[Distutils] PyPI lost IPv6 support?

[Daniele Sluijters]

Looks like Latin America has reached the point of no return:
http://www.lacnic.net/en/web/anuncios/2014-no-hay-mas-direcciones-ipv4-en-lac
(article is in English)

On 10 June 2014 15:47, Nick Coghlan <ncoghlan at gmail.com> wrote:
> On 10 June 2014 23:22, Wichert Akkerman <wichert at wiggy.net> wrote:
>>
>> If I remember correctly there are some mobile networks in Asia who only do IPv6 internally. Gandi offers IPv6-only servers that are cheaper than servers with ipv4 connectivity. So while right now not having IPv4 connectivity is unlikely, it does happen and will only become more common. People are also introducing monstrosities like carrier-grade NAT to delay the inevitable, but we really should not encourage that madness and just add IPv6. It generally is very easy to do.
>
> The challenge is that PyPI now runs behind a donated CDN service, and
> our vendor doesn't offer IPv6 yet:
> https://fastly.zendesk.com/entries/30549708-Do-you-support-IPv6-
>
> That means that, for the time being "the PyPI CDN is generously
> donated by Fastly" trumps "the PyPI CDN supports IPv6" - IPv6 support
> isn't currently high enough on the priority list for us to be willing
> to turn down Fastly's offer. That trade-off may change some day, but I
> expect Fastly will have already added IPv6 support before we reach
> that point.
>
>>> It's something we'll want to keep an eye on, but yeah, at this point
>>> in time, when connecting an IPv6-only system to the internet, PyPI is
>>> likely to be long way down the "it isn't working" priority list.
>>
>> I have an ipv6-only VM, and it works wonderfully: it can send email, pull Debian updates, serve IPv6 websites and it has my remote backups and git-annex repositories.
>
> I was thinking of the client case, but you're right, in a server
> context, IPv6 only is far more likely to be viable already.
>
> Cheers,
> Nick.
>
> --
> Nick Coghlan   |   ncoghlan at gmail.com   |   Brisbane, Australia



-- 
Daniele Sluijters