How necessary is IPV6 outside the ISP industry?
I work for a company owning a single class C IPV4 range (which we barely use).
Every server (Windows 2008) and desktop (Windows 7) we now commision now defaults to IPV6 (6to4). They work fine but I don't like this unnecessary and possibly unsupported protocol being used internally. (Devices by default respond to pings using IPV6).
There is no way private IPV4 addresses will EVER be a problem on our (or any) private network.
It is recommended by MS NOT to disable IPV6 on W2008/W7 YET it (or tunneling protocols) is implemented by default and causing confusion as we transition to W2008/W7.
We have no need of IPV6 internally - who does? Who is implementing this internally on their private address ranges and why? Why is this default in Windows??
I understand the requirement of ISPs to implement IPV6 for public addressing to easilly alleviate the IPV4 address shortage but I don't understand why most companies with a few hundred (or even thousand) private devices behind a firewall are being forced into IPV6 with Windows builds?
To put it bluntly - every Windows server or client now uses IPV6 as well as IPV4 needlessly by default and MS recommend using and not disabling IPV6 . Why?
NYDTS. Thanks. But MS are defaulting to IPV6 (particularly 6to4 transition) in latest versions of Windows, causing confusion for commercial enterprises administering small to medium IPV4 networks with no need of IPV6.
Also, I too thought IPV6 was mainly to increase public IP addresses (which it is), but it completely re-writes LAN activity too - no broadcasts, default multiple 128 bit IP addresses per host and much more use of multicast.