New on LowEndTalk? Please Register and read our Community Rules.
All new Registrations are manually reviewed and approved, so a short delay after registration may occur before your account becomes active.
All new Registrations are manually reviewed and approved, so a short delay after registration may occur before your account becomes active.
Comments
I asked them the same question the other day, here's the reply:
Steven,
IPV6 has been a commonly discussed question over here. We have a ton of features we are always working on and prioritizing them is a challenge at any company. When looking at the new things we are working on or have worked on, we have a ton of variables we look at.
One of the big ones is if the new feature is something the customer can already do. The problem we have been having wth IPv6 is we are yet to find a usecase that is not currently achievable by IPv4.
If you could help provide a justification then it would help us get it prioritized. What I really need is a usecase that is not obtainable via IPv4.
Thanks,
Jordan Jacobs
They have IP's routed but won't allocate until they setup automation in Leap but it's not high on their priority list apparently.
At this day and age, IPv6 has become a necessity more than just a "plus" for any provider. I do however agree with you that SingleHop should have been offering IPv6 for years already.
That's pretty much it.
If it's truly a necessity then you should be able to answer their question: what can it achieve that IPv4 cannot? Besides lower revenue (since you can't use the IPv4 shortage argument to jack up rental costs) and less need for justification. Quite frankly, it isn't a necessity. People just want it to be. Rightfully so. But that doesn't make it true, sadly.
Their stance seems reasonable. They have IPv4 for their customers. There are no IPv6 only ISPs out there that I'm aware of (set aside anyone doing it just to try to set an example). They still have time to implement it.
Achieving connectivity to the entire Internet, and not just to the IPv4 part.
Yes and some of those people carry purchase decision influence power. Oh sure it's entirely possible "I just want it to be", but when a friend or a company I am consulting for will ask me which web host or VPS provider I would recommend, I will only consider recommending those which support IPv6. If for nothing else then for the fact that this shows they care about the future of the Internet and having their service ready for it, and therefore most likely care about their service and their customers in general. The end result for you however, is because of your lack of IPv6 at this your SingleHop, you are now losing potential sales.
That's not even mentioning the countries which mandate every government website to support IPv6. Now you can't bid for any government contract, that's another thing you now can't do without IPv6.
You can have an IP that has deadbeef on it, but you can't do that on IPv4. Case closed, everyone should upgrade now, @rm_ will be footing the bill.
So many possibilities
::b00b
ARIN is largely useless at enforcing muddy policies. At the end of the day, they assign addresses, and that's pretty much it. Ultimately, they don't give two shits when IPv4 runs out, reality is not their problem to solve.
::d00d
If we assume IPv6 is the future of the Internet. Maybe it will be. As of today, it's a loosely implemented standard with varying degrees of quality on a small scale.
Certainly this is not what the designers intended, but then again they didn't seem to take into consideration the practically of pushing a non-backwards compatible addressing scheme onto a world of networks largely driven by profit margins and averse to fork-lift upgrades. Nothing new in the history of engineering academia.
Don't get me wrong, I'm not anti-IPv6, but I am a realist. I would like to see it succeed, and it likely will, eventually. I just don't see that happening anytime soon. Nobody relevant gives a shit what addressing scheme is used, except the entities that stand to lose more money by not implementing it than the cost of the implementation itself. Those are few and far between in the reality of today, next week, or next year, which is how most of those entities budget.
Which is what part of the internet, exactly, except for websites and services that use IPv6 only to try to drive that point home early and really exist for little to no other purpose? If I disable IPv6 for my home connection, I find zero loss. Why? Because we're still not to that point yet where legitimate, necessary services run on IPv6 only. Pretending we're there doesn't make it true. If you want to help us reach that point, remove IPv4 from anything and everything you do. Be the change you want to see
It has to balance out though. I mean, when was the last time you were looking to make a $10,000/m deal with someone and backed out over lack of IPv6? In all honesty, I think they're probably missing out on tens of...dollars. Hundreds at most. I'm not saying it's not good to get people on board with your way of thinking. It has the potential to eventually give them incentive to implement it earlier. That said, LowEndTalk is hardly the source of excessive revenue for SingleHop I'm sure.
Put your weight behind IPv6, absolutely, and I'll join you in that (except I won't remove IPv4 from my services, Gmail hates IPv6). However, know that not every company is willing to implement something like that early for a few extra dollars.
If Singlehop can allocate 18,446,744,073,709,551,616 Ip's to my server for free!! Then yeah.. I don't see the need for IPv6.
Sounds like you're trying to crash vzctl there
Eh.. Who uses OVZ these days :P
Looked at LEB lately?
Aww that's so cruel to LowEndSpirit, I thought people do find many purposes in those little boxes, despite them being IPv6-only.
Oh it might be only a hundred or two per month. But it adds up. And the thing is, someone else pays that, and not to me but to the host. So I don't lose or gain anything by giving a recommendation that's in line with what I believe is actually the best, and not what will bring the most personal profit.
I believe @earl by now has multiple dedis (as many other LET regulars tend to, over time
)
and perhaps also spoiled by some quality KVM or Xen VPSes... After all of that, it's really unimaginable that someone still actually puts up with all of the OpenVZ's b/s.
No.. I can't say I have..
Personally in my Dedi I rarely use OVZ.. KVM is so much more fun!!
For all public-facing uses, people reverse proxy LES boxes behind CF or something similar afaik. I can't imagine trying to host a website or some web-app with only ipv6. I'm going to have to agree with @Jar that currently, IPv6 is largely useless. We've been predicting the end of IPv4 for YEARS, and even today you can go pick up a block of IPs for cheap. It's unfortunate, but it's reality.
Gmail will kick back an NDR to your MTA if your IPv6 rDNS is not up to par.
There goes gmail for all your endusers!!!
I remember some time ago gmail would kick back an NDR regardless of ipv6 rdns, if mail delivery to them was attempted over ipv6.