bigstrat2003 6 days ago

I've run IPv6 on both corporate and home networks. Whether or not the additions were merited, they are not a formidable challenge for any reasonably-skilled admin. So no, I don't think that the reason you gave suffices as an excuse for why so many still refuse to deploy IPv6.

▲

icedchai 6 days ago | parent | next [-]

It's definitely more of an education issue. I still run into "IT" people that instinctively disable IPv6 no matter what. How do we fix this? The sad thing is IPv6 is actually easier in many respects: subnetting is simpler, no NAT hackery, SLAAC...

	▲	raron 5 days ago \| parent [-]
		> I still run into "IT" people that instinctively disable IPv6 no matter what. How do we fix this? - force ISPs to follow RIPE guidance on addressing (static prefix, at least /56 for every site, DHCPv6-PD) - force the manufacturers of low-end routers (e.g. provided by ISPs) to have good IPv6 support (good firewalling, DHCPv6-PD, mDNS, PCP/UPNP, advertise static ULA prefix to have working local network even if internet connection is cut) - force Android team to support DHCPv6 - force browsers to support full IPv6 addresses in URLs / URIs (link local addresses, scope id) - force avahi / mDNS to support IPv6 scope id - make operating system manufacturers to have a better unified socket API which can resolve any type of address (IPv4, IPv6, DNS, mDNS, etc. maybe even URLs directly) and deprecate all other API - make software developers to use this new API and don't try to parse IP addresses or URLs themselves - have a good solution for multi-homing / WAN failover (without BGP and PI address space) - have a good solution for mobile / roaming devices (phones, notebooks) and maybe we could make IPv6 stable and universally working (Waste a /40 for every company, get low on available prefixes and start over designing IPv8 to have 256 bit addresses with 184 bit host part...)

▲

dmitrygr 6 days ago | parent | prev [-]

I'll assume you are speaking in good faith, so i'll reply so as well:

I do not want to be a "reasonably-skilled admin". Not my job nor desire. I want DHCP to work and NAT to exist which acts as a de-facto firewall and hides my internal network config from the outside world. All with zero or fewer clicks in my home router's config. With IPv4 this works. With IPv6 it does not. Simple choice for me then: find the IPv6 checkbox and turn it off, as usual.

▲

miyuru 6 days ago | parent | next [-]

> I do not want to be a "reasonably-skilled admin" > NAT to exist which acts as a de-facto firewall

My option is you should not handle router config at all and leave it to the ISP.

▲

Dylan16807 6 days ago | parent | prev [-]

That's the fault of whoever designed the router, not IPv6.

▲

dmitrygr 6 days ago | parent [-]

As a consumer, I don’t care if it’s Santa Claus’s fault. IPv4: works, IPv6: doesn’t. I don’t even need to know what IPv6 means. I just need to know: Turn it off to make things work.

As a technologist, growing up involves learning not to blame the consumer. They are not holding it wrong, you just designed it in a dumb way.

▲

Dylan16807 6 days ago | parent [-]

And I'm not blaming the consumer.

If you want to come into a topic and say the problem is that IPv6 did too much, you can't fall back on "it doesn't matter who's at fault". Yes it does matter, that's what this thread is about, that and looking at how technological changes would have affected deployment.

▲

dmitrygr 6 days ago | parent [-]

It is forever tainted and I will put down money on a bet that when IPv4 is replaced (in the 2040s), it will be by something that will not be IPv6.

	▲	zveyaeyv3sfye 5 days ago \| parent [-]
		My main man, It is already IPv6 !