Mordecai Walfish wrote on Apr 21, 2018, 11:24:
Mr. Tact wrote on Apr 20, 2018, 21:40:
Oh, additionally FWIW (possibly not much) -- I have an acquaintance who owns/runs a medium to large privately owned ISP in the Chicago area. And his personal spin on this topic is the "lack of IPv4 addresses" is unlikely to ever be an issue. There are so many chunks that people are squatting on, and so many devices being assigned real IPv4 that don't need them.
There are a number of hacks in the works at isps to alleviate this issue somewhat, like "Carrier Grade NAT", which my ISP recently started using.
This is a direct negative consequence of not switching to ipv6 sooner, as carrier grade NAT is prohibitive in a number of different ways. The way carrier grade NAT works, it could switch your IP address multiple times a day, and break simple things like port forwarding. This conflicts with running a home/remote server as well.
I had to call and discuss issues I was having with my internet with my ISP to find out they had switched to this recently, and it was the source of the issues I was having. They switched me back to standard upon request, but they ask for a reason when you do this. I simply told them I stream media from my home computer to my portable tablets/devices and needed proper NAT for this to work properly. No problems since.
I looked in to it, and many carriers across the country are switching over to patchwork solutions like this, and this is indeed a cause for concern with the limited abilities of solutions like "Carrier Grade NAT".
As more people go online and more iots devices get into consumer hands the "lack of IPv4 addresses" will definitely
be a thing. If is inevitable.
- I refer to it as BC, Before Corona, and AD, After Disaster. -