I'm working on deploying services using Google Cloud Platform (GCP) and Vercel but I've noticed that implementing IPv6 can be quite pricey. GCP only supports IPv6 in the premium tier, which ups the costs significantly. While it's possible to use IPv6 on edge load balancers and NAT64 for the rest, managing dual-stack connectivity would be a lot simpler. Vercel, on the other hand, doesn't directly support IPv6, meaning I'd have to use a service like Cloudflare to bridge that gap. Are there cheaper alternatives? What makes deploying IPv6 so costly, especially when considering that dual-stack clients typically prefer IPv6?
5 Answers
Honestly, vendors like GCP and Vercel seem to fall short when it comes to IPv6 support. With GCP built on Kubernetes, it primarily defaults to IPv4. Ultimately, whether you're serving via IPv4 or IPv6 doesn't matter unless you have specific compliance needs. Personally, I'm a big supporter of IPv6, but in practice, it often feels secondary to simply delivering your service to users.
Why not look for a provider that has strong dual-stack support across all their services? The best options out there will prioritize IPv6 functionality right from the get-go and implement IPv4 as needed.
Is it possible to just use Cloudflare in front of Vercel to manage the IPv6 layer?
Vercel’s issues with bot protection might be more about the way they handle TLS termination with IPv6, rather than the protocol itself. It sounds like they're struggling with features like Encrypted Client Hello. If you're in a complex environment, this could be a red flag about their technical capabilities.
I feel like this is more about ticking the IPv6 box for compliance rather than genuine support. It seems like these companies are just meeting the bare minimum requirements.
Related Questions
Can't Load PhpMyadmin On After Server Update
Redirect www to non-www in Apache Conf
How To Check If Your SSL Cert Is SHA 1
Windows TrackPad Gestures