125 comments

[ 4.2 ms ] story [ 103 ms ] thread
(comment deleted)
crossed 50% on Mar 28, 2026, 3 weekends back.

google published the latest data only yesterday, hence the delay.

It has barely hit 50% and it's already plateauing. This adoption rate is ridiculous despite basically all network interfaces supporting it. I thought I would see IPv6 take over in my lifetime as the default for platforms to build on but I can see I was wrong. Enterprise and commercial companies are literally going to hold back internet progress around 60 to 75 years because it's in their best interest to ensure users can't host services without them. Maybe even 75 years might be too optimistic? They are literally going to do everything in their power to avoid the transition, either being dragged out kicking and screaming or throwing their hands up and saying they can't support IPv6 because it costs too much.

Try going IPv6-only by disabling IPv4 on your computer as a test and notice that almost nothing works except Google. End users shouldn't need to set up NAT64/6to4 tunneling. It should be ISPs doing that to prepare for the transition.

Also, notice how Android and iOS don't support turning off IPv4.

My German ISP supports it now, which was the limiting factor for me, and a new VPS I just bought also does, so finally I was able to create my first personal AAAA record. I am hoping that we're seeing a tipping point. Again.
Since when was there ever a plan to disable IPv4 on the Internet? Just because IPv6 is around doesn't mean that IPv4 is going to go away.
> Also, notice how Android and iOS don't support turning off IPv4.

You can trivially connect an iOS device via IPv6 only.

> It has barely hit 50% and it's already plateauing. This adoption rate is ridiculous despite basically all network interfaces supporting it

It's fine. IPv4 and IPv6 can be used at the same time. There's no hurry. Network interfaces support anything as long as both sides agree (nothing stopping you from building your own IPX network over MPLS).

People can move to IPv6 when the IPv4-as-real-estate speculators get out of control, and if IPv6 prevents IPv4 rental prices from going haywire, then it's served a useful purpose.

I saw a news article that said something about India considering moving to IPv6-only? That's going to be interesting if the rest of the world moves to IPv6 and the U.S. doesn't.

> End users shouldn't need to set up NAT64/6to4 tunneling. It should be ISPs doing that to prepare for the transition.

100%

> It has barely hit 50% and it's already plateauing.

Is it plateauing? From the chart it doesn't look that way at all to me.

You could say it's flat between August 2025 and now, but it also was from Jun 2024-Feb 2025, or August 2023-March 2024. There's just a lot of noise to it -- lots of short plateaus or even dips followed by lots of sudden jumps. Indeed, it seems to have a bit of a yearly cycle to it, suggesting we're at the inflection point of another jump upwards.

So it still seems to be growing strongly to me. The rate of growth has slowed maybe the tiniest bit 2024-2026 compared 2018-2023, but I don't see it anywhere close to plateauing yet.

Every company I have ever worked for in the US didn't use IPv6 and actually blocked it at the FW
It's been amazingly linear since 2014.

amazon.com needs to get with the program. Still IPv4 only.

Nice. But note that the average is still significantly below 50%. It's also a bit concerning that the growth rate seems to be levelling off. It currently looks like a sigmoid curve with a maximum far below 100%.
The question is, "what will the graph look like in the next 10 years?"

I get the whole s-curve trend but if I squint at 2017, there is an inflection to slow the s-curve down.

Annoyingly, when setting up service with a fiber company in the last couple months, I explicitly asked about IPv6 connectivity and they said, "yes." Turns out "yes, but not in my region."

while it looks like its slowing down, I am pretty sure it will speed up once IPv4 get even more expensive, sites start to be hosted on IPv6 only and become inaccessible to some users that dont have IPv4. Thats surely going to put pressure on ISPs
And still, in the year of our lord 2026, GitHub does not support IPv6.

https://github.com/orgs/community/discussions/10539

The irony of this is that pretty much all they'd have to do to enable IPv6 support is to use Azure Front Door as their CDN. Or... use any other CDN, they pretty much all default to providing IPv6!
Same with Twilio. We have an internal server that does system alerts. We recently moved it to an IPv6 only host, and a few weeks went by and noticed there were no longer receiving alerts.

Turns out we could not connect to Twilio's API which is IPv4 only.

Kinda sorta.

github.com doesn’t have an IPv6 address.

github.io does have an IPv6 address. Indeed, one workaround for getting rate limited when using a carrier NAT with github.com is to have a github.io page and pull data from github.io instead of github.com.

Edit: About a decade ago, all of my hosting had full IPv6 support, and I tried to move over to IPv6. However, there was an issue with Letsencrypt certs not validating over IPv6, so I made my web pages IPv4 only. Recently, I gave IPv6 a go again, and the cert issue has been fixed, so now my webpages finally have both IPv4 and IPv6 addresses.

At least HN supports IPv6 now, which I remember was not the case last time I checked.
My next project, IPv6 in my homelab. It will be a challenge but it is time. My ISP gives me a static /48, I should use it.
Setting up my own server (migrating off GCP LB) taught me so much about networking. I was especially surprised that providing IPv6 is such a performance boost for low bandwidth phones since they mostly only operate on IPv6 by now and IPv4 needs some sort of special roundtrip.
It's only a matter of time before laptops get 5G. Macbooks have been rumoured for a while to get cellular modems. [1]

This will probably help adoption. On the one hand it will generate more IPv6 traffic. On the other hand it will expose more developers to IPv6; which will expose them to any lack of support for IPv6 within their own products.

[1]: https://9to5mac.com/2025/08/14/apples-first-mac-with-5g-cell...

> It's only a matter of time before laptops get 5G.

So you want laptops to cost <whatever the laptop costs> plus a measly 19.99/month for internet connectivity?

What's wrong with just tethering to my existing phone?

5G services all give you an ipv4 too, so devs won't be exposed to lack of v6 support.
This google metric measures adoption in access networks, but at this point I feel more interesting metric is adoption in services.

One such stat is here:

> adoption ranging from 71% among the top 100 to 32% in the long tail

https://commoncrawl.org/blog/ipv6-adoption-across-the-top-10...

Getting full coverage on AWS (/GCP/Azure) and few other key services (GitHub...) would be significant here imho.

great resource. Common crawl is a goldmine
Yeah, a large portion of those ipv6 Google searches are afterwards connecting to an ipv4 host.
I doubt it honestly. Most people are connecting to sites like Youtube, Instagram etc., which do actually support IPv6.

It's how I get 60~80% IPv6 traffic on my home network. A great portion of it was because of my mom watching Youtube.

Even when you discount the services run by FAANG, for personal sites, Cloudflare and GitHub Pages (but surprisingly, not GitHub itself) support IPv6 and enable IPv6 support by default.

Sometimes TCP/IP is a leaky abstraction, and recently ipv6 peeked through in two separate instances:

- In a cafe wifi, I had partial connectivity. For some reason my wifi interface had an ipv6 address but no ipv4 address. As a result, some sites worked just fine but github.com (which is, incredibly, ipv4-only) didn't

- I created a ipv6-only hetzner server (because it's 2026) but ended up giving up and bought a ipv6 address because lack of ipv4 access caused too many headaches. Docker didn't work with default settings (I had to switch to host networking) and package managers fail or just hang when there's no route to the host. All of which is hard to debug and gets in your way

The cafe WiFi thing (getting IPv6 only, no ipv4, on a public network) used to happen quite often to me on macOS. I never figured out why, and I haven’t noticed in a while.
But I still have to pay Hetzner separately to rent out an IPv4.
Current submission title:

> IPv6 traffic crosses the 50% mark

Graph description:

> The graph shows the percentage of users that access Google over IPv6

There are reasons to expect both much more and much less traffic per user on IPv6 compared to IPv4...

At home, I use an Android 16 Pixel phone, and a Chromebook, and I would suspect (but cannot prove) that 100% of my LAN outages can be blamed on the dual-stacking nature of IPv6 plus IPv4.

Chris Siebenmann has written extensively on IPv6: https://utcc.utoronto.ca/~cks/space/?search=ipv6

Google has some weird way of asserting connectivity, and I suspect that when connectivity on one protocol is lost, it is impossible to maintain or establish connectivity through the other one (IPv6) even if it is available upstream.

I am rather infuriated with the status quo at this point, because it is impossible to disable IPv6 on my devices and it is also impossible for my ISP to disable IPv6 on my LAN or on the CPE router which they own and control.

Due to chronic WiFi issues I was eventually forced to place my ISP router into Bridge mode permanently, and I use a 3rd party Netgear which I own, and does not have the same WiFi issues, and where IPv6 is optional (and often fails, because its implementation is buggy and glitchy for no reason.)

Are any ISP's or corp intranets doing IPv6-mostly style networks yet: https://www.ietf.org/archive/id/draft-link-v6ops-6mops-00.ht...

That seems to be a promising approach.

T-Mobile does: https://www.internetsociety.org/deploy360/2014/case-study-t-...

They use 464XLAT, basically NAT64/DNS64 with some extra cooperation on the OS’s part for backwards compatibility with apps that hard-code IPv4. You get only a v6 address, and your OS basically synthesizes an v4 network on your device in cooperation with their NAT64 router. But all the bytes going from your device through to their towers are ipv6. Talking to a v4-only website uses carrier-grade NAT64 when leaving the t-mobile network.

I wonder why Germany has a relative high adoption rate with 77%? They are normally behind when it comes to new technology.

Is it because they have more carrier NAT?

In Denmark I can get cheap 1 / 1 Gbit/s fiber, but still no ipv6 :(

We have enough IPv4 addresses (combined with CGNAT) in Denmark so the providers have no business incentive to spend money on supporting IPv6 :/
In before the dinosaurs arrive to complain about the challenges of moving to IPv6 and why NAT and IPv4 are better. ;)
Countries like India have higher adoption (>70%) because of 4G/5G abundance. Legacy broadband providers hold back IPv6 usage.
Every year I just wish someone will come up with IPv4-with-more-bytes and we can switch to it before IPv6 gets another percent usage share.
That's what IPv6 is. People get so fixated on being annoyed at IPv6 they forget to actually think. Whatever you invent won't be any better than IPv6. Many people have tried.

If you change the address format even the tiniest amount, if you add one single additional bit, your new protocol is already completely incompatible with all existing IPv4 software and equipment.