On 10 June 2014 23:22, Wichert Akkerman <wich...@wiggy.net> wrote: > > If I remember correctly there are some mobile networks in Asia who only do > IPv6 internally. Gandi offers IPv6-only servers that are cheaper than servers > with ipv4 connectivity. So while right now not having IPv4 connectivity is > unlikely, it does happen and will only become more common. People are also > introducing monstrosities like carrier-grade NAT to delay the inevitable, but > we really should not encourage that madness and just add IPv6. It generally > is very easy to do.
The challenge is that PyPI now runs behind a donated CDN service, and our vendor doesn't offer IPv6 yet: https://fastly.zendesk.com/entries/30549708-Do-you-support-IPv6- That means that, for the time being "the PyPI CDN is generously donated by Fastly" trumps "the PyPI CDN supports IPv6" - IPv6 support isn't currently high enough on the priority list for us to be willing to turn down Fastly's offer. That trade-off may change some day, but I expect Fastly will have already added IPv6 support before we reach that point. >> It's something we'll want to keep an eye on, but yeah, at this point >> in time, when connecting an IPv6-only system to the internet, PyPI is >> likely to be long way down the "it isn't working" priority list. > > I have an ipv6-only VM, and it works wonderfully: it can send email, pull > Debian updates, serve IPv6 websites and it has my remote backups and > git-annex repositories. I was thinking of the client case, but you're right, in a server context, IPv6 only is far more likely to be viable already. Cheers, Nick. -- Nick Coghlan | ncogh...@gmail.com | Brisbane, Australia _______________________________________________ Distutils-SIG maillist - Distutils-SIG@python.org https://mail.python.org/mailman/listinfo/distutils-sig
