4 ms·

I always thought that basically the only difference between IPv4 and IPv6 is the number of bytes in an address. Lately I've been learning a lot more about IPv6

I always thought that basically the only difference between IPv4 and IPv6 is the number of bytes in an address. Lately I've been learning a lot more about IPv6 and there are a TON of subtle differences in the protocols that matter if you're operating a large network. Random example I recently read about: the way link-local addresses are generated. [0] Not that this excuses inaction, but it does give me more empathy for orgs struggling with, or not doing, the transition to IPv6. [0]: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Link-local_address https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Link-local_address [1]: Best doc I can find in 30 seconds that covers some of the differences: https://www.juniper.net/documentation/en_US/learn-about/ipv4-ipv6-differences.pdf https://www.juniper.net/documentation/en_US/learn-about/ipv4...

apple4ever 7y ago
What happened is they changed a bunch of things about the protocol because they thought it would be a very forced adoption. Instead, it caused lagging adoption because of all the changes. If IPv6 was just IPv4 with extra addresses, the adoption rate would have been very quick.
- zymhan 7y ago
  On the other hand, you really do not get many chances to re-architect a universally used network protocol. It's important to make changes with a long-lasting impact.
- zamadatix 7y ago
  I hear this a lot but being in the networking but the only 3 complaints I actually hear in the field are "those addresses look a lot harder to type out", "our device doesn't support IPv6 (at all/fully)", and "can we hold off on that project another year or will things start breaking before then?". Not once has any of the protocol additions that always get talked about been a stopping point. I finally got the opportunity to roll it out on some of our guest wireless networks, it was literally a matter of assigning some space, flipping some settings on, and making sure Google still loads. Ironically the techs did complain about the addresses looking funny in the Firewall logging.
CameronNemo 7y ago
Personally I like the link local addresses, SLAAC, and NDP features.

apple4ever 7y ago

What happened is they changed a bunch of things about the protocol because they thought it would be a very forced adoption. Instead, it caused lagging adoption because of all the changes. If IPv6 was just IPv4 with extra addresses, the adoption rate would have been very quick.

zymhan 7y ago
On the other hand, you really do not get many chances to re-architect a universally used network protocol. It's important to make changes with a long-lasting impact.
zamadatix 7y ago
I hear this a lot but being in the networking but the only 3 complaints I actually hear in the field are "those addresses look a lot harder to type out", "our device doesn't support IPv6 (at all/fully)", and "can we hold off on that project another year or will things start breaking before then?". Not once has any of the protocol additions that always get talked about been a stopping point. I finally got the opportunity to roll it out on some of our guest wireless networks, it was literally a matter of assigning some space, flipping some settings on, and making sure Google still loads. Ironically the techs did complain about the addresses looking funny in the Firewall logging.

CameronNemo 7y ago

Personally I like the link local addresses, SLAAC, and NDP features.