Pros/Cons of enabling IPv6

[JohnB_123]

That's not the proper question.
The proper question is what benefit would I get by disabling IPv6?

As long as IPv4 is enabled, disabling IPv6 gives you better performance and more security.

 

[K-2SO]

I there a device requiring IPv6 to work? I read Xbox One people say needs IPv6.

 

[pirx73]

Microsoft killed one Windows Vista+ feature which depended on IPv6 working - Homegroup. It is almost completely removed from latest builds of Windows 10.
Only point of IPv6 is to give more IP addresses where IPv4 pools are exausted. Judging from my ISP, easily giving 2 public IPs to every home customer, i can say that IPv4 pool is not exausted, at least for this ISP. Out mobile ISPs heavily NAT their connections and do not give any public IPs to customers, not even business ones. My country is not even in this list:
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/IPv6_deployment which means we are so behind our neighbours in IPv6 department that it even does not count.
Worldwide IPv4 address pool is more or less exausted.
Higher level pool is exausted, continent-wide too, but individual ISPs can still have free pools to give. At least wiki says so.
Well, Xbox One can use IPv6 but i highly doubt it can not function without it. Otherwise Twitch streamers would run out of viewers and quit.

 

[K-2SO]

Judging from my ISP, easily giving 2 public IPs to every home customer,

Same here. I can run 2 routers off a single modem. Direct, no double NAT.

 

[heysoundude]

I there a device requiring IPv6 to work? I read Xbox One people say needs IPv6.

needs, perhaps; strongly prefers, most definitely.
which makes perfect sense, if you think about where the main servers for the parent company (probably) are: IPv6 is the kind of "hard work to achieve beautiful elegance" the Japanese pride themselves on.
They're known for having some of the fastest ISP and mobile speeds in the World as I recall, and at some of the lowest costs; look at how they spread internet around: IPoE, which I believe by default is IPv6.

http://telecomsite.ru/upload/news/using_pppoe_and_ipoe.pdf

we have the technology, and I'm increasingly of the mind that it's the way forward.
(heated) discussions over protocols are ridiculous - wouldn't you rather expend that energy on your ISP so their network works better, faster, cheaper?

 

[K-2SO]

network works better, faster, cheaper?

Better, faster, cheaper in my country is on everyone's wish list. Only 3 companies own the infrastructure.

 

[pirx73]

Basically only con of not having IPv6 i imagine is not being able to access IPv6-only site. That's it.
Same for IPv4-only sites which i think is still a majority. So, for a while we need both. People and ISPs won't have incentive to move towards IPv6 until there will be a lot of highly-visited sites using IPv6 only.

 

[heysoundude]

Better, faster, cheaper in my country is on everyone's wish list. Only 3 companies own the infrastructure.

I wish my country would just nationalize it already. Maybe this virus thing will kick start that in parliament...


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

 

[K-2SO]

Search helped me to find we're talking about the same country. Not going to happen. Too much money and politics involved.

 

[heysoundude]

Search helped me to find we're talking about the same country. Not going to happen. Too much money and politics involved.

It seems to me that lately the government in our country can do whatever it wants if it fits their agenda, so maybe a good case just needs to be made. Governments need reminding just who they work for sometimes, too- this would be an easy, gentle reminder. You might feel differently, and I respect that, but it doesn’t change my opinion/perspective; if we’re on the same page, it wouldnt hurt to speak up and lay some truth on the powers that be when opportunity permits.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

 

[K-2SO]

Governments need reminding just who they work for sometimes, too

I don't see a legal way to nationalize multi billion dollar businesses. They had to regulate the industry starting decades ago. It's too late now. Going against businesses of this magnitude is a political suicide. I don't want the Monster Telecom coming. It's going to get only worse. I want 300 players on the market. The competition lowers prices and improves services.

 

[heysoundude]

We’ve taken this WAY off topic. Oops.
I don’t disagree with you. Lol.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

 

[GHammer]

As long as IPv4 is enabled, disabling IPv6 gives you better performance and more security.

Stuff and nonsense.

 

[JohnB_123]

Stuff and nonsense.

yet objectively true.

 

[pirx73]

I don't think we are arguing about protocols here, we are discussing benefits of using one over another and turning one over in favour of other.
I have IPv6 disabled on my router because my ISP does not offer IPv6 at all and 4to6 tunnels have strange side effects for my office VPN.
If your ISP has it, it is good, because of growing number of IPv6-only sites.

 

[GHammer]

yet objectively true.

I'm from Missouri. You have to show me.

 

[JohnB_123]

I'm from Missouri. You have to show me.

In order for IPv6 to be implemented properly, it requires ICMP access to the device. Full compliance requires a reverse hostname. The former creates exposure that doesn't exist with IPv4, the latter weakens opsec.

Performance-wise, where do you want to begin?

6to4 tunnels are measurably slower, and that's honestly the main problem. Many ISPs are still using this method.

Client implementations (like Windows 10) perform excessive AAAA DNS lookups, causing it to be slower. I've noticed this on the Pi-hole -- even with a dutifully implemented IPv6 home network (dual stack, of course), my network queries dropped more than 50% when I went IPv4.

And in "perfect" implementations (which are apparently hard to come by), IPv6 is slower at worst - same as IPv4 at best.

I dunno about you, but most of my wifi neighbors are on Channel 1 with "ORBI23" as their SSID. You honestly think they have IPv6 set up correctly, if at all? And that's the problem - as long as we're in this hybrid state (10+ years now !!), IPv6 will perpetually be a next-generation thing. So it's dual stack for the indefinite future.

So... why again would you run IPv6?

 

[JohnB_123]

If your ISP has it, it is good, because of growing number of IPv6-only sites.

Which sites are IPv6 only?

 

[--Manu--]

Here in germany "IPv4 only" internet connections are no no longer common.
Either you get Dual-Stack or DS-Lite.

In many cases you can`t switch from DS-Lite to Dual-Stack, or it is chargeable as a private customer...or there is no chance to get an IPv4...or you are lucky, very few internet providers give you an IPv4 (DS-Lite to Dual-Stack) for free if there is a need.

In summary: IPv6 is the absolute standard here in Europe and nearly the whole internet-backbone relies on IPv6 capabilities. Also the worldwide big TIER Carriers and so on.

By-the-way (Business 2 Business, B2B):
Microsoft does not support any server products (AD, Exchange, Sharepoint,Hyper-V,...) with completely deactivated IPv6. All testing done by Microsoft to their products is based on activated IPv6.

Furthermore:
Why should i deactivate IPv6 (if it is possible, Dual-Stack for example) and build my entire network on a dying protocol?

My network should correspond to the current state of the art so the question doesn't arise for me at all.

IPv6 is closer today than many users think ... or they just don't want to admit it.

 

[pirx73]

Which sites are IPv6 only?

I found this list, it is not big, but something to keep in mind.
https://ungleich.ch/en-us/cms/blog/2019/02/05/list-of-ipv6-only-services/