IPv6 - practical experience of a pro

rcy026

@jsg said:

@rcy026 said:

@jsg said:

@rcy026 said:

@jsg said:
Why not simply tell us about all the relevant experience? How many years have you professionally worked on IPv6 enabling (halfway serious) software, how many years have you professionally ran an ISP or a hosting operation or a DC fully supporting IPv6?

That didn't address you, but as you answered ...

Never been much of a software developer, so I'll admit that I have no say in that field.

Of course. A professional knows what is his field and what is not. I expected no less from you (unlike many others).

But I did ran an ISP for ~15 years, I've been operating DC's for over 20 years and I've spent the last 10-15 years in the metro network/backbone industry.
Most DC's went dualstack around 10-12 years ago and many metro's are now ipv6 only. Mobile carriers are running ipv6 only so most of he CGNAT is being replaced by 6to4 to be able to reach the parts of the net that is stuck in the past.

But this is in Europe, not the US. I'm sure you guys will catch up eventually.

(a) would you kindly specify "Europe" a bit tighter? Which country/ies have you worked in (for a nontrivial period of time)? One of the reasons I'm asking is that Europa is a quite big place with some more "open to new technology" and some far less so.

Scandinavia, Netherlands and Germany mainly. Many of my customers have presence in a lot of other countries but I cant really say that I have on-site experience in those.

Thanks for providing that info.

Now, for the sake of fairness Sandinavia, while being quite modernistic, still is rather insignificant with just a bit over 20 mio. population. The only two of the countries you worked in that carry some weight are Germany (mainly simply due to their > 80 mio. population and geography) and Netherland which, while having not even 20 mio. people, has (in my view anyway) become the internet center of Europe.
That said, all those countries are "the rich North" (of Europe). There are way more countries and people in Europe though, to be more precise a bit less than double the population of the USA.

Scandinavia has been in the top when it comes to infrastructure for the past 30 years. Having 20 million people spread across a pretty vast area gives totally different challenges then having 10 million people concentrated in one city. Still, we have some of the best infrastructure in the world.
And yes, I only have experience of northern Europe, but that does not automagically mean the south is different.

I take what you said as truthful - but still that's insignificant not only on the global scale but even on the european scale. Basically it boils down to "well, there are some small corners in the world where IPv6 seems to be significant".

Not really. There may be small corners in the world where it is not significant, as is evident by your view of the world. But outside of your little corner and among the big international carriers, nobody is doing anything that does not run on ipv6 today. You might not like it, and luckily you do not have to care until it hits your little corner of the world as well, but it's a fact.

However I would say that Europe as a region is years ahead of the US, no matter what part of Europe you are looking at.

We may turn it every which way we like but fact is that, at least for the time being, Europe is but a small light compared to across the Atlantic. We have achieved a few "honorable mentions" like e.g. a few leading and very major IXs, but largely the internet still is pretty much defined from across the ocean.

Size wise yes. But, and I know this might come as a shock to all you Americans out there, size isn't the only thing that matters. You might have a "bigger" internet, but we have a better internet.

Or in other words: They use IPv6 largely internally, but the traffic to/from users is largely IP4. Or in yet other words, they largely play IPv6 where it works and is easy - and users don't care and have no saying anyway.

No, you purposely worded that to sound that way. Let me try.
They use ipv6 everywhere, but when forced to talk to people that still has not evolved they use ip4. There, same thing, just worded differently.
How you draw the conclusion that they would use ip4 to their users is beyond me. They use ipv6 all the way to their users. When their users request something that still is not reachable via ipv6, they use 6to4 to get it.

Example "cell phones". Those, at least by the majority, are used like fridges not like computers; one doesn't care about a fridge's tech innards, it just has to work. (Desktop, office, server) computers are a very different story. Similarly one cares very little, if at all, whether carriers run IPv6, IP4, or 46 and a half bit protocol on their backbones and internal networks. And in that scenario IPv6 indeed makes sense (for carriers, etc), just like in the military; those are basically internal networks under full control and authority of a single player or a relatively small group of players, plus of course it saves on cost and allows them to, oh so generously, "free" IP4 ranges (so that their customers or the customers of their customers can generate more revenue ...).

99.9% of all users just want their computer to work. They do not care if the website they visit or the movies they stream is delivered via ip4, ipv6 or pigeon, as long as it works. And ipv6 works, that's a fact not even you can deny.
And it's not "internal networks". Set up peering with a major carrier today and they will do it via ipv6. Carriers are even building MPLS on ipv6 to be able to move ip4 traffic over their ipv6 networks.
The "internal traffic" you talk about is the traffic that the carrier has to do down to endpoints like you, low end players that still thinks ipv6 does not exist. That's when it gets to ip4 and not because it's easier, better or cheaper, but because they have to since some people are stuck in their old ways.

That's dandy but it's largely outside of the question we're discussing here.
What you use internally is of little concern to me, but forget about me and billions of users and companies switching our servers and computers from IP4 to IPv6 just because a few "modernists" accept a brainfart from the IPv6 weirdos instead of rejecting it and laughing those morons out of the room.

It's not exactly a "few modernists", billions have already done it. Windows uses ipv6 by default, so does most linux'es. You will have a hard time buying a router or switch today that does not support ipv6. Nobody builds a network today based on ip4, unless maybe in your little corner of the world. There is even a RFC6540 that says that every device that supports ip must support ipv6 and it has been in effect since 2012, so anybody that still does not support ipv6 is really really far behind. Calling a standard that has basically been internationally approved for a few decades for "a few modernists" is pretty far from a correct statement.

I've spent my last 10 years as a professional basically doing nothing but building networks with ipv6 and it is just so much better then ip4, so hearing you call it a "brainfart" just makes me feel sorry for you. If it was a brainfart I assure you that I would have noticed during the last decade. But I haven't, because it just works and it is a lot better then ip4. It's not perfect, but neither is ip4.
And even if by some random chance I wouldn't have noticed, at least some of the worlds major companies that spent billions on it would have.
I'm not trying to insult you, but when one grumpy user with a personal vendetta calls something that the world has already embraced for a "brainfart", it doesn't really build a lot of confidence in that user.

There is still one major hurdle for ipv6, just one category that does not support ipv6 and that will take a lot of work and time to overcome. Know what it is? Zealots like you.

Maounique

@jsg said: Sorry, but as long as IPv6 isn't generally and cheaply (about like IP4)

What are you talking about, IPv6 is mostly free, at least I haven't heard of anyone charging extra for it in my country, people charge for IPv4 NOT Ipv6.

@jsg said: available in, let's be nice and say 2/3rds of the world (and at least 85% in the major civilized not poor countries) IPv6 is not the standard.

Not THE standard but A standard. Also, very few things run on IPv4 only, so, if people would stop sitting on their hands and deploy IPv6 it would work.
Look, nobody denies that holdouts like you managed to delay the adoption of IPv6 and the deprecation of IPv4, yes, we are in a sorry mess, but that is just delaying the inevitable like the fossil fuel subsidies. Many people here are subsidizing the dying IPv4 standard by buying or renting IPv4s at indecent prices.

While that is their right and their money, that does not mean in any way that the change is not happening. It is way slower than it should have been, but it is as inevitable as the demise of the fossil fuels.

@jsg said: That said, all those countries are "the rich North" (of Europe).

Is Greece part of the "rich north"?

@jsg said: but largely the internet still is pretty much defined from across the ocean.

Where IPv6 connections are the majority for a while.

jsg

@rcy026 said:
Scandinavia has been in the top when it comes to infrastructure for the past 30 years. Having 20 million people spread across a pretty vast area gives totally different challenges then having 10 million people concentrated in one city. Still, we have some of the best infrastructure in the world.

>

That doesn't change the fact that ca. 20 mio vs. 7.5 or 8 bln is less than a third of 1% -> insignifcant.

And yes, I only have experience of northern Europe, but that does not automagically mean the south is different.

Sure, but it also doesn't automagically mean that the South of Europe is very similar, let alone equal.

I take what you said as truthful - but still that's insignificant not only on the global scale but even on the european scale. Basically it boils down to "well, there are some small corners in the world where IPv6 seems to be significant".

Not really. There may be small corners in the world where it is not significant, as is evident by your view of the world. But outside of your little corner and among the big international carriers, nobody is doing anything that does not run on ipv6 today. You might not like it, and luckily you do not have to care until it hits your little corner of the world as well, but it's a fact.

As you repeatedly tried and try to make this personal, let me set it straight:

• I wrote, I quote "what you said ... insignificant ...". Kindly read what you mean to criticize.
• "among the big international carriers, nobody is doing anything that does not run on ipv6 today." - do you have evidence for such a global statement, or is that just an extrapolation of what you saw in a couple of countries?

jsg said:
We may turn it every which way we like but fact is that, at least for the time being, Europe is but a small light compared to across the Atlantic. We have achieved a few "honorable mentions" like e.g. a few leading and very major IXs, but largely the internet still is pretty much defined from across the ocean.

>
Size wise yes. But, and I know this might come as a shock to all you Americans out there, size isn't the only thing that matters. You might have a "bigger" internet, but we have a better internet.

(a) I am not a US-American
(b) I wasn't talking about size.

Or in other words: They use IPv6 largely internally, but the traffic to/from users is largely IP4. Or in yet other words, they largely play IPv6 where it works and is easy - and users don't care and have no saying anyway.

No, you purposely worded that to sound that way. Let me try.
They use ipv6 everywhere, but when forced to talk to people that still has not evolved they use ip4. There, same thing, just worded differently.

>
So, we IP4 users are "not [yet] evolved". Because we don't blindly follow a weirdo sect that failed go gain more than marginal significance during over 20 years
...

How you draw the conclusion that they would use ip4 to their users is beyond me. They use ipv6 all the way to their users. When their users request something that still is not reachable via ipv6, they use 6to4 to get it.

Sorry, I'm not interested in your wet dream but in reality. You yourself said, I quote, "Carriers around here that still run ip4 in their backbone are considered outdated, ip4 is just what you use the last hop to parts of the net that still hasn't been updated."
And again, that was a statement about the status in an insignificant rather small part of the world.

Example "cell phones". Those, at least by the majority, are used like fridges not like computers; one doesn't care about a fridge's tech innards, it just has to work. (Desktop, office, server) computers are a very different story. Similarly one cares very little, if at all, whether carriers run IPv6, IP4, or 46 and a half bit protocol on their backbones and internal networks. And in that scenario IPv6 indeed makes sense (for carriers, etc), just like in the military; those are basically internal networks under full control and authority of a single player or a relatively small group of players, plus of course it saves on cost and allows them to, oh so generously, "free" IP4 ranges (so that their customers or the customers of their customers can generate more revenue ...).

99.9% of all users just want their computer to work. They do not care if the website they visit or the movies they stream is delivered via ip4, ipv6 or pigeon, as long as it works. And ipv6 works, that's a fact not even you can deny.

So, as one conclusion, you yourself think that only 0.1% of all internet users care about IPv6?

As for "And ipv6 works, that's a fact not even you can deny" I suggest you read the blog post linked in the OP. And that guys is pro IPv6 - yet he seems to strongly disagree with you.

And it's not "internal networks". Set up peering with a major carrier today and they will do it via ipv6. Carriers are even building MPLS on ipv6 to be able to move ip4 traffic over their ipv6 networks.

Current state with, to pick a very major scandinavian carrier example, twelve99 ("fka Telia"):

BGP says:
IPv4 Peers: 2,328
IPv6 Peers: 1,581

Most of them being professionals/companies/other carriers I presume.

That's dandy but it's largely outside of the question we're discussing here.
What you use internally is of little concern to me, but forget about me and billions of users and companies switching our servers and computers from IP4 to IPv6 just because a few "modernists" accept a brainfart from the IPv6 weirdos instead of rejecting it and laughing those morons out of the room.

It's not exactly a "few modernists", billions have already done it. Windows uses ipv6 by default, so does most linux'es. You will have a hard time buying a router or switch today that does not support ipv6. Nobody builds a network today based on ip4, unless maybe in your little corner of the world. There is even a RFC6540 that says that every device that supports ip must support ipv6 and it has been in effect since 2012, so anybody that still does not support ipv6 is really really far behind. Calling a standard that has basically been internationally approved for a few decades for "a few modernists" is pretty far from a correct statement.

>
I find it immensely funny that even though the IPv6 sectarians really tried hard to force their crap on us and even have a funny RFC6540 ... a very significant majority of users of all kind, incl. large corporations, even ones owned by Microsoft, hehe ... still use IP4.

I've spent my last 10 years as a professional basically doing nothing but building networks with ipv6 and it is just so much better then ip4, so hearing you call it a "brainfart" just makes me feel sorry for you. If it was a brainfart I assure you that I would have noticed during the last decade. But I haven't, because it just works and it is a lot better then ip4. It's not perfect, but neither is ip4.

That means nothing, it's a just a subjective personal view by an IPv6 fan.

"Not perfect"? How about "so crappy that even many who wanted to switch or at least use it more ... gave up cursing".

And even if by some random chance I wouldn't have noticed, at least some of the worlds major companies that spent billions on it would have.

In fact, many major companies did proper research ... and decided to stick with IP4.

I'm not trying to insult you, but when one grumpy user with a personal vendetta calls something that the world has already embraced for a "brainfart", it doesn't really build a lot of confidence in that user.

Nice try ...

There is still one major hurdle for ipv6, just one category that does not support ipv6 and that will take a lot of work and time to overcome. Know what it is? Zealots like you.

Nope, a significant majority of users world-wide. Plus a significant percentage of people who tried IPv6 and found it to be crap.

Otus9051

"he doesnt want to have it so why should i"
bad example but op is basically trying to say this

no ordinary joe is gonna know or even care if they are using ipv6 or not, they just want their sites to load and work. ipv6 only is unrealistic at this stage but will become realistic sooner or later.

kait

IPv6 is cool, but adoption will be as slow as its going now. Nothing anyone can do about this shit. Keep Dual Stacking those Sats.

Mumbly

@jsg said: That doesn't change the fact that ca. 20 mio vs. 7.5 or 8 bln is less than a third of 1% -> insignifcant.

So he gave you an example and for some reason known only to yourself, you excluded the rest of the world completely? Based on what? You wild imagination?

You should check your forum signature every time before you produce such nonsense ...

shafire

@jsg said:
Nope, a significant majority of users world-wide. Plus a significant percentage of people who tried IPv6 and found it to be crap.

Lol, I thought the vast majority of users didn't care?

jsg

@kait said:
IPv6 is cool, but adoption will be as slow as its going now. Nothing anyone can do about this shit. Keep Dual Stacking those Sats.

Well, depending on what "cool" means.
But anyway, I agree that adoption is slow. To the surprise of probably many I wouldn't even mind to switch to IPv6 if it properly, completely, and reliably worked. Plus, it must become easy, easy enough for an average say Ubuntu user to handle simple config.

@Mumbly said:

@jsg said: That doesn't change the fact that ca. 20 mio vs. 7.5 or 8 bln is less than a third of 1% -> insignifcant.

So he gave you an example and for some reason known only to yourself, you excluded the rest of the world completely? Based on what? You wild imagination?

You should check your forum signature every time before you produce such nonsense ...

When making global statements it's sensible to hint at a very small sample size (very limited experience background).

But feel free anyway to simply disliking me, no matter what

Otus9051

@jsg said:

@kait said:
IPv6 is cool, but adoption will be as slow as its going now. Nothing anyone can do about this shit. Keep Dual Stacking those Sats.

Well, depending on what "cool" means.
But anyway, I agree that adoption is slow. To the surprise of probably many I wouldn't even mind to switch to IPv6 if it properly, completely, and reliably worked. Plus, it must become easy, easy enough for an average say Ubuntu user to handle simple config.

@Mumbly said:

@jsg said: That doesn't change the fact that ca. 20 mio vs. 7.5 or 8 bln is less than a third of 1% -> insignifcant.

So he gave you an example and for some reason known only to yourself, you excluded the rest of the world completely? Based on what? You wild imagination?

You should check your forum signature every time before you produce such nonsense ...

When making global statements it's sensible to hint at a very small sample size (very limited experience background).

But feel free anyway to simply disliking me, no matter what

1. how the hell is it not simple
2. sometimes you need to look into the mirror and think, why you exist. questioning your existence is a surefire way to understand why no one likes you.

kait

@jsg said: Well, depending on what "cool" means.

It's cheap and everyone can afford it. I never had any issue rolling it out anywhere.

Maounique

@kait said: It's cheap and everyone can afford it.

"Cool" things are NEVER cheap let alone free. A shoe must cost north of 1 k (a piece) to be "cool". Same with handbags, watches, phones...

The IPv4 is increasingly expensive, therefore its "coolness" levels keep getting upgraded. One day every "influencer" will buy their "vanity range" such as 222.222.222.0/24 for millions and everyone would say, "wow, how cool is that!". There will be ISPs like "Cool ISP inc." running entirely over IPv4 having gateways and tunnels all over the world to serve the few "gold subscribers" with their vintage Apple II typewriters over IPv4 only.

Same as vintage cars. They are expensive and cost a fortune to maintain and run but, hey, "they are so cool"!

xoctopus

@Maounique said: Same as vintage cars. They are expensive and cost a fortune to maintain and run but, hey, "they are so cool"!

Having IPv4 connectivity is not vintage, luxury, or cool, it's a must.
Unless it's a dev project to play with your friends on some container, you need both in<>out connectivity on v4 to not cut yourself from large parts of users and services.
I'm not even talking about the fact that sometimes routes over v6 are absolute trash,
even when comparing provider X to provider Y path both on v4 and v6, I could see v6 sometimes had far worse routing, going via extra hops, etc.

emgh

From my experience, when having fiber through STADSNÄTET (sorry I have no clue what that might be in english, city network?) which maybe the majority of people at least in Sweden have, IPv6 or not is not fully up to the ISP, so I don’t think even a single well-known ISP in Sweden have IPv6 access throughout

Maounique

@emgh said:
From my experience, when having fiber through STADSNÄTET (sorry I have no clue what that might be in english, city network?) which maybe the majority of people at least in Sweden have, IPv6 or not is not fully up to the ISP, so I don’t think even a single well-known ISP in Sweden have IPv6 access throughout

Yes, we have in Bucharest NetCity: https://www.net-city.ro/en/

However, IPv6 is FULLY up to the provider, the legacy providers have to use the same system, the cityhall employees cut their hanging cables so they had no choice, after a month and 10 days after the cables have been cut (after years of ultimatums have been ignored) they restored my legacy Telekom connection I was using as a backup and with a HE tunnel through NetCity infrastructure.

@xoctopus said: Having IPv4 connectivity is not vintage, luxury, or cool, it's a must.

If your provider has no IPv6, correct. In many monopolistic countries, US, India, Syria etc. you can't have a choice of ISP in most places so you have to take anything they offer, but you can still use a HE tunnel, probably without even degrading the speed because the only ISP with local infrastructure probably has plans so slow that a tunnel might actually improve some of the latency.

As I said, I used to have a back-up link with a legacy provider (former Romanian state monopoly from communist times) without IPv6 and was using a HE tunnel, so you CAN access your networks over IPv6 even if your ISP doesn't have it.

The average Joe doesn't need github anyway, but even if you do, you can take a NAT box from Calin at 6 bucks a year and the problem with the legacy providers who couldn't be bothered yet to upgrade their networks is solved.

After all, people on this forum are not the average Joe and if they need github they know how to setup one of the ten variants of 4to6 proxies and tunnels I can think of now or even use RDP of some kind and grab their stuff.

xoctopus

@Maounique said: After all, people on this forum are not the average Joe and if they need github they know how to setup one of the ten variants of 4to6 proxies and tunnels I can think of now or even use RDP of some kind and grab their stuff.

Are you ready to go v6 only then? Read this article before you attempt:
https://blog.brixit.nl/going-ipv6-only/

There are many other stuff that will break, not only github, and not only for average Joe.

emgh

@xoctopus said:

@Maounique said: After all, people on this forum are not the average Joe and if they need github they know how to setup one of the ten variants of 4to6 proxies and tunnels I can think of now or even use RDP of some kind and grab their stuff.

Are you ready to go v6 only then? Read this article before you attempt:
https://blog.brixit.nl/going-ipv6-only/

There are many other stuff that will break, not only github, and not only for average Joe.

Good lad, still made sure his website is V6’able

Maounique

@xoctopus said:

@Maounique said: After all, people on this forum are not the average Joe and if they need github they know how to setup one of the ten variants of 4to6 proxies and tunnels I can think of now or even use RDP of some kind and grab their stuff.

Are you ready to go v6 only then? Read this article before you attempt:
https://blog.brixit.nl/going-ipv6-only/

There are many other stuff that will break, not only github, and not only for average Joe.

Have you actually read what I wrote?

I already have many IPv6 only boxes and I create more all the time, I can go IPv6 only at home right now and us one of the 2 proxies I have to the legacy Internet. I can have an IPv6 only network at home if I turn off NAT and DHCPv4 and STILL access the legacy Internet simply because I have services with free IPv4 but even if I didn't have them, I could get a box from Calin and set one up even as it only has some forwarded ports I don't care about that as I would use it to go out over the legacy Internet, not access my box over IPv4 from outside.

rcy026

@jsg said:

@rcy026 said:
Scandinavia has been in the top when it comes to infrastructure for the past 30 years. Having 20 million people spread across a pretty vast area gives totally different challenges then having 10 million people concentrated in one city. Still, we have some of the best infrastructure in the world.

>

That doesn't change the fact that ca. 20 mio vs. 7.5 or 8 bln is less than a third of 1% -> insignifcant.

Well, to use your logic, I only know one person that hates ipv6 and that is you. That's one person out of 8 billion, so your opinion is totally insignificant. You see the flaw in your logic? You can not just assume that just because someone uses a small percentage of a whole, everything outside of that percentage is completely different.

And yes, I only have experience of northern Europe, but that does not automagically mean the south is different.

Sure, but it also doesn't automagically mean that the South of Europe is very similar, let alone equal.

So it is ok for you to assume that the entire world is like your little corner, but it is not ok for me to make an educated guess about facts in a field I worked my entire life in and have experience of in several countries?

I take what you said as truthful - but still that's insignificant not only on the global scale but even on the european scale. Basically it boils down to "well, there are some small corners in the world where IPv6 seems to be significant".

Not really. There may be small corners in the world where it is not significant, as is evident by your view of the world. But outside of your little corner and among the big international carriers, nobody is doing anything that does not run on ipv6 today. You might not like it, and luckily you do not have to care until it hits your little corner of the world as well, but it's a fact.

As you repeatedly tried and try to make this personal, let me set it straight:

• I wrote, I quote "what you said ... insignificant ...". Kindly read what you mean to criticize.
• "among the big international carriers, nobody is doing anything that does not run on ipv6 today." - do you have evidence for such a global statement, or is that just an extrapolation of what you saw in a couple of countries?

It's common sense. Big companies are not stupid, they would not build networks that are completely obsolete in 10 years time.

jsg said:
We may turn it every which way we like but fact is that, at least for the time being, Europe is but a small light compared to across the Atlantic. We have achieved a few "honorable mentions" like e.g. a few leading and very major IXs, but largely the internet still is pretty much defined from across the ocean.

>
Size wise yes. But, and I know this might come as a shock to all you Americans out there, size isn't the only thing that matters. You might have a "bigger" internet, but we have a better internet.

(a) I am not a US-American

Then I apologize, I should not have assumed that just because you speak like an American you are one, that was my bad.

(b) I wasn't talking about size.

Then what were you talking about? The Japanese have the speed record, Singapore have the best infrastructure, eastern Europe is the cheapest. How is the internet "defined from across the ocean" if not by mere size?

Or in other words: They use IPv6 largely internally, but the traffic to/from users is largely IP4. Or in yet other words, they largely play IPv6 where it works and is easy - and users don't care and have no saying anyway.

No, you purposely worded that to sound that way. Let me try.
They use ipv6 everywhere, but when forced to talk to people that still has not evolved they use ip4. There, same thing, just worded differently.

>
So, we IP4 users are "not [yet] evolved". Because we don't blindly follow a weirdo sect that failed go gain more than marginal significance during over 20 years

I purposely worded that to make it sound negative, I thought I made that perfectly clear but obviously I did not. But really, does it differ that much from your "weirdo sect" or "brainfarts"? You can use insulting language but I may not? Got it.

...

How you draw the conclusion that they would use ip4 to their users is beyond me. They use ipv6 all the way to their users. When their users request something that still is not reachable via ipv6, they use 6to4 to get it.

Sorry, I'm not interested in your wet dream but in reality. You yourself said, I quote, "Carriers around here that still run ip4 in their backbone are considered outdated, ip4 is just what you use the last hop to parts of the net that still hasn't been updated."

"Last hop" is not users, its services that their users are trying to reach.
Like this:
user --ipv6-- carrier --ipv6-- other carrier --ip4-- jsg's hosting

And again, that was a statement about the status in an insignificant rather small part of the world.

And yet again, nothing says that the rest of the world is different. You seem completely convinced that every part of the world but yours is totally insignificant, are you sure you are not American?

You seem completely fixated with the fact that I talk about my reality, but isn't that exactly what you do too? You base your opinion on your experience of your part of the world, why am I not allowed to do the same? As soon as I say something you go "but that's just your part of the world, it's insignificant" while as soon as you say something I should accept it as a universal truth? It does not work like that.

Example "cell phones". Those, at least by the majority, are used like fridges not like computers; one doesn't care about a fridge's tech innards, it just has to work. (Desktop, office, server) computers are a very different story. Similarly one cares very little, if at all, whether carriers run IPv6, IP4, or 46 and a half bit protocol on their backbones and internal networks. And in that scenario IPv6 indeed makes sense (for carriers, etc), just like in the military; those are basically internal networks under full control and authority of a single player or a relatively small group of players, plus of course it saves on cost and allows them to, oh so generously, "free" IP4 ranges (so that their customers or the customers of their customers can generate more revenue ...).

99.9% of all users just want their computer to work. They do not care if the website they visit or the movies they stream is delivered via ip4, ipv6 or pigeon, as long as it works. And ipv6 works, that's a fact not even you can deny.

So, as one conclusion, you yourself think that only 0.1% of all internet users care about IPv6?

Yes, in exactly the same way that 0.1% of users care about ip4. And that 0.1% is exactly the same 0.1% that care about ipv6.
Users do not care at all. Go outside and ask 100 random people what their ip is and the majority will have absolutely no clue. Tell them that they have a ipv9 on their phone and they will take your word for it. Ask if they want a ip4 or a ipv6 on their phone and when they ask what the difference is you say "absolutely nothing" and see how much they care.

As for "And ipv6 works, that's a fact not even you can deny" I suggest you read the blog post linked in the OP. And that guys is pro IPv6 - yet he seems to strongly disagree with you.

No, he does not, not in any way.
See, this is one thing I really dislike about every discussion about ipv6. People can not differentiate between problems with the protocol itself and problems due to other people not supporting the protocol. Things like Github not supporting ipv6 is not a problem with ipv6, it is a problem with Github.
Every single problem he encountered in that article was due to the other side not supporting ipv6, it was not a problem with the protocol itself.
As the author himself ends the article: "My hope is that the folks who don't want to pay push more IPv6 adoption, but it's also a shame that it has taken so long for us to get here. All these problems and issues could have been addressed gradually and instead it's going to be something where people freak out until the teams that own these resources make the required changes."

I totally agree with him, it's a shame. We've had 30 years and people are still refusing to let go of the old. Again, I'm not trying to insult you, but anyone that thinks that ip4 is the future is stupid.

And it's not "internal networks". Set up peering with a major carrier today and they will do it via ipv6. Carriers are even building MPLS on ipv6 to be able to move ip4 traffic over their ipv6 networks.

Current state with, to pick a very major scandinavian carrier example, twelve99 ("fka Telia"):

BGP says:
IPv4 Peers: 2,328
IPv6 Peers: 1,581

Most of them being professionals/companies/other carriers I presume.

A majority if the ip4 peers are probably 10-20 years old. Get figures for new peers over the last 2 or 3 years, if they look the same I will give you a point.
I have 2 ASN's directly peering with Arelion (I assume you are talking about AS1299) one is both ip4 and ipv6 and the other is ipv6 only.

That's dandy but it's largely outside of the question we're discussing here.
What you use internally is of little concern to me, but forget about me and billions of users and companies switching our servers and computers from IP4 to IPv6 just because a few "modernists" accept a brainfart from the IPv6 weirdos instead of rejecting it and laughing those morons out of the room.

It's not exactly a "few modernists", billions have already done it. Windows uses ipv6 by default, so does most linux'es. You will have a hard time buying a router or switch today that does not support ipv6. Nobody builds a network today based on ip4, unless maybe in your little corner of the world. There is even a RFC6540 that says that every device that supports ip must support ipv6 and it has been in effect since 2012, so anybody that still does not support ipv6 is really really far behind. Calling a standard that has basically been internationally approved for a few decades for "a few modernists" is pretty far from a correct statement.

>
I find it immensely funny that even though the IPv6 sectarians really tried hard to force their crap on us and even have a funny RFC6540 ... a very significant majority of users of all kind, incl. large corporations, even ones owned by Microsoft, hehe ... still use IP4.

"Still use ip4" is kind of a strange way of phrasing it, it implies that just because they use ip4 they do not use ipv6. I assume you are referring to Github. They do use ipv6 already, just not on all services. However, they have publicly announced that they are working on it.

I've spent my last 10 years as a professional basically doing nothing but building networks with ipv6 and it is just so much better then ip4, so hearing you call it a "brainfart" just makes me feel sorry for you. If it was a brainfart I assure you that I would have noticed during the last decade. But I haven't, because it just works and it is a lot better then ip4. It's not perfect, but neither is ip4.

That means nothing, it's a just a subjective personal view by an IPv6 fan.

I've tried to explain this to you before, but here we go again. I'm not a "fan" of ipv6, just as I'm not a "fan" of gasoline just because I use it in my car.
I'm a network technician, I build networks with whatever technology is available. It is my job to give my customers the best networks available, and right now that means giving them a future-proof investment by making them use ipv6 and ip4. If there was an ipv7 or ipv11 or whatever available, I can guarantee that I would be on top of that shit and if it was useful in any way I would probably implement that too. I do not let personal feelings dictate my professional opinion, I'm way too expensive for that.

"Not perfect"? How about "so crappy that even many who wanted to switch or at least use it more ... gave up cursing".

Again, there is nothing wrong with the protocol itself, and he clearly says so in the article. He did gave up cursing, cursing that we have not gotten further in 20+ years and that adaption is so slow.

And even if by some random chance I wouldn't have noticed, at least some of the worlds major companies that spent billions on it would have.

In fact, many major companies did proper research ... and decided to stick with IP4.

Could you name some major companies that have decided to never implement ipv6?
Or are we again making the assumption that just because someone is still using ip4 they are not using ipv6? That reasoning makes you sound like the people that does not believe in evolution because "if we came from monkeys, why are there still monkeys"?

I'm not trying to insult you, but when one grumpy user with a personal vendetta calls something that the world has already embraced for a "brainfart", it doesn't really build a lot of confidence in that user.

Nice try ...

Try what? I'm not following you here, I genuinely meant what I said. Calling ipv6 a "brainfart" doesn't really make you look intelligent, it is a very well designed protocol that has proven itself for over 20 years. You know I have a lot of respect for you so trust me when I say that it is not in your favor.

There is still one major hurdle for ipv6, just one category that does not support ipv6 and that will take a lot of work and time to overcome. Know what it is? Zealots like you.

Nope, a significant majority of users world-wide. Plus a significant percentage of people who tried IPv6 and found it to be crap.

And again, found ipv6 to be crap or the slow adoption rate to be crap? Big difference.
The only valid reasons I ever hear for not running ipv6 is that the addresses are to long or that not everybody else is using it. The long addresses issue I get, the addresses are long, but seriously, if that's the biggest problem I don't even think we have a problem, just get over it!
The other issue is like this enormous catch 22 that people just keeps contributing to.
Saying "I will not adopt ipv6 because of the slow adoption rate" means that you are part of the problem. Just run dual stack until people catch up and be part of the solution instead.
Luckily, it is starting to get better, and my guess is that we will see enormous acceleration in the near future. Providers and carriers are starting to charge extra for ip4, and as usual, money talks.

rcy026

@jsg said:
Well, depending on what "cool" means.
But anyway, I agree that adoption is slow. To the surprise of probably many I wouldn't even mind to switch to IPv6 if it properly, completely, and reliably worked. Plus, it must become easy, easy enough for an average say Ubuntu user to handle simple config.

OK, so lets get down to practical reality here.
What exactly is more difficult when setting up a Ubuntu box with ipv6 compared to ip4?
Yes, the addresses are longer so if you are using static addressing you will probably have to type more characters if you are not lucky and your ip's are very shortened.
But it's a one time task, and is it really more difficult to type a few extra characters? Harder to remember possibly, but seriously, most users do not memorize their ip's anyway. And this is if you are using static addressing, I would say that a vast majority of users do not.

Maounique

@rcy026 said: However, they have publicly announced that they are working on it.

You know, I freely admit I have trouble understanding what the actual fuck is so complicated in assigning an IPv6 to your reverse proxy in front of your web servers? Or to the whole kit and caboodle for that matter?

Not only jsg but other people too were talking about how this is complicated.
I could understand that only in the case in which your router is from 20+ years ago and doesn't know IPv6 and there is no firmware available to teach it, but even then I could patch in a software router (because we are supposed to only have 1% of our users using v6, right, so there won't be any problem with the trickle, even a plastic consumer router should be able to do it...)

Seriously, though, if I were github, where would the problems arise? I admit I never managed such a big network and there are probably some aspects I miss, it is not all just scalability, after some [insert large number here] concurrent users going dual-stack poses extra problems and I am curious what they could be.

Not arguing, I would be interested to hear from the actual pros what were the insurmountable costs in going dual-stack that they met.

TimboJones

jsg is easily the most ignorant and obtuse LET user. He's been harping on and on about this for years and ignores all arguments for IPV6 adoption. He refuses to even educate himself on the matter, constantly repeating easily disputed arguments.

He's NOT a software or hardware developer.
He's NOT a Network Engineer or architect.
He's not qualified by any college/university in any relevant area.

He's a whining little bitch who's main complaint is typing more characters because he's the laziest fucking bitch in the world. Learns something once and that's it, no further education and advancement, the worst kind of useless person.

I'm NOT a network engineer and yet IPv6 was covered in 2000 at college. Any silly fucks only talking about IPv6 setup in 2023 for the first time is definitely not a professional and maybe not even amateur.

Give up on this brick wall. It's pointless and a waste of all our time. If someone pays him for advice, they're fucking stupid and deserve it.

jsg

@emgh said:
From my experience, when having fiber through STADSNÄTET (sorry I have no clue what that might be in english, city network?) which maybe the majority of people at least in Sweden have, IPv6 or not is not fully up to the ISP, so I don’t think even a single well-known ISP in Sweden have IPv6 access throughout

Ooops ...

Well, maybe STADSNÄTET hasn't been informed yet that basically all Scandinavia is an IPv6 heaven and that it's working perfectly.
But to be fair, twelfe99, a scandinavian carrier and one of the largest in the world, also still has considerably more IP4 peering partners than IPv6, so, as hundreds of partners do not know yet that basically all Scandinavia is an IPv6 heaven and that it's working perfectly and even twelve99 hasn't been informed that IP4 is only for the "not evolved" and shouldn't be used anymore, there seems to be some kind of hiccup somewhere.
Those bloody "not evolved" IP4 users still are a significant majority.

@rcy026 said:

@jsg said:

@rcy026 said:
Scandinavia has been in the top when it comes to infrastructure for the past 30 years. Having 20 million people spread across a pretty vast area gives totally different challenges then having 10 million people concentrated in one city. Still, we have some of the best infrastructure in the world.

>

That doesn't change the fact that ca. 20 mio vs. 7.5 or 8 bln is less than a third of 1% -> insignifcant.

Well, to use your logic, I only know one person that hates ipv6 and that is you. That's one person out of 8 billion, so your opinion is totally insignificant. You see the flaw in your logic? You can not just assume that just because someone uses a small percentage of a whole, everything outside of that percentage is completely different.

That's double nonsense. (a) I don't hate IPv6, I merely refuse to use that crap and let others know about it. (b) You can't put your (1 single person) "knowledge" of just one IPv6 "hater" -next to- objective facts.

And yes, I only have experience of northern Europe, but that does not automagically mean the south is different.

Sure, but it also doesn't automagically mean that the South of Europe is very similar, let alone equal.

So it is ok for you to assume that the entire world is like your little corner, but it is not ok for me to make an educated guess about facts in a field I worked my entire life in and have experience of in several countries?

Uhm, That was not the point.

I take what you said as truthful - but still that's insignificant not only on the global scale but even on the european scale. Basically it boils down to "well, there are some small corners in the world where IPv6 seems to be significant".

Not really. There may be small corners in the world where it is not significant, as is evident by your view of the world. But outside of your little corner and among the big international carriers, nobody is doing anything that does not run on ipv6 today. You might not like it, and luckily you do not have to care until it hits your little corner of the world as well, but it's a fact.

As you repeatedly tried and try to make this personal, let me set it straight:

• I wrote, I quote "what you said ... insignificant ...". Kindly read what you mean to criticize.
• "among the big international carriers, nobody is doing anything that does not run on ipv6 today." - do you have evidence for such a global statement, or is that just an extrapolation of what you saw in a couple of countries?

It's common sense. Big companies are not stupid, they would not build networks that are completely obsolete in 10 years time.

(a) provably wrong, (b) you ignore the big companies who did not yet switch to IPv6.

jsg said:
We may turn it every which way we like but fact is that, at least for the time being, Europe is but a small light compared to across the Atlantic. We have achieved a few "honorable mentions" like e.g. a few leading and very major IXs, but largely the internet still is pretty much defined from across the ocean.

>

(b) I wasn't talking about size.

Then what were you talking about? The Japanese have the speed record, Singapore have the best infrastructure, eastern Europe is the cheapest. How is the internet "defined from across the ocean" if not by mere size?

That may well be but that's not what "definition" is about. And btw. most of those countries are, uhm how to put it politely, closely linked to the United States of a part of a part of America.

So, we IP4 users are "not [yet] evolved". Because we don't blindly follow a weirdo sect that failed go gain more than marginal significance during over 20 years

I purposely worded that to make it sound negative, I thought I made that perfectly clear but obviously I did not. But really, does it differ that much from your "weirdo sect" or "brainfarts"? You can use insulting language but I may not? Got it.

I admit that my wording regarding the IPv6 topic is sometimes a bit harsh, but then, it's not use IPv6 refusers who want to basically force something new, unproven, and known to be troublesome upon the world.
But anyway, I get your point; both sides should strive for civility in our discussions.

And yet again, nothing says that the rest of the world is different. You seem completely convinced that every part of the world but yours is totally insignificant, are you sure you are not American?

To make that perfectly clear: Yes, my part of the world, along with the US of a part of a part of America - still - is the one which largely defined the rules for the world, incl. and especially the internet. But I'm not at all pleased with that. As far as I'm concerned I (personally) consider other countries and regions as the relevant points of orientation.

You seem completely fixated with the fact that I talk about my reality, but isn't that exactly what you do too? You base your opinion on your experience of your part of the world, why am I not allowed to do the same? As soon as I say something you go "but that's just your part of the world, it's insignificant" while as soon as you say something I should accept it as a universal truth? It does not work like that.

(a) I do not say that anything you say is irrelevant, but you see, the IP this or that version is of concern to the whole world, so it does not seem wise to be based on only experience in one, and a very small one at that, part of the world. If my experience were as geographically limited as yours I wouldn't trust it either in that matter.
Btw. I do not consider you an idiot. I take you to be an intelligent guy with lots of experience who unfortunately is misguided in one, albeit an important one, matter.
(b) you do not know my experience. I'll give you a hint: I was in a quite senior position on the other side of the world (Far East) and I co-designed and ran a mid-size (back then large) DC and co-operated two mid-size ISPs.

As for "And ipv6 works, that's a fact not even you can deny" I suggest you read the blog post linked in the OP. And that guys is pro IPv6 - yet he seems to strongly disagree with you.

No, he does not, not in any way.
See, this is one thing I really dislike about every discussion about ipv6. People can not differentiate between problems with the protocol itself and problems due to other people not supporting the protocol. ...

I interrupt because, you see, one couldn't care less. In summary, IPv6 doesn't work properly and reliably. Besides, IMO you are wrong even re the protocol itself - but who cares. IPv6 isn't easily, well, and fully usable, period.

I totally agree with him, it's a shame. We've had 30 years and people are still refusing to let go of the old. Again, I'm not trying to insult you, but anyone that thinks that ip4 is the future is stupid.

You are not insulting me because I do not consider IP4 to be "the future". But a far more important point is your deduction. Get it already, it's not the peoples fault, it's "yours"!
Even I would have accepted and, albeit grumbling, switched to IPv6 if it at least worked. "worked" not as in "the protocol" but as in "plug the device in, edit/set max 3 lines/values of config and you can surf/ssh/whatever to any and every server (just like with IP4)".
Next thought step: Why, bloody why, didn't IPv6 find the acceptance of say > 90% of people and companies? The answer is basically "because IPv6 did/does not deliver what people and companies want". IMO one "deadly" error you made was to change too much too liberally; another one is that you unnecessarily went 128 bits which is a major - and hence cost - problem.

Counter-example: Had you just extended the address space within bounds of reason (to 64 bits) and not made other changes too ... >90% of people would have accepted it.

And it's not "internal networks". Set up peering with a major carrier today and they will do it via ipv6. Carriers are even building MPLS on ipv6 to be able to move ip4 traffic over their ipv6 networks.

Current state with, to pick a very major scandinavian carrier example, twelve99 ("fka Telia"):

BGP says:
IPv4 Peers: 2,328
IPv6 Peers: 1,581

Most of them being professionals/companies/other carriers I presume.

A majority if the ip4 peers are probably 10-20 years old.

"probably"? But even if that assumption were correct, twelve99 still would have about 50% more IP4 peering partners than IPv6 ones.

Get figures for new peers over the last 2 or 3 years, if they look the same I will give you a point.

Nope. I don't. Among others for the reason that "you" (the IPv6 fan crowd) had not 2 or 3 but well over 20 years.

I find it immensely funny that even though the IPv6 sectarians really tried hard to force their crap on us and even have a funny RFC6540 ... a very significant majority of users of all kind, incl. large corporations, even ones owned by Microsoft, hehe ... still use IP4.

"Still use ip4" is kind of a strange way of phrasing it, it implies that just because they use ip4 they do not use ipv6. I assume you are referring to Github. They do use ipv6 already, just not on all services. However, they have publicly announced that they are working on it.

"are working on it" ~ it's not really important to them -and/or- it's not easy.

I've spent my last 10 years as a professional basically doing nothing but building networks with ipv6 and it is just so much better then ip4, so hearing you call it a "brainfart" just makes me feel sorry for you. If it was a brainfart I assure you that I would have noticed during the last decade. But I haven't, because it just works and it is a lot better then ip4. It's not perfect, but neither is ip4.

That means nothing, it's a just a subjective personal view by an IPv6 fan.

I've tried to explain this to you before, but here we go again. I'm not a "fan" of ipv6, just as I'm not a "fan" of gasoline just because I use it in my car.
I'm a network technician, I build networks with whatever technology is available. It is my job to give my customers the best networks available, and right now that means giving them a future-proof investment by making them use ipv6 and ip4. If there was an ipv7 or ipv11 or whatever available, I can guarantee that I would be on top of that shit and if it was useful in any way I would probably implement that too. I do not let personal feelings dictate my professional opinion, I'm way too expensive for that.

Classical problem. We techies quite often fail to create things in a way that users grok and like.

"Not perfect"? How about "so crappy that even many who wanted to switch or at least use it more ... gave up cursing".

Again, there is nothing wrong with the protocol itself, and he clearly says so in the article. He did gave up cursing, cursing that we have not gotten further in 20+ years and that adaption is so slow.

At the end of the day I don't give a flying crap about "the protocol". I care about what we can use and how well it works.

And even if by some random chance I wouldn't have noticed, at least some of the worlds major companies that spent billions on it would have.

In fact, many major companies did proper research ... and decided to stick with IP4.

Could you name some major companies that have decided to never implement ipv6?

No. Because that's not how companies usually tick. They tick like "do we implement IPv6 (sometimes quite soon)?". If the answer is "no" they often look at the question again later.
And there are indeed many, whose answer was - and in many cases still is - "no".

Or are we again making the assumption that just because someone is still using ip4 they are not using ipv6? That reasoning makes you sound like the people that does not believe in evolution because "if we came from monkeys, why are there still monkeys"?

IMO that's not a sensible game, because the whole story for the IPv6 crowd is not to make the world use it along with IP4 but rather to replace IP4 completely.

There is still one major hurdle for ipv6, just one category that does not support ipv6 and that will take a lot of work and time to overcome. Know what it is? Zealots like you.

Nope, a significant majority of users world-wide. Plus a significant percentage of people who tried IPv6 and found it to be crap.

And again, found ipv6 to be crap or the slow adoption rate to be crap? Big difference.

Sorry, but "the protocol itself is great!" didn't make IPv6 successful and will continue to fail. Besides 128-bit addresses are like "hungry people need multiple 40-ton trucks with food every hour!".

ahnlak

@jsg said:
... I don't hate IPv6, I merely refuse to use that crap and let others know about it...

You do hear yourself, right?

@jsg said:
I interrupt because, you see, one couldn't care less. In summary, IPv6 doesn't work properly and reliably. Besides, IMO you are wrong even re the protocol itself - but who cares. IPv6 isn't easily, well, and fully usable, period.

Yes it is. I use it every day. I'm using it right now.

Maounique

@jsg said: Sorry, but "the protocol itself is great!" didn't make IPv6 successful and will continue to fail.

IPv6 IS successful as is the human inertia. Is it still working for most stuff with a lot of patches and workarounds? Why change? We go for the proven and stable, IPv6 is too new and untested. Then the accountant comes and says we are spending x amount on IPs every month, are you sure that is needed? And so far those numbers have been pretty low, but they are doubling every few years if not yearly. Even when you own legacy allocations, it would be a great deal to sell those and make tons of cash out of nothing.

So, yeah, keep paying for nothing, literally, and then come to explain how that is the way to do business. I am okay with that.

Arkas

@TimboJones said: jsg is easily the most ignorant and obtuse LET user.

Please avoid direct attacks on other members. This shouldn't be a personal attack, please just use the facts.

kait

You are all wrong.

https://twitter.com/ThePrimeagen/status/1690066519680524288

rcy026

@Maounique said:

@rcy026 said: However, they have publicly announced that they are working on it.

You know, I freely admit I have trouble understanding what the actual fuck is so complicated in assigning an IPv6 to your reverse proxy in front of your web servers? Or to the whole kit and caboodle for that matter?

Not only jsg but other people too were talking about how this is complicated.
I could understand that only in the case in which your router is from 20+ years ago and doesn't know IPv6 and there is no firmware available to teach it, but even then I could patch in a software router (because we are supposed to only have 1% of our users using v6, right, so there won't be any problem with the trickle, even a plastic consumer router should be able to do it...)

Seriously, though, if I were github, where would the problems arise? I admit I never managed such a big network and there are probably some aspects I miss, it is not all just scalability, after some [insert large number here] concurrent users going dual-stack poses extra problems and I am curious what they could be.

Not arguing, I would be interested to hear from the actual pros what were the insurmountable costs in going dual-stack that they met.

This is something that has baffled me for a long time.
Ipv6 is not complicated, if you have even a basic understanding of networking you should be able to figure it out in an afternoon. I have actually taught classes in ipv6 and even people that I would describe as stupid has been able to grasp it without too much effort.
I'm not saying that getting Github on ipv6 is a piece of cake, but they are the people that run Github for crying out loud, there is no they should not be able to do it. So I really can not figure out what the problem is. The users have been begging for it for a decade and Github keep promising that they are working on it but still nothing happens. Most of their infrastructure already runs ipv6, but the repos don't. Even their own documentation states things like "Please note that Github is gradually rolling out support for ipv6" but still nothing seems to happen.
Projects are actually moving from Github to Gitlab or Codeberg due to the lack of ipv6, and even if its a marginal amount of users it would be so easy for Github to simply fix the issue, but they don't.
If someone has some insight into this I would love to hear it, because it just baffles me.

rcy026

@jsg said:

I cut a lot of text where we are obviously just going back and forth and getting nowhere.

I admit that my wording regarding the IPv6 topic is sometimes a bit harsh, but then, it's not use IPv6 refusers who want to basically force something new, unproven, and known to be troublesome upon the world.

But this I have to question.
Ipv6 is not new, its close to 30 years old.
Ipv6 is not unproven, it is used all over the world and has been for decades.
Ipv6 is not "known to be troublesome", everyone that I has ever talked to that is qualified to have an opinion about advanced networking have no problem at all with ipv6, on the contrary it is widely regarded to be a very well designed protocol with few drawbacks. Of course there are people that dislikes it, but they are in such a small minority they are (and I am intentionally using your favorite word here) insignificant.

But anyway, I get your point; both sides should strive for civility in our discussions.

Totally agree, and with some minor sidesteps in the heat of the moment I do feel that we both at least try.

rcy026

@TimboJones said:
jsg is easily the most ignorant and obtuse LET user. He's been harping on and on about this for years and ignores all arguments for IPV6 adoption. He refuses to even educate himself on the matter, constantly repeating easily disputed arguments.

He's NOT a software or hardware developer.
He's NOT a Network Engineer or architect.
He's not qualified by any college/university in any relevant area.

He's a whining little bitch who's main complaint is typing more characters because he's the laziest fucking bitch in the world. Learns something once and that's it, no further education and advancement, the worst kind of useless person.

I'm NOT a network engineer and yet IPv6 was covered in 2000 at college. Any silly fucks only talking about IPv6 setup in 2023 for the first time is definitely not a professional and maybe not even amateur.

Give up on this brick wall. It's pointless and a waste of all our time. If someone pays him for advice, they're fucking stupid and deserve it.

Actually, while I strongly disagree with jsg in this particular matter, I also have to strongly disagree with you here.

First of all I would not call jsg ignorant. Stubborn, self-centered and a bit of a bully sometimes, absolutely, but the guy is clearly not stupid.
With all due respect, it would be very difficult to find a longtime user of LET that would not use the same words to describe you, so I would be careful before I threw the first rock.

Second, you should not have to be a developer, engineer or architect or have a degree in anything to be allowed to have an opinion. Networking may not be jsg's area of expertise, but he knows enough to be able to carry an opinion. I am the first to admit that even tough networking without a doubt is my area of expertise, some of jsg's arguments have actually made me reconsider some of my earlier standpoints. I'm not saying he changed them, but he made me reconsider them. And that is something that can not be said about most "experts" in the area.

And lastly, what the fuck is the point of a forum if not discussion? If we all agreed on everything this would be the most boring place on the internet. The sole reason I come here is for discussions and drama. If nobody questioned me and my opinions and I was not allowed to disagree with people I do not agree with, there would be absolutely no point in coming here. I absolutely love the fact that it does not matter how sure I am that I am right, someone will still disagree with me, question my statements and make me argue my point. That's the beauty of discussions, the sole reason for having them. If I can not make my point across to someone who completely disagrees with me, then I take that as a sign that I need to reconsider my standpoint.
Yes, jsg is a brick wall, especially when it comes to ipv6. I've butted my head against this wall many times before and will probably do it many times again, but I really do not care. I highly doubt any one of us will ever back down so only time will tell who is right and before that happens we will probably have this discussion again many times over. But that's what forums are for.

TimboJones

@rcy026 said:

@TimboJones said:
jsg is easily the most ignorant and obtuse LET user. He's been harping on and on about this for years and ignores all arguments for IPV6 adoption. He refuses to even educate himself on the matter, constantly repeating easily disputed arguments.

He's NOT a software or hardware developer.
He's NOT a Network Engineer or architect.
He's not qualified by any college/university in any relevant area.

He's a whining little bitch who's main complaint is typing more characters because he's the laziest fucking bitch in the world. Learns something once and that's it, no further education and advancement, the worst kind of useless person.

I'm NOT a network engineer and yet IPv6 was covered in 2000 at college. Any silly fucks only talking about IPv6 setup in 2023 for the first time is definitely not a professional and maybe not even amateur.

Give up on this brick wall. It's pointless and a waste of all our time. If someone pays him for advice, they're fucking stupid and deserve it.

Actually, while I strongly disagree with jsg in this particular matter, I also have to strongly disagree with you here.

First of all I would not call jsg ignorant. Stubborn, self-centered and a bit of a bully sometimes, absolutely, but the guy is clearly not stupid.
With all due respect, it would be very difficult to find a longtime user of LET that would not use the same words to describe you, so I would be careful before I threw the first rock.

Ignorant doesn't mean stupid and that clearly wasn't implied. I specifically said he refuses to educate himself on IPv6. I'll repeat, he's intentionally ignoring the problems with IPV4 and the solutions provided by IPv6. Feel free to call me ignorant, I'll be confused of course without an example of ignorance like I did.

Second, you should not have to be a developer, engineer or architect or have a degree in anything to be allowed to have an opinion. Networking may not be jsg's area of expertise, but he knows enough to be able to carry an opinion. I am the first to admit that even tough networking without a doubt is my area of expertise, some of jsg's arguments have actually made me reconsider some of my earlier standpoints. I'm not saying he changed them, but he made me reconsider them. And that is something that can not be said about most "experts" in the area.

I never said he isn't allowed to have an opinion, just that it's worthless because he doesn't know what he's talking about. Why are you reading shit wrong on purpose? You're just derailing the topic further. You do need to be familiar with a topic to talk protocol implementation, ffs. Do you have total amateurs come in and give you advice on your area of expertise? (My friend has a phrase for that, "don't tell Daddy how to fuck" ). Let me give a brain surgeon some of my thoughts on how they should do their fucking job they've trained years in... jsg is like a character from Utopia AU in that he wants his desired outcome without understanding any of the inputs or how the sausage is made.

And lastly, what the fuck is the point of a forum if not discussion? If we all agreed on everything this would be the most boring place on the internet. The sole reason I come here is for discussions and drama. If nobody questioned me and my opinions and I was not allowed to disagree with people I do not agree with, there would be absolutely no point in coming here. I absolutely love the fact that it does not matter how sure I am that I am right, someone will still disagree with me, question my statements and make me argue my point. That's the beauty of discussions, the sole reason for having them. If I can not make my point across to someone who completely disagrees with me, then I take that as a sign that I need to reconsider my standpoint.
Yes, jsg is a brick wall, especially when it comes to ipv6. I've butted my head against this wall many times before and will probably do it many times again, but I really do not care. I highly doubt any one of us will ever back down so only time will tell who is right and before that happens we will probably have this discussion again many times over. But that's what forums are for.

I'm usually the one that tells people this is a discussion forum but I have say again, we've done this IPv6 back and forth at least three deep threads over the years with jsg and he hasn't learned a fucking thing. I guess I completely failed to make that point before since your whole post ignores that complaint. Like completely.

Tl;dr my opinion is it's a waste of time to argue IPv6 with jsg, specifically. Been there, done that. Go read previous threads for same old song and dance.

You believe there's worth in the same argument over and over again. I don't know if you've been involved in previous jsg/IPv6 threads, that will mostly be the reason you may still think there's value STILL arguing IPv6 with jsg if you didn't previously participate.