Slashdot Mirror


Some Telcos and ISPs are Frustrating IPv6 Adoption (guardian.ng)

An anonymous reader writes: "There are indications that telecommunications operators and traditional ISPs in the country are frustrating adoption of Internet Protocol version six (IPv6) by other networks," reports Nigeria's Guardian newspaper, citing Nigeria CommunicationsWeek. The magazine found 32 networks with IPv6 addresses -- but only three which are using them. And the newspaper cites "a network engineer with a university who does not want to be named" frustrated that their ISP's network isn't IPv6-compatible, so the university can't use its own IPv6 address. "Mohammed Rudman, chairman, IPv6 Council Nigeria, said that most telecommunications operators and internet service providers in the country have not adopted IPv6 which raises the issue of compatibility with other networks."
Firefox has a fast-fallback-to-IPv4 option, which you can disable in about:config (as well as an option to disable IPv6 altogether). But "the Chrome browser supports IPv6 natively and doesn't allow users to decide which protocol to use," reports TechGlimpse.com.

How does your browser perform? Long-time Slashdot reader ourlovecanlastforeve shared a link to Test-IPv6.com, which detects whether "when given the choice, your browser decided it would prefer to use IPv4 instead of IPv6."

3 of 135 comments (clear)

  1. C'mon Editors by great+throwdini · · Score: 5, Informative

    I typically refrain from calling out the staff supporting /., but is it really too much to postfix the submission title with "in Nigeria"? Or is that somehow at cross-purposes with what you all are trying to achieve on this site?

  2. Re: NAT (IPv4 Address sharing) is not security. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0, Informative

    Ok dumbfuck, NAT is Network Address Translation. It can be 1 to many, or 1 to 1. It can be ipv4, or ipv6, or v4 to v6.
    A stateful firewall is only necessary for 1 to many translation, but can be part of a 1 to 1 implementation.

    And yes, it can be used to increase security, especially if you don't have a standalone firewall (or load balancer) appliance.

  3. Re:IPv6 sucks ass by johnw · · Score: 3, Informative

    The biggest mistake the IPv6 inventors made was making it incompatible with IPv4 by creating a completely different address space.

    They didn't - the IPv4 address space is embedded within the (vastly larger) IPv6 address space. The IPv4 address 1.2.3.4 is ::ffff:1.2.3.4. Any IPv6-only application can thus reference any IPv4 address (although some residual NAT is obviously needed to allow the IPv4 server to reply).