Reply to post: Re: if at all

Asia’s internet registry APNIC finds about 50 million unused IPv4 addresses behind the sofa

Amos

Re: if at all

> they put too much unnecessary nonsense ion ipv6 and tried to persuade people it was a good thing.

That can be said of IPv4.

However, the truth is the "they" you are referring to are not IPv6 people. "They" are a host of IPv4 advocates trying to make IPv6 behave like IPv4 when such behaviour is counter productive and inefficient. As a result there have been a huge number of extension, compatibility, address translation, address mapping, address re-assignment, and tunneling specifications defined. Each used briefly then thrown away when the "IPv4 way" proved, time and again to be unnecessary or worse than the originally defined "IPv6 way".

> no nat by design

That can be said of IPv4.

NAT is an extension in both IPv4 and IPv6. It is largely unused because once admin take the step to migrate they find out how useless the IPv4 types of NAT really are in IPv6 networks.

> every thing publicly addressable by design

False.

The IPv4 core specification defines all IPs as globally routable.

IPv6 core specification defines several ranges which must never be permitted through routers.

> the ip address being derived from the MAC address permitting device tracking by design (ok mainly addressed now)

Link-local address allocation is such a popular feature it got back-ported to IPv4 despite major performance loss on allocation, issues with IPv4 not coping with multiple IPs per machine interface, and the 169/8 range being globally routable adding security issues the IPv6 dedicated private range does not have.

You also aware of a little old protocol called ARP? The one which puts the word 'address' in the term "MAC address".

> slaac

IPv4 has the same feature. Its called DHCP static address assignment, and is surprisingly popular with IPV4 admin.

IPv6 just removes several layers of complexity and dependency on DHCP servers.

> extensible headers

The great failing of IPv4. Fixed at last. No more need to, how did you put it, "bolt things around the standard".

> etc etc etc

Do continue please. So far all we can see is a list of common myths.

> the simplicity of ipv4 has ensured it has survived longer unexpected as we've learnt to bolt things around the standard rather than in the standard.

IPV6 is much, much simpler than IPv4. It is the great expanse of legacy IPv4-only software and hardware around the world combined with misinformation from IPv4-focussed people like yourself which is keeping IPV4 alive. IPv6 is a mature protocol, in so far as any network protocol ever is.

POST COMMENT House rules

Not a member of The Register? Create a new account here.

  • Enter your comment

  • Add an icon

Anonymous cowards cannot choose their icon

Biting the hand that feeds IT © 1998–2021