INET6 -- and why I don't use it

[Michael Gratton]

Hi Jeremy,

On Wed, 2008-03-05 at 08:01 -0800, Jeremy Chadwick wrote:
> * I'm not familiar with the intricacies of the protocol. 

No better time (or way) to learn! Get going!

> * The last I read about IPv6 in mainstream news, there were major
> concerns cited over some of the security aspects of the protocol.

When was the last time you heard anything about IPv4 in the mainstream
news (that wasn't related the approaching address space armageddon)?

> * I have never liked how IPv6 denotes its addresses by using colon-
> delimited hexadecimal strings.

The glib answer would be "and this is why we have the DNS". Yes it is
more typing and/or talking, but that's the price to pay for a larger
address space. Anyway, just do what we do when relating v4 addresses:
don't pronounce the delimiter.

Bonus points to the first person who coins the name of the double-colon.
I vote for "bam":

  "What's that address again?"
  "Err, two oh oh one, aye bee oh nine, bam oh oh oh five."

> * Consumer ISPs here in the States do not "pass packets" -- you aren't
> given a raw pipe; you're given a physical transport with IPv4 service.

As others have pointed out, ISPs over there are staring to get in on the
act, behind Asia. As I said, no better time to learn! 

> * The "we're running out of address space" argument doesn't hold
> much ground with me.  Yes, it's getting tight, but it's not THAT tight.

Only because of NAT, and...

> * NAT with IPv4 appears to be "solving" most of the address space issues
> in this day and age.

No. NAT is evil. If you have ever been at a site that uses the same
private range as on the other side of the VPN you're using, you know
what I mean. There's plenty of other reasons why NAT is a terrible kluge
that needs to go away ASAP. I think you mentioned many of them.

> * None of my employers (sans my current, Microsoft) have ever bothered
> implementing IPv6 on their networks.

For many, many reasons, which are slowly going away.

> Sufficient?

I'd argue otherwise. :)

/Mike

-- 
Michael Gratton <michael at quuxo.com>     
Quuxo Software <http://web.quuxo.com/>
-------------- next part --------------
A non-text attachment was scrubbed...
Name: not available
Type: application/pgp-signature
Size: 189 bytes
Desc: This is a digitally signed message part
Url : http://lists.freebsd.org/pipermail/freebsd-stable/attachments/20080306/c65a8415/attachment.pgp