Champagne anybody?

[chemlud]

https://www.heise.de/news/APNIC-Chefwissenschaftler-IPv6-Einfuehrung-wohl-obsolet-9995140.html

***party***

[Patrick M. Hausen]

What a moron.

[chemlud]

...what has been seen can't be made unseen... :-D

[Bob.Dig]

I think, it is clickbait. What that guy actually said according to this article, it is not what the heading implies.

[mooh]

The article is referring to the situation in the Asia-Pacific-Region that is largely dominated by China and India.

China is well on its way to IPv6. Mobile traffic is overwhelmingly IPv6 already. Recently, the government mandated the move to IPv6 even for the if-it-aint-broke-dont-fix-it IPv4 networks.

In India, double and even triple NAT within ISP networks used to be the norm. That's why they have moved to ~50% IPv6 already, but for many customers a new router is a significant investment and thus postponed until they don't have a choice.

In Germany, there are major ISPs that sell current model business routers that can't do prefix delegation in 2024. forum.opnsense.org has no IPv6 address while opnsense.org does...

The USA got the lions share of available IPv4 address space. That's why many ISP and network equipment makers simply didn't bother to support IPv6. They didn't feel the squeeze. Ubiquiti is making essential IPv6 features user configurable in their software only now.

[chemlud]

ipv6 deserves to die. no solutions, only problems.

[Patrick M. Hausen]

ipv6 deserves to die. no solutions, only problems.

You mistyped IPv4! 

[Bob.Dig]

ipv6 deserves to die. no solutions, only problems.

Dynamic IPv6 needs to die.

[Monviech (Cedrik)]

Most issues with IPv6 are self inflicted by ISPs doing random weird garbage and not adhering to a common standard.

Most of the issues I always read are: "But my ISP wants to have it this way or that way for no reason".

For example I have a static IPv6 /56 prefix from Deutsche Telekom since 6 years and never had any IPv6 issues.

[chemlud]

All I read here can be summarized: ipv6 helps nobody to solve a problem, but results in signifcant problems. NAT is for me a feature, not a bug.

So: ipv6 deserves to die quickly. and for ever...

[tiermutter]

What a moron.

+1

[tiermutter]

Most issues with IPv6 are self inflicted by ISPs doing random weird garbage and not adhering to a common standard.

also +1

[tiermutter]

All I read here can be summarized: ipv6 helps nobody to solve a problem, but results in signifcant problems. NAT is for me a feature, not a bug.

So: ipv6 deserves to die quickly. and for ever...

That's a -1

Me really happy to have v6 for VPN purposes since I am behind CGNAT.
For sure me can pay high amounts of money to get a public IP... but why, thanks IPv6?

[chemlud]

Why have a VPN on an inherently unsafe platform? If you can't control the OS and can't be root, it's not your device in the first place. It's like band-aid on a ruptured aorta...

It's political, ipv6. ;-)

[Patrick M. Hausen]

IPv6 gives you globally routable addresses at your home or office so you can control all the devices and e.g. VPN connections. It brings back the end to end principle upon which the Internet was built.