What’s their excuse?
Adding IPv6 would cost them money. Probably a relatively small amount of money, but still money. They get nothing from that investment. As long as they have IPv4 addresses to assign to their customers, there’s basically no demand for IPv6 addresses. NAT and UPnP work fine for just about everyone. I think the only way we see serious IPv6 adoption in North America and Europe is government mandates.
It’s not working fine for me! I need a static address and they quoted me $200/mo for an IPv4 one.
DDNS doesn’t work behind CGNAT. Never heard of ngrok; google says it might work. I’m trying to do something with WireGuard.
There’s like 6 more bytes used for an IPv6 address, I think. Their server doesn’t have enough RAM to hold it all.
The same reason so many “business server hosting” companies claim that a 5 year old unpatched version of PHP is “world class”.
literally just too lazy, nobody is asking for it and at a small or medium scale probably no cost benefit to them besides future readiness
Laziness
I think it’s more laziness. If they were greedy they would charge for ipv6.
