At my workplace, all of our internal services are IPv6-only. My home connection, phone, and workplace all have native IPv6, so I have no issues using it for my own personal servers. Sure, the addresses are longer, but DNS makes that a non-issue.
Mobile carriers in particular are trying really hard to avoid using “carrier-grade NAT” because it has a bunch of issues. T-Mobile routes ~94% of their traffic via IPv6 (presentation about it: https://pc.nanog.org/static/published/meetings/NANOG73/1645/20180625_Lagerholm_T-Mobile_S_Journey_To_v1.pdf). Newer phones generally always use IPv6 for the connection between the phone and the carrier, and then the carrier uses an IPv6 to IPv4 gateway for legacy v4-only sites.
Yeah, using IPv6 avoids NAT. Note that NAT is not really supposed to be used as a firewall. Your router would still act as a firewall and block incoming connections
Sadly no ISPs in my area offers dual stack and in my country IPv6 usage is at ~4% according to Google stats, yet it’s been steadily increasing recently. There’s still some friction from some techies
I insist in using IPv6 on every public facing service and I see that IPv6 traffic on those boxes amounts to at least 35% of the grand-total, so that’s encouraging. The biggest single advantage I noticed a while back was instantaneous Inbox delivery towards gmail recipients for a new mail server.
Sure we won’t go too far until Google and similar search engines won’t start penalizing (for whichever reason) IPv4-only websites. Optimistically I would expect to reach such a goal in a couple of decades
