Re: IPv6 was Re: www.irtf.org unreachable?

[Marco Davids <[e-mail]>]

Op 13-11-18 om 15:29 schreef Martin Rex:

> I'm living in Germany and without IPv6 -- and there exists nothing
> interesting that isn't available through IPv4.

You are aware of the fact that in order to achieve that, we had to come 
op with a couple of nasty tricks, are you? Things such as NAT, 
Carrier-Grade NAT and STUN.

Why? Well, because we have run out of IPv4. We have to create hacks in 
order to keep IPv4 usable and that is a kind of silly when there is a 
much more appropriate solution readily available.

>> I just wanted to point that that 'no-one uses IPv6'
>> is not accurate anymore in the present decade.

That is a fact.

> The vast majority of users in Germany are using IPv6 by accident or
> ISP mischief, but certainly not because they wanted it or asked for it,
> let alone needed it.

Users don't ask for IP, whether it be v4 or v6 for that matter. They ask 
for 'internet' or 'cat pictures' or what have you.

User demand is not a reliable indicator when it comes to these kind of 
technologies 'under the hood'.

>> It will be a couple more years (but not that much longer)
>> until IPv4-only service feels like analog cellular.
> 
> Right now, IPv6-only feels like you're in a desert.

You might me surprised to see how much content is already available via 
IPv6 (albeit 'sap.com' seems to be lagging behind a bit).

> We're still *FAR*AWAY* from being able to reach everything via IPv6,
> while you can get everywhere just fine with IPv4-only.

Not 'just fine'. It's horrible to get it working sometimes. Things like 
port forwarding relly are sub-optimal hacks. We could do so much better.

-- 
Marco