3 ms·

You appear to not understand my argument. IPv6 is over 30 years old. The world has not embraced it. It isn’t going to. It is time to call it and try to figure

by bborud 5mo ago

You appear to not understand my argument. IPv6 is over 30 years old. The world has not embraced it. It isn’t going to. It is time to call it and try to figure out something that will work. You do understand that one need not have a better idea to make that observation? The observation is self-evident and can exist in the world regardless of what we think about IPv6 or the feasibility of figuring out something people will want to use. Getting defensive and playing “then you come up with something better”-games is not getting us anywhere. It is just part of the problem. It is unproductive. 30 years. Let’s not waste more time.

tardedmeme 5mo ago
So now please get to step 2 of the argument: why do you think a world that did not embrace IPv6 (a false premise by the way, as 50% of internet traffic is IPv6) would embrace IPvBBORUD?
- bborud 5mo ago
  Again, you are not getting the argument. IPv6 is dead. It is better go give up and see what else can be done. Stop and think about what I'm saying before you react. Are you suggesting we spend another 30 years beating a dead horse?
  - icedchai 5mo ago
    Google is seeing almost 50% IPv6 adoption: https://www.google.com/intl/en/ipv6/statistics.html#tab=ipv6-adoption https://www.google.com/intl/en/ipv6/statistics.html#tab=ipv6... Yes, it started out slow. But from 2016 to 2026 we've gone from 10% to almost 50%. In some countries, it is much higher. It would be a waste of time to deploy yet another standard.
  - tardedmeme 5mo ago
    If you call 50% of internet traffic "dead" then I guess IPv4 is dead too. Again, you have refused to answer what would make IPvBBORUD better?
t43562 5mo ago
That would indeed be a disaster because there is a lot of IPv6 usage and a lot more support from operating systems and hardware that has to exist first and now we should start again with something else would introduce a 3rd unsuccessful attempt with ....what benefits?

by bborud 5mo ago

tardedmeme 5mo ago

So now please get to step 2 of the argument: why do you think a world that did not embrace IPv6 (a false premise by the way, as 50% of internet traffic is IPv6) would embrace IPvBBORUD?

bborud 5mo ago
Again, you are not getting the argument. IPv6 is dead. It is better go give up and see what else can be done. Stop and think about what I'm saying before you react. Are you suggesting we spend another 30 years beating a dead horse?
- icedchai 5mo ago
  Google is seeing almost 50% IPv6 adoption: https://www.google.com/intl/en/ipv6/statistics.html#tab=ipv6-adoption https://www.google.com/intl/en/ipv6/statistics.html#tab=ipv6... Yes, it started out slow. But from 2016 to 2026 we've gone from 10% to almost 50%. In some countries, it is much higher. It would be a waste of time to deploy yet another standard.
- tardedmeme 5mo ago
  If you call 50% of internet traffic "dead" then I guess IPv4 is dead too. Again, you have refused to answer what would make IPvBBORUD better?

t43562 5mo ago

That would indeed be a disaster because there is a lot of IPv6 usage and a lot more support from operating systems and hardware that has to exist first and now we should start again with something else would introduce a 3rd unsuccessful attempt with ....what benefits?