember Y2K and how nothing got fixed until right before the year 2000? Same deal now that we are running out of ipv4 address space there is a panic to get ipv6 everywhere. Microsoft finally properly supports ipv6 as of last year so now the ISPs are moving. My hosting provider is promising me ipv6 connectivity by the end of summer.
...www.name.com itself doesn't run IPv6. Don't they like the taste of their own dogfood?
Since the supply of new IPv4 addresses from IANA is now down to 365 days, it seems like time for everybody to start worrying about actually *running* IPv6.
We are planning that soon (our load balancers don't support it, so we are migrating off them) - it was a higher priority to enable our customers to use IPv6 for their domains/websites/DNS - which is why we enabled it on our registrar platform and our DNS platform first. Thanks!
CTO - name.com
localhost sweet localhost???
Home sweet home, natch.
That would be "~ sweet ~" then. If you're going to geek-out you need to use the correct terminology.
This biggest problem is not whether you can get companies to upgrade (you probably can) but instead whether ISPs can get home users to upgrade (no so easy). And if consumers don't upgrade then web sites can't ever go IPV6-only.
I.e. all of the non-tech-literate people running old versions of Windows, or with old Linksys/Netgear home routers that only do IPV4 and can't easily be upgraded -- this is the nightmare for ISPs and it means most/all public web servers still need an IPV4 address.
No doubt an optimist could make this transparent, given DHCP, a router that does IPV6, and an up to date OS as well. But in reality there are likely to be lots of transition issues.
The main issue with IPV6 is that nobody has come up with any must-have service that only works with IPV6, that would make existing IPV4 users want to upgrade. Or a price difference with IPV6 being cheaper. As such there is a distinct lack of motivation for existing users to change.
Biting the hand that feeds IT © 1998–2017