IPv6-only Hosting Won't Make Sense For Years 173
rawagajah writes "World IPv6 Day this Wednesday will shake out any bugs for websites running on IPv4 and IPv6 in parallel. However, cloud server provider ElasticHosts points out that IPv6-only websites are still a long way off — they only make sense after access is overwhelmingly IPv6 capable. In the meantime, the market in IPv4 space will presumably only grow, benefiting the IPv4 hogs..."
Slashvertisment please (Score:1, Insightful)
Some cloud unstart makes a blog, and the blog entry gets slipped in as a "story".
FUCK OFF PLZ.
On the other hand ... (Score:4, Insightful)
Dual stack hosting does make sense right now, what is slashdot [ipv6-test.com] waiting for ?
Re:SNI and other alternatives (Score:4, Insightful)
"it would give us most likely a good 5 to 6 years to do a nice orderly IPV6 rollout instead of the mess we are in now."
We've had a decade to do a nice orderly IPv6 rollout. The problem is no one will spend the time/money to do it until it is absolutely unavoidable.
Re:SNI and other alternatives (Score:3, Insightful)
If the unused addresses were to be put back into the pool it would give us most likely a good 5 to 6 years to do a nice orderly IPV6 rollout instead of the mess we are in now.
More time isn't what is needed. They've already had lots of time (nearly a decade).
So I say my proposal would buy us the time we need to fix the above problems and make the IPV6 transition a nice slow methodical orderly change over rather than the "Oh shit what are we gonna do?" mess that we have now.
That's the only way it's gonna happen. Like many other problems (pollution or fossil fuel) that cost a lot of money to fix just to get back to nominal, it's not gonna be dealt with until stuff starts actually breaking.