5 ms·
One day will come, when network admins will be so happy to finally turn off IPv4 on their stack. When router manufacturers will feel happy to support only IPv6.
by ramshanker 3y ago
One day will come, when network admins will be so happy to finally turn off IPv4 on their stack. When router manufacturers will feel happy to support only IPv6. It is definitely coming within my lifetime.
So, these intermediate steps are just cooking the final dish.
Peace. ;)
- flumpcakes 3y agoI don't think that will ever happen... Too many big businesses squatting on their IPv4 allocations to ever want to spend the money to implement IPv6. They don't need to worry about allocation running out or charging for IPs because they've got theirs. They would need to be forced to move by customers, probably through an ISP being IPv6 only. And that probably won't ever happen as the customers of those ISPs would drop them for one that does support IPv4 because they expect access to the same big businesses mentioned earlier. I think the whole thing has lots of inertia to not move to IPv6 and there's no incentive to force it.
- _trampeltier 3y agoNot just that, there are other networks too on IPv4. In industry automation, IPv6 is no thing at all yet.
- SamuelAdams 3y agoOnce GitHub works with ipv6 I’ll start to take it seriously.
- throw555chip 3y agoIPv6 is a privacy nightmare, no privacy technology designed to fix IPv6, fixes it.
- jjjjmoney 3y agoHow is it any worse than IPv4?
- TheNewsIsHere 3y agoI can’t know for sure what the parent comment was alluding to, but I would assume the idea is that because IPv6 isn’t built around an assumption of NAT, that it’s less private because you don’t have an intermediary router (potentially) concealing traffic origins as a network design feature. That’s the only thing about IPv6 that I’ve heard of that I think is a reasonable argument regarding a degradation in privacy. With that said, NAT was a fix for issues that weren’t about privacy, and NAT itself was not designed to give you privacy. It used to be that IPv4 connections were always direct in the same way IPv6 connections were designed to be direct. In that regard you could make the argument that IPv6 is a regression, but that regression is effectively answering for an architectural shortcoming in IPv4 that we’ve tried hard to fix but that can only go so far. Edit to add: NAT also doesn’t protect anyone’s privacy anymore than their ISP is willing to protect it anyway, for what it’s worth.