New on LowEndTalk? Please Register and read our Community Rules.
All new Registrations are manually reviewed and approved, so a short delay after registration may occur before your account becomes active.
All new Registrations are manually reviewed and approved, so a short delay after registration may occur before your account becomes active.
Comments
sigh you must be management.
Trademark runaway after failing to make valid point.
@rcy026 he also whined about the colons. He couldn't imagine why they'd do that. Oh, and the length was just too much for him.
Everyone here knows, right, that without IPV6, the price of IPV4 would be even higher with no potential for going down in price, right? Now we have the free market kicking in to allow competition when prices exceed what the majority can afford and IPv6 utilization will increase.
Of course, panic buying is a thing.
Not even panic buying, there's daily and increased demand, especially after covid changed the work from home ratio.
Yes it's an attempt by the free market which I can respect, but the target audiences are ultimately different.
Actually, there are very few offers IPv6 only, therefore I imagine that increase of demand of IPv4 is not really influenced by IPv6 presence.
The bulk of price increase would come from hoarding and speculation, most likely.
Yes, the presence of IPv6 is weighing heavily on the IPv4 price, the cost of implementing IPv6 is going down, the price of IPv4 is going up, there will soon be IPv6 only offers from ISPs especially in Asia and 6to4 portals.
? The target audience isn't end users, it's service providers.
The IPv6 IP header does not have a checksum, which has saved the router a lot of cpu, although CRC is generally done by hardware.
Also, the IPv6 IP header is fixed length, which is very friendly for switch forwarding.
IPv6 is just another scam created by some nerd's wife to fuck with him, but it ended up becoming a virus in itself.
vidm.fun/vidmate/
mobdro
Major carriers in Europe already run IPv6 only on phone networks. A lot of people only have a IPv6 address on their mobilephone, but they have no idea. On the other hand, they had no idea when they had a IP4 either. Consumers really does not give a shit as long as Youtube and Tiktok works, you could tell 99% of them that their ip address is 12-gamma-delta-dot-square, and they would say "OK, cool".
Here you go: SIPP/rfc1710, which actually delivers and at reasonable cost advantages yet is IP4 compatible, which is a very major point wrt acceptance and transition, and also delivers on routing, header parsing&processing speed. There are/have even been implementations for quite a few architectures and OSs.
Btw, even Prof Bernstein ('djb') - who is not against IPv6 per se - has criticized (and IMO even ridiculed) it. Also wrt his criticism SIPP would deliver what IPv6 failed so far.
I don't know about that, here I don't see it. They do use a lot of weird routing with 10.x.x.x all over the place if you traceroute anything, but the phone does offer a routable IPv4 and I needed that recently when I have moved as I play an ancient game online which works only over v4 and didn't have fiber installed yet.
Yes, major services are running over dual stack since a long time, but IPv6 only offers by residential ISPs I haven't seen outside of Asia. I would take one as long as they allocate a FIXED /64, not that I can't do around that, but i am sick and tired of workarounds when fixed IPs should be easier to allocate than dynamic ones.
Do you actually believe IPv6 will be abandoned and another solution adopted instead at THIS time? Or just trolling?
I think we are stuck with it, I don't like it, but I don't think you or me can do anything about it. The faster we swallow the bitter pill, the better.
IIRC, SIPP is the ancestor of IPv6 (more or less).
I merely responded to a statement.
That's not my point, I have no problem at all to just add yet another item to the already long list of shitfuckery, especially since WW2. I myself will keep and have IP4 dedis and VMs as well as my lab and home for years to come.
My point was to critically look at the "miracle for a millenium".
(Regarding "Mr. f_ck f_ck f_ck": (a) To know whether or not you had your typical orgy of ultra-primitive cursing I would have had to read your transpirations, (b) Classical primitive pit perspective. I'm not "running away", I'm disgusted and appalled and leave the field for you and the other "experts" of everything.
Do yourself and me a favour and don't address me anymore. You are a person who serially breaks agreements and who rewards friendliness with vile. Nothing you say carries any weight, and also keep your "Thanks" clicks.)
Their RFC indeed used protocol number 6 but they are clearly not an ancestor to IPv6 (unless the IPv6 people are even way more incompetent than I think). SIPP is coming very close to a really good IP4 successor and would actually allowed for a smooth transition (read: we would be done by now rather than going into the third decade of IPv6 transition shitfuckery).
SIPP is one of the earliest draft of what later became IPv6.
Go to https://encyclopedia2.thefreedictionary.com/Simple+Internet+Protocol+Plus or https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Simple_Internet_Protocol_Plus and you will simply be redirected to their IPv6 pages.
The third decade of "transition shitfuckery" is mainly due to some people refusing to let go of IP4. Most of us that are seriously into networking made the transition over a decade ago so we are already done, we just keep IP4 for backwards compatibility to be able to speak with the slow people.
And if you dislike IPv6 for its 128-bit, you should know that SIPP actually supported up to 192-bit addresses. This was however dropped in the final RFC for IPv6.
Refusing... Well, it is a crowd issue, as long as the crowd does not budge, there is cost associated with IPv6 rollout and no benefit, there will still be slowness.
Of course we are "fans" i.e. early adopters, I am worried about the techies which are NOT. No matter your ideas, beliefs and preferences, it WILL come, therefore you need to be prepared.
I don't like it, jsg doesn't like it, others are fans 100% or 80%, whatever, but it is like debating the weather, is it good or bad the storm will hit us? Will be a devastation or just a couple of really shitty days for people which have to work outdoor?
No matter what we "decide" or "prefer", it will be what it will be, discussing how to stop it is futile, discussing and predicting how will go, then that is more productive, we need to be prepared, in the end.
In a world of mesh, p2p, VPN, VOIP, SDN protocols and firewalls, it's much easier for developers to code for IPv6 than IPv4. IPv6 would help from a "Killer app" that takes advantage of that instead of using third party companies to get around IPv4 NAT issues. Squid Game IPv6 or something.
Way back in the day there was a group that would provide free porn downloads/streaming/etc that was V6 only.
Francisco
Love you!
Yes, it is, the port forwarding and UDP punching through will be a thing of the past, and, yes, there is security through obscurity, come scan my /64 :P
Still, the port forwarding and stuff, the NAT, those were solutions mainly for limited IPv4 supply, they could have been solved with making that supply unlimited through various means.
One way to see it. Another way to see it is that SIPP was one of multiple approaches (largely from Sun btw) and something quite different became the "new IP".
Sure, because Wikipedia never speaks but the truth and knows everything, hahaha. Even one of its co-founders calls it bent and biased as hell (nowadays) and a sh_t-show that hasn't much in common anymore with what it was meant to be.
Another way to look at it: If IPv6 were a company's project it would already be considered a failure. If one pushes and trumpets and markets a major project and it fails to win the market some people get fired.
Similarly, if only professionals in the trade would accept it, some people would be fired and the project would be put to (eternal) sleep or completely retargeted, e.g. to any parties working with semi-large to large address spaces (in IP4 lingo parties with a >= /24).
But the, companies - unlike the IPv6 committee crowd - would have asked and cared about what the people think and want. The answer of most would have been something like "no significant changes, just a larger address space".
To be more precise, SIPP was 64-bits only, but provisions were taken to extend it in further 64-bit steps if that would ever be needed. And the motivation for that almost certainly was to keep those perverts calm who demanded 128-bit addresses.
The one, true way. Worked for VHS, streaming, etc,etc.
Another thing we agree on @SirFoxy . I like you.