3 ms·

So did 64 bit CPU adoption get delayed because addresses are hard to read compared to 32 bit addresses? Maybe not so much... But the argument might still hold.

So did 64 bit CPU adoption get delayed because addresses are hard to read compared to 32 bit addresses? Maybe not so much... But the argument might still hold. If 80% of average network admins decide to hate IPv6 because they can no longer remember IP addresses of several machines and subnets by heart that might hinder adoption. Most of them are not daily affected by the fact that the world has run out of IPv4 addresses. And NAT works well enough for most of them, many are even convinced it gives them security.

soneil 5y ago
Remembering your own machines really isn't the problem people think it is. If I ask you what 192.168.1.1 is, you're probably going to guess it's a router/gateway. There is absolutely no reason for it to be, it's merely an accepted convention that the lowest-numbered host is the gateway. There's absolutely nothing stopping you doing the same in ipv6. If you need to be able to remember where your gateway is, put it on 2001:db8::1. The problem isn't that they're long, it's that for some reason we assume we have to remember dynamically assigned addresses. Any address you have to memorise shouldn't be dynamically assigned, whether it's v4 or v6.
- magicalhippo 5y ago
  > put it on 2001:db8::1 Except my prefix is a hell of a lot longer than that... And it's not my choice that it changes every now and then (at least once a month). That said, I use DynDNS for IPv4 too, but it's easier since I only need to configure it for the router, but for IPv6 each machine I want to access needs it's own record.