4 ms·
IPV6 is probably the worst "upgrade" to have ever rolled out and graced our world with its stinky existence. It's been a decade and IPv6 has barely entered the
by hatsunearu 7y ago
IPV6 is probably the worst "upgrade" to have ever rolled out and graced our world with its stinky existence.
It's been a decade and IPv6 has barely entered the zeitgeist of the common internet user.
- sigstoat 7y agoi don't know what's in the "zeitgiest of the common internet user" but i'm pretty sure IPv4 isn't in there either. besides, https://www.google.com/intl/en/ipv6/statistics.html https://www.google.com/intl/en/ipv6/statistics.html
- easytiger 7y ago> It's been a decade and IPv6 has barely entered the zeitgeist of the common internet user. It has not been a decade! I remember printing out the draft spec in the late 1990s thinking that I have to get ahead of this curve. Twenty years in the making. I recall at the time thinking initially that the obscure nomenclature for addressing would be annoying, but that it clearly would be fine. What do I know. In 2010 hackernews luminaries predicted the ipv6 momentum singlularity here: https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=1236048 https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=1236048 The fact of the matter is very very large private corporate networks do not need more addressing space. ISPs use CGnats. Most home broadband routers|modems are junk. It is just a mess
- throwawaycert 7y agoMore than a quarter of Google's traffic today is IPv6. So apparently ISP's representing a quarter of their traffic don't consider the marketing oxymoron that is "carrier grade nat" an adequate substitute for IPv6...