41–50 of 54 posts
"almost"? I'm still stuck on an IPv4 connection at home, in Britain. My phone still can't get IPv6 on mobile internet. My VPS host still doesn't support IPv6 on my server. And PHP still fails to properly parse some types of IPv6 address. Things have got better, sure, but don't say it's almost gone. Far from it.
"almost"? I'm still stuck on an IPv4 connection at home, in Britain. My phone still can't get IPv6 on mobile internet. My VPS host still doesn't support IPv6 on my server. And PHP still fails to properly parse some types of IPv6 address. Things have got better, sure, but don't say it's almost gone. Far from it.
The notice is about IPv4 allocation, not about IPv6 market penetration. RIPE NCC has just begun allocating IPv4 addresses from the last available /8 block.
It's also hard to get the entire `net to switch their behaviour, and adopt something that is incompatible with IPv4, without telling them what benefit they will gain by doing so. Can you blame them? But the "experts" and their zombie followers sure are trying.
IPv4 works. NAT works. NAT can be traversed. So what is the problem exactly?
As a home user, I can set up my own NAT'ing scheme with private IPv4 space far easier than I can learn to deal with the added complexity of IPv6.
OK, now I will get skewered by IPv6 fanatics. How many of them are getting paid to do IPv6 consulting work?
IPv4: It Just Works. "Experts": They make mistakes, just like everyone else.
Now, let's hear from the "experts".
"almost"? I'm still stuck on an IPv4 connection at home, in Britain. My phone still can't get IPv6 on mobile internet. My VPS host still doesn't support IPv6 on my server. And PHP still fails to properly parse some types of IPv6 address. Things have got better, sure, but don't say it's almost gone. Far from it.
It still fails to reject February 31, I'm completely not surprised to hear that it fails on IPv6.
"almost"? I'm still stuck on an IPv4 connection at home, in Britain. My phone still can't get IPv6 on mobile internet. My VPS host still doesn't support IPv6 on my server. And PHP still fails to properly parse some types of IPv6 address. Things have got better, sure, but don't say it's almost gone. Far from it.
> PHP still fails It still fails to reject February 31, I'm completely not surprised to hear that it fails on IPv6.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
"Unfortunately /64 is all you can get for now, which isn't really sufficient" Not sufficient for what? (Honest question.)
Sufficient to have more than one subnet. In IPv6 you can't easily have a subnet that's smaller than /64, so even though /64 = 2^64 addresses, it's still just a single subnet. In IPv6, we need to start thinking in terms of number of subnets rather than number of IP addresses. Why is having one subnet insufficient? I use multiple subnets (I have a guest network), and I don't want to have to use NAT with IPv6 when my IS…
Earlier quoted context omitted.
a /65 is a subnet, and you get TWO of them with a /64. And so on. So I don't really understand what you're talking about here.
In theory, you're right. But in practice, IPv6 really wants subnets to be /64. For example, stateless address autoconfiguration requires it.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
Sufficient to have more than one subnet. In IPv6 you can't easily have a subnet that's smaller than /64, so even though /64 = 2^64 addresses, it's still just a single subnet. In IPv6, we need to start thinking in terms of number of subnets rather than number of IP addresses. Why is having one subnet insufficient? I use multiple subnets (I have a guest network), and I don't want to have to use NAT with IPv6 when my IS…
NAT will never disappear.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
In theory, you're right. But in practice, IPv6 really wants subnets to be /64. For example, stateless address autoconfiguration requires it.
It truly is saddening how we're treating v6
I'm afraid of the possibility that instead of adopting IPv6, internet providers will just switch to ISP-wide NAT, making the internet even more asymmetric than it already is.
I sincerely hope not! ISP wide NAT is bound to cause countless issues for internet services and businesses. The first and mose obvious examples I can think of: * Internet services (eg websites, netfix etc) can no longer blacklist IP addresses without blocking entire ISPs. * Businesses can no longer offer "direct to the office" VPNs for remote workers.. Actually - even site-2-site VPN's will break if both sides are be…