4 ms·

The problem with ipv6 is that it doesn't consider that people are still remembering and typing ip addresses everyday. IPv6 is more effort on the mind and hand.

The problem with ipv6 is that it doesn't consider that people are still remembering and typing ip addresses everyday. IPv6 is more effort on the mind and hand. A shorthand version would be better. Ideally if the router ip address is 1, Subnet would be 1.0/24, Client 1.2 Client IP: 1.1 Router: 1 Subnet: 1.0/24 Gateway: 1 I'm too lazy for ipv6. Nothing to celebrate about ipv6 except for a bigger pool and some other minor +.

SG- 11y ago
What are you talking about? Users aren't entering IPs for anything other than maybe custom DNS servers. Unless you mean 'advanced' users that set up static machines? Either way if those users want routable IPs going forward and not be stuck behind CGNAT then they'll have to use their brains and learn something new. The truly lazy people like yourself and remain in some sort of segmented Internet I suppose.
- mbrutsch 11y ago
  That's just mean.
  - mbrutsch 11y ago
    I found where all the childish redditors went.
- vog 11y ago
  I agree with you, except for this part: > The truly lazy people like yourself and remain in some sort of segmented Internet I suppose. That last sentence doesn't add anything to the conversation. Your comment wouldn't lose anything by removing that. Also, this one: > they'll have to use their brains and learn something new could have been simply written as follows, again without losing anything: > they'll have to learn something new
  - simoncion 11y ago
    The last sentence echoes the OP's last sentence, which was as follows: > I'm too lazy for ipv6. Nothing to celebrate about ipv6 except for a bigger pool and some other minor +. Symmetrical construction is nice. :) Additionally, it's pretty appropriate to say: > Either way if [advanced users who are setting up static, globally routable IPs for machines] want routable IPs going forward and not be stuck behind CGNAT then they'll have to use their brains and learn something new. Any sysadmin who is configuring a server that requires a globally routeable IP is expected to use his brain. Moreover, he will be expected to have to use that brain to learn new things from time to time, lest his systems become crusty and unmaintained. There are many things that can go wrong when you configure a machine as an Internet peer. Some amount of savvy and smarts is required.
    - vog 11y ago
      > The last sentence echoes the OP's last sentence, which was as follows Good point. But I found the OP's statement inappropriate, either. > Any sysadmin who is configuring a server that requires a globally routeable IP is expected to use his brain Everyone is expected to use their brain. Implying that somebody doesn't use their brain is dehumanizing. That kind of isults should have no place on HN.
      - simoncion 11y ago
        > Good point. But I found the OP's statement inappropriate, either. [sic] OP (workworksleep) was calling himself lazy. You consider it inappropriate to call oneself lazy? > Everyone is expected to use their brain. If you work in a technical field, and have not had the inhuman good fortune of never working with C or D players, you will know that some sorts of people will -not infrequently- fail to meet expectations by failing to engage their brain. This isn't an insult, it's a statement of fact. A Comp Sci student who requests that others write his 1xx or 2xx level homework for him would be quite rightly accused of not using his brain. Hell, on my worst days, I've failed to use my brain and spent 8+ hours writing code that was -at best- hilariously roundabout and overly complex or -at worst- didn't even solve the problem I had intended to solve. When reviewing days like that, I openly admit to not using my brain and accept the shame and wasted effort that came from my failure. What would you call a network administrator who knew IPX/SPX inside and out but refused to learn IP networking, declaring -like workworksleep did in his OP- that he was "too lazy" to do so and that there wasn't enough benefit to overcome his laziness?
RKearney 11y ago
In IPv6, everyones gateway can be FE80::1 if you enjoy entering everything by hand.
- hobarrera 11y ago
  Sure, if you manage to reconfigure every single gateway you'll ever need to use (and assume that every network has a single gateway).
baq 11y ago
fc00::whatever isn't really harder than 10.whatever. the addresses potentially look scary and they are harder to communicate by voice, but that's pretty much the only thing against them and the price that has to be paid for having those 128 bits.
- simoncion 11y ago
  While fc00::/7 is set aside for Unique Local Addresses, -AIUI- the fc00::/8 block hasn't been defined yet. fd00::/8 has been set aside for ULA use.
icedchai 11y ago
DNS. Have you heard of it?
mikeash 11y ago
How would you solve to propose the growing need for IP addresses and the hard limit imposed by IPv4? It seems like increasing the address space is an absolute necessity, and I see no way to accomplish it without hurting the ability to memorize and type them proportionally.

SG- 11y ago

What are you talking about? Users aren't entering IPs for anything other than maybe custom DNS servers. Unless you mean 'advanced' users that set up static machines? Either way if those users want routable IPs going forward and not be stuck behind CGNAT then they'll have to use their brains and learn something new. The truly lazy people like yourself and remain in some sort of segmented Internet I suppose.

mbrutsch 11y ago
That's just mean.
- mbrutsch 11y ago
  I found where all the childish redditors went.
vog 11y ago
I agree with you, except for this part: > The truly lazy people like yourself and remain in some sort of segmented Internet I suppose. That last sentence doesn't add anything to the conversation. Your comment wouldn't lose anything by removing that. Also, this one: > they'll have to use their brains and learn something new could have been simply written as follows, again without losing anything: > they'll have to learn something new
- simoncion 11y ago
  The last sentence echoes the OP's last sentence, which was as follows: > I'm too lazy for ipv6. Nothing to celebrate about ipv6 except for a bigger pool and some other minor +. Symmetrical construction is nice. :) Additionally, it's pretty appropriate to say: > Either way if [advanced users who are setting up static, globally routable IPs for machines] want routable IPs going forward and not be stuck behind CGNAT then they'll have to use their brains and learn something new. Any sysadmin who is configuring a server that requires a globally routeable IP is expected to use his brain. Moreover, he will be expected to have to use that brain to learn new things from time to time, lest his systems become crusty and unmaintained. There are many things that can go wrong when you configure a machine as an Internet peer. Some amount of savvy and smarts is required.
  - vog 11y ago
    > The last sentence echoes the OP's last sentence, which was as follows Good point. But I found the OP's statement inappropriate, either. > Any sysadmin who is configuring a server that requires a globally routeable IP is expected to use his brain Everyone is expected to use their brain. Implying that somebody doesn't use their brain is dehumanizing. That kind of isults should have no place on HN.
    - simoncion 11y ago
      > Good point. But I found the OP's statement inappropriate, either. [sic] OP (workworksleep) was calling himself lazy. You consider it inappropriate to call oneself lazy? > Everyone is expected to use their brain. If you work in a technical field, and have not had the inhuman good fortune of never working with C or D players, you will know that some sorts of people will -not infrequently- fail to meet expectations by failing to engage their brain. This isn't an insult, it's a statement of fact. A Comp Sci student who requests that others write his 1xx or 2xx level homework for him would be quite rightly accused of not using his brain. Hell, on my worst days, I've failed to use my brain and spent 8+ hours writing code that was -at best- hilariously roundabout and overly complex or -at worst- didn't even solve the problem I had intended to solve. When reviewing days like that, I openly admit to not using my brain and accept the shame and wasted effort that came from my failure. What would you call a network administrator who knew IPX/SPX inside and out but refused to learn IP networking, declaring -like workworksleep did in his OP- that he was "too lazy" to do so and that there wasn't enough benefit to overcome his laziness?

RKearney 11y ago

In IPv6, everyones gateway can be FE80::1 if you enjoy entering everything by hand.

hobarrera 11y ago
Sure, if you manage to reconfigure every single gateway you'll ever need to use (and assume that every network has a single gateway).

baq 11y ago

fc00::whatever isn't really harder than 10.whatever. the addresses potentially look scary and they are harder to communicate by voice, but that's pretty much the only thing against them and the price that has to be paid for having those 128 bits.

simoncion 11y ago
While fc00::/7 is set aside for Unique Local Addresses, -AIUI- the fc00::/8 block hasn't been defined yet. fd00::/8 has been set aside for ULA use.

icedchai 11y ago

DNS. Have you heard of it?

mikeash 11y ago

How would you solve to propose the growing need for IP addresses and the hard limit imposed by IPv4? It seems like increasing the address space is an absolute necessity, and I see no way to accomplish it without hurting the ability to memorize and type them proportionally.