Starlink Helps Eight More Nations Pass 50% IPv6 Adoption (theregister.com) 28
Eight nations have surpassed 50% IPv6 deployment since June 2024, bringing the total number of countries in the majority IPv6 club to 21, according to the Internet Society. Brazil, Guatemala, Hungary, Japan, Mexico, Puerto Rico, Sri Lanka, and Tuvalu all crossed the threshold over the past year.
Tuvalu's adoption coincided with the arrival of Elon Musk's Starlink satellite broadband service, which operates as IPv6-only. The Internet Society's Pulse platform found no IPv6 deployment in the Pacific nation in June 2024, but Starlink now holds 88% market share there and 59% of Tuvalu's internet connections use IPv6.
France moved from third place to tie with India for the global lead at 73% IPv6 deployment. Japan rebounded from 49% to 55%, returning to the 50% club after dropping below the mark in mid-2024. Puerto Rico climbed from 49% to 53%. Thailand appears positioned to join next at 49% deployment, followed by Estonia at 46% and the United Kingdom at 45%.
Tuvalu's adoption coincided with the arrival of Elon Musk's Starlink satellite broadband service, which operates as IPv6-only. The Internet Society's Pulse platform found no IPv6 deployment in the Pacific nation in June 2024, but Starlink now holds 88% market share there and 59% of Tuvalu's internet connections use IPv6.
France moved from third place to tie with India for the global lead at 73% IPv6 deployment. Japan rebounded from 49% to 55%, returning to the 50% club after dropping below the mark in mid-2024. Puerto Rico climbed from 49% to 53%. Thailand appears positioned to join next at 49% deployment, followed by Estonia at 46% and the United Kingdom at 45%.
We really need to push IPv6 adoption (Score:1)
Cisco (Score:4, Interesting)
Cisco will never end ipv4. Not anytime in the near or mid future, at least. The industrial vertical makes up a big chunk of their profit nowadays, and a large number of companies are running old hardware on plant floors. Think million dollar stamping presses and injection molding machines and CNC mills that run on OS/2 and Windows NT. These things must be networked to support the production execution system, coordinating with conveyors, robots, PLCs, inventory systems, SPC and inspection systems, etc...
It's the same reason a company still sells a PDP-11 emulator.
https://www.stromasys.com/solu... [stromasys.com]
Re: (Score:2)
Gear (Score:3)
Yeah but those systems shouldn't be connected to the open internet at all. Even if you don't want to airgap them, they should be behind a network topology that prevents them from connecting out freely, or accepting random connections inward.
It's not about connecting to the open internet. The OP was talking about Cisco completely dropping ipv4 support. Cisco is a major supplier of industrial ethernet switches and routers, so that isn't going to happen. These industrial machines use ipv4 to talk to each other, and it *has* to be ipv4 because a lot of them predate the ipv6 standard, and there is no upgrade path to enable ipv6 support.
Re: (Score:2)
The OP was talking about Cisco completely dropping ipv4 support.
The OP was talking about Cisco ending production of IPv4-only devices, not dropping support for IPv4. And I agree. In my opinion, we need a government mandate to end IPv4 on the Internet. It no longer serves a useful purpose outside the LAN.
Re: (Score:3)
Cisco will never end ipv4.
That's not what the GP said. He said "IPv4 only equipment". I agree with you Cisco won't ever end IPv4 support, and honestly no device should do so. But in 2025 *new* devices not supporting IPv6 should be banned from connecting to outside networks. There's zero reason to be dual stack these days, especially since doing so will give your critical equipment some much needed life in the form of 4-6 gateways and routing.
Re: (Score:3)
Re: (Score:2)
Because you probably want to connect from your home network to places on the Internet.
The way that works is that the machine on your network sends an IP packet with the remote machine's IP in the header. The src/dest address fields in the header of v4 packets are too small to fit a v6 address (which is sort of the whole reason we needed a new protocol in the first place), so this requires a revised header format that has enough space, i.e. v6 packets.
Nobody is saying that your home network can't use v4, it
Re: (Score:2)
For an airgapped network sure, you can continue using whatever antiquated protocol you want - NetBEUI, DECNet, IPX/SPX, Vines etc.
If you're going to provide Internet access at all you really need IPv6. You can get away with IPv6-only and provide access to legacy resources through NAT64. Most legacy networks don't have full dual stack and are encumbered by NAT44 anyway so the single stack setup is easier. If you have a legacy only network encumbered by NAT you're going to find increasing numbers of things ar
Re: (Score:2)
Why can't my home setup use IPv4?
No one said it can't. The OP said IPv4 only equipment should be EOL'd and IPv4 allocations should be revoked. Your home network doesn't have an IPv4 allocation (I suspect), it uses a private reserved space.
There are tons of cases where an isolated IPv4 setup with static addresses is simpler to setup and troubleshoot than an IPv6 network.
One of the more interesting things about this argument is that I frequently find when home networks do have a problem with IPv4, a simple ping still goes through, ... to perfectly fine resolving IPv6 addresses. It's a curious result of people being scared of IPv6. The setup process for IPv6 itself is virt
Re: (Score:1)
The push is ongoing, but the general consensus is: (Score:2)
It's odd but people like numbers they can remember for 2 minutes while they walk between machines.
We also don't really need everyone's toaster, can opener, and vibrator accessible to the internet.
All they really needed to do was add a country prefix number like the phone system to expand ipv4, instead ipv6 went all complicated and stuff.
127.0.0.1 vs eafd:45ac:5820:ffad:dead:beef::0 -- really? (apologies if that actually breaks out to a connectable address)
This (Score:3)
The human factor is something the people who devised IP6 completely ignored (or didn't even understand). A lot of network setup and troubleshooting requires knowing the numeric IP address , good luck with even trying to even write down an IP6 address, never mind remember it.
"All they really needed to do was add a country prefix number like the phone system"
Quite. A 16 bit value would have done it and for IP4 would have been zero and ignored, anything else you add it to the front, maybe like 1234:240.0.0.1 ,
Re: (Score:2)
It's odd but people like numbers they can remember for 2 minutes while they walk between machines.
If you're using IP addresses directly you're doing it wrong. DNS exists for a reason. ::1 ::2 ::3 etc - if memorising addresses is your thing then choose an addressing sch
Aside from that...
v6 has a more sensible hierarchical approach, you have a prefix which in any business environment is going to be static - remembering that 2001:db8:: is your prefix isn't hard and then the whole company uses the same prefix.
Individual host addresses *can* be randomly generated using 64 bits, but they can just as easily be
Re: (Score:2)
All they really needed to do was add a country prefix number like the phone system
Not really. The phone system is based around variable-length addresses, whereas v4 is fixed to 32 bits. It's not just the packet format, but also related protocols like DNS and DHCP, and basically all software; everything stores v4 addresses in a fixed-width field. You can't just add a prefix onto v4 and have it work with everything like you can with phone numbers -- you need to do basically all the things v6 is doing to get longer addresses.
(And if you're doing that, it makes sense to add enough new addres
Re: (Score:2)
Cisco hasn't made legacy-only equipment for a long time. Pretty much everything they have supports v6, and anything that doesn't is long past EOL.
Puerto Rico is a nation? (Score:5, Insightful)
When did Puerto Rico leave the US?
Re: Puerto Rico is a nation? (Score:1)
Exactly. I was coming to say that.
Its a bit of a halfway house (Score:2)
Self governing except for foreign policy and defense AFAIK. Why doesn't it just become a state?
Re: (Score:2)
One political party is dead-set against that happening.
Re: Its a bit of a halfway house (Score:2)
It's actually mostly both parties right now.
The problem is when their economy was going good, they likely could've gotten statehood, but they didn't want it.
When it started going bad 15 years ago, the majority started wanting statehood, but we won't give it to them.
Basically, they only want statehood when things are bad and they want to be bailed out.
And, we are only willing to give them statehood when they are doing well enough they won't be a drag on the other states.
https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wik... [wikipedia.org]
Re: (Score:2)
When did Puerto Rico leave the US?
Puerto Rico was part of the USA? Someone should tell republican congress critters. They certainly act like it's a different country, and a 3rd world undesirable one at that.
ISDN (Score:2)
What will come first? (Score:2)
Fusion power reactors?
Fully self driving cars?
Lasting world peace?
Getting completely off IPv4?
ISP efforts have been embarrassing (Score:2)
When I moved to Europe I was given an IPv6 address and a CGNAT'd IPv4 that broke much of what I did with my home servers. So switch to a business plan, easy right? Except my ISP could not offer me a business plan with an IPv6 address. I literally had the option of paying a lot more for a fixed IPv4 and *NO* IPv6, or have broken IPv4 and working IPv6.
10 fucking years it took for them to resolve this. It was late 2024 when I finally got a public IPv6 address on that business plan.
Now if only Vodaphone would f
Re: (Score:2)
It's the same in a lot of places - legacy traffic is through CGNAT unless you pay (sometimes a LOT) extra. If you want any kind of home server you have to do it over v6. Also makes it much easier if you have more than one device since you can access them directly rather than having to mess with non standard ports or proxies etc.
Vodafone are a mixed bag - depends what country you're in. They have v6 in india, portugal, germany etc while in some other countries they don't.