IPv4 not having enough addresses is a good thing.
With IPv6 identification (and therefore control) can be down to the person globally, but IPv4 forces NAT's. The inability to label all the things is a feature. NAT's are borders; they prevent fine grained censorship without larger consequences.
$ zcat /proc/config.gz | grep -i ipv6
# CONFIG_IPV6 is not setThe V6 privacy addresses are typically only rotated daily but the space is so large that it could be done almost per connection of the stack and router could handle that. Realistic rotation limits are probably every few minutes.
Both of my ISPs hand out new ISPs hand out new /64 prefixes every so often. One does it every half-hour, the other is comparable but I don't remember. I think they do it to encourage business customers to get more expensive connections, but the effect on my connections is that each device's IP address changes every few minutes, within the ISP's /32, and doesn't repeat in a year... and I do wonder how many IPSs do this.
Changing your prefix every half an hour would be... unusual, at least, although again I wouldn't put it past some ISPs to do that (possibly unintentionally)... but sounds like your prefix might be changing every time you do a DHCPv6-PD request, which makes me wonder if your DHCPv6 client might be generating a new DUID for every request rather than remembering it.
How do you know that the ISP replacing it often is "unusual, to say the least"? Or is that something you know?
Even my incoming rdiff-backup jobs don't raise a noticeable number of errors.
If 30-minutely prefix changes were common, people would definitely be complaining about it.
...but okay, I won't claim that I catch everything. Can I ask which ISP this is, or at least which country? Perhaps it's common in places that don't have much presence in the English-speaking parts of the internet.
It's nice to hear that it mostly works for you. It should do, but a lot of software is terrible at handling dynamic changes -- it seems to be something that programmers struggle with. The biggest problem should be that long-running connections aren't possible.
https://www.transtutors.com/questions/how-many-bits-are-need...
In the typical IPv6 setup, your network gets an IPv6 prefix from which client devices use randomized and rotating IPs. Everything in your network is trivial to group.
How long the network-identifying address/prefix is stable is purely an ISP design choice - some keep them as long as possible, others force a change regularly.
People know why. Even if a few really get 32's, it's PR. The endgame is the same.
This is a critical path item for removing the ability to have 2 party value transfers. The power at stake is incalculably valuable.
The vast majority of IPv4 connections get an IPv4 IP (= a /32), CGNAT is pretty much only used by providers that don't have another choice and has various downsides for users too.
IPv4 not having enough addresses is why it's valuable. It's impossible to arm band every human with 32b.
EDIT: I'm comment limited for the night. @efzx: Seeing "google" in the same sentience with "does not have anything with tracking" is pretty good stuff.
Do you have better insight than Apple?
It's also always there to pretend the major corps care about (insert 15s ad here) it.
If you really measure response time, frame by frame, Windows 3.1 is faster than Windows Billion.
Process improvements in hardware obviate any trivial 40% benchmark. 400%, maybe, lets talk about it.
It's utterly irrelevant compared to what being to tag every item every person ever comes into contact with and the interactions of those items with other items; iterated as many times as desired.
Why can't Android devices connect to ipv4-only networks?
Google building their infrastructure around IPv6 does not have anything with tracking IPv6 users
This is widely believed, but it's false. There is nothing whatsoever stopping you doing NAT with IPv6, even though you probably don't need to.
In the early to mid 90's, nobody did NAT with IPv4 either.
Your client machines don't know what is going on at the border, so they can't "choose" a route out unless you turn the lot into routers and use OSPF or something internally.
So NPT. Your router sends flows out over links and rewrites the prefix accordingly for that link. Its a bit horrible and I've decided not to bother yet.
And surely you can do NAT with IPv6, Google for NAT66, but your average Linux box can do it. It's just almost never needed.