@tschaefer i do ipv4 only for lack of complexity sake but i understand we are running out of addresses. maybe i just don't understand or appreciate the real appeal of ipv6 #arin #name rez #sdr #hosts #bind #unbound

Full confession: I run IPv4-only at home purely for simplicity. I get the address scarcity issue, but maybe I just don't see the real appeal yet.

The Core Appeal of IPv6: It's not just more addresses—it's about reclaiming end-to-end connectivity. No NAT, no port forwarding hassles. Every device gets a globally reachable IP.

For DNS/Naming (like #BIND/#Unbound): It eliminates the need for ugly NAT reflection/"hairpinning" to access internal services from your LAN. The host just works, internally and externally.

For SDR/Hosting: Imagine running an SDR server or a personal host—you can give it a static /64 prefix and actually reach it without wrestling with UPnP or carrier-grade NAT.

The Complexity Trade-off: You're right, dual-stack is complex. But the long-term play is IPv6-only with DNS64/NAT64 to handle legacy IPv4 traffic. That's actually less complexity than maintaining two parallel stacks forever.

#ARIN Reality: They're essentially out of IPv4. If you need more than a tiny allocation, v6 is the only path forward."