4 ms·

> Remembering and hand manipulating IPv6 addresses is not something end users need to deal with. Assuming it's configured correctly. Most devices are not. >

> Remembering and hand manipulating IPv6 addresses is not something end users need to deal with. Assuming it's configured correctly. Most devices are not. > Like everyone else on my ISP, I have a publicly routeable v6 subnet at home and v6 addresses on my phones. I couldn't tell you what they are, but they work just fine. Why would you ever want publicly routable addresses on devices inside your home? If Ipv6 was simply a 64-bit quad improvement on IPv4 it would be fine. However, the only valid use cases I can think of are mostly to the benefit of end users. What possible need could anyone have for more address space than the non-routable private address blocks already afforded by IPv4? Throw in the insecure-by-default and frequent misconfiguration out-of-the-box and you have the current flaming security dumpster fire that is IPv6.

jeroenhd 5y ago
> Assuming it's configured correctly. Most devices are not. Aren't they? I've never seen a home user fight with IPv6 > Why would you ever want publicly routable addresses on devices inside your home? Because that's how the internet is supposed to work. It's what protocols are designed for. IPv4's shortcomings have led to many stupid security issues (SIP ALG, FTP ALG, all the other ALGs, all allowing anyone website to punch a hole straight through consumer firewalls). I don't know what insecure-by-default devices you use, but all routers I've seen come with a firewall enabled by default set to deny all incoming traffic. If you don't want that for some reason, feel free to NAT66 your network into your own chosen ULA. IPv6 is no more of a flaming security dumpster fire than IPv4.