3 ms·
Yes. It's a bit like, "Do you need a car?". If you're only going very popular places public transport might work. But to be able to surf the 'net you need ipv4.
by superkuh 3y ago
Yes. It's a bit like, "Do you need a car?". If you're only going very popular places public transport might work. But to be able to surf the 'net you need ipv4.
- deleted 3y ago[deleted]
- p_j_w 3y ago>If you're only going very popular places public transport might work. This exception doesn't apply to cities that have their acts together.
- munchler 3y agoRight, as long as you don’t try to visit less-developed areas outside the city.
- mcpherrinm 3y agoWell, as this post discusses, the end devices don’t need IPv4 to talk to IPv4-only services.
- superkuh 3y agoYou do though. It's only consuming generic content from generic websites that works with ipv6 cnat. Try to actually participate in the 'net (ie, host a video game server, do some peer to peer task, port scan to explore, etc) and you find out very fast you have no ports and can't do anything. "End devices" are not mindless consumers of content like this very naming and article suggest. They are participants in the internet, if you let them. It's a shame kids are growing up today without being able to participate. Most are going to be intellectually stunted by it.
- mcpherrinm 3y agoThere’s not enough v4 addresses to go around, so if you want to “participate in the net”, then the approach of assigning public IPv6 addresses to end devices is better, not somehow worse.
- greyface- 3y agoThe article accepts this premise, but argues that you only need it on the provider's edge, not on end-user devices. > First of all, let’s start with stating the obvious: most devices will have to talk to legacy services. This post will not argue against this, despite excuses for this decreasing. > Luckily, IPv6-only devices can still talk to IPv4-only ones, and this is getting easier than ever before.