IPv6 support. Does it exist?

[NewEraCracker]

Hello,

I have been using IP.Board 3 and vB 3. Both do not support IPv6, although there are some dirty tricks to workaround issue.

I am wondering in Xenforo supports it by design. If not, it would be great time to implement it or face issues in future as IPB and vB have.

Regards,
NewEraCracker

 

[Sir nick]

Agree it would be a nice feature to have!

 

[Mike]

There aren't a lot of places where we do IP stuff, but they are IPv4 currently. Most of the management stuff just becomes much more of a pain with IPv6 (managing 128-bit numbers isn't fun). Obviously things will transition to it eventually, but it's very much a chicken and egg now.

 

[Sir nick]

There aren't a lot of places where we do IP stuff, but they are IPv4 currently. Most of the management stuff just becomes much more of a pain with IPv6 (managing 128-bit numbers isn't fun). Obviously things will transition to it eventually, but it's very much a chicken and egg now.

Thanks for the quick response mike.

 

[Steffen]

IPv6 addresses fit into a binary(16) column. And since there is a mapping from IPv4 to IPv6 addresses (http://tools.ietf.org/html/rfc1884, section 2.4.4) you could easily store IPv4 addresses in the very same column (no need for two separate columns).

Since vBulletin 3 wastefully stores IPv4 addresses in a varchar(16) column no additional storage space would be required. I'd really like to see XenForo support IPv6!

 

[Enigma]

Since vBulletin 3 wastefully stores IPv4 addresses in a varchar(16) column no additional storage space would be required. I'd really like to see XenForo support IPv6!

If I had to take a wild stab at it, I'd hazard that XenForo currently stores IP addresses as unsigned ints.

 

[Mike]

If I had to take a wild stab at it, I'd hazard that XenForo currently stores IP addresses as unsigned ints.

Indeed.

 

[Steffen]

Ok, then my storage space argument does not count anymore.

 

[iGamer]

There are instances where there are some major players in the US where IPv6 is now being implemented. Even though it is still a long way from beoming a major player in the protocol stream, eventually it will be rolled out everywhere. I am taking a wild guess here, but i think we will see more of it in the next 5 to 8 years. With more and more carriers adopting this technology.

So having xF IPv6 capable right now to me is something that is not needed, or called for yet. I figure that by the time the product needs this, the product will me much more mature and be for sure capable of handeling this.

xF is good the way it is right now. And adding the IPv6 feature right now would be a waste of resources, and time when they can be consentrating in making xF what it needs to be. I say when the time comes as Mike said, it will be there.

I am sure they have other stuff to worry about right now. When this feature gets added to xF, i think it will be awesome, and the capabilities will be far much more superior than any other. Showing the current small track record for xF. I say we got ourselfs a young champion here.