Every HackerNews post about IPv6 has some of the worst, most privileged, idiotic, vibe-coded, proprietary, ignorant, 16bit, capital-guzzling, unicorn takes I've ever known on the subject:

- IPv6 addresses are
too hard to remember.
So? You're not meant to remember addresses, that's why we have DNS, write it down, literally a non-issue.

- IPv6 is confusing and I don't want to learn something new.
That's a personal issue buddy, either start reading or get left behind, that's what you said about AI right? More things than you depend on this transition.

- NATing has solved the IP limit problem so there's no point.
NATing is a plaster slapped onto brain bleed, easy and cheap, but ineffective, it causes a wide range of usability problems, such as blanket IP bans, restrictions on self-hosting, connectivity issue for VPNs both private and corporate.
To make matters worse, the effects are significantly worse in poorer countries, while Europe, China and the USA have a bounty of IPv4s to use (though China's still aren't enough), India has been on critically short supply for a while now with reports of
multiple NATed network layers being issued. Imagine if you got banned from Valo because your neighbour 4 districts away got caught cheating.

- We've been trying for 40 years and it hasn't worked so let's give up.
OK, we're going to give up on solving world hunger too then because that's clearly not getting anywhere, and the energy crisis too while we're at it, just shut it all down.
Just because you personally haven't seen the progress or felt its effects doesn't mean its not happening, people smarter than you have been working on this before you were born, and at this rate might continue to work on it after you switch careers to Goose Farming.

- IPv6 hasn't worked so let's just make IPv7.
Insane take, despite how it looks, IPv6 support is extremely widespread and ready to go, the reluctance of big tech and ISPs is purely due to the cost implication and lack of enforcement, creating a brand new spec now would enforce another 40 year delay just to assuage your own personal opinion.

- IPv6 is a security risk because the router isn't NATing.
Misunderstanding of what NATing does. Even with a public-facing IP on every device, ports are still protected by the router's firewall.

- IPv6 is a privacy issue because now you can easily identify every device in a home by its public IP.
A valid concern,
if it hadn't been identified and resolved with the Privacy Extensions to SLAAC that randomises your IP address after a set time period, mitigating the problem to that of your NATed IPv4 Public IP, if not making it more private by muddying the telemetry waters.

#ipv6 #networking
Privacy Extensions for IPv6 SLAAC - Internet Society

Whereas IPv4 had two basic methods for obtaining an IP address, IPv6 has three. Static configuration is basically the same in both protocols, although less relevant for IPv6 given the length of the address. DHCP is also there for both protocols, and IPv6 DHCPv6 is described in RFC 3315. Introducing SLAAC The new method that […]

Internet Society
@Baa as much as I agree with all of this, these arguments are all worthless if you can't make a compelling business case to management.

@silhouette @Baa

🤦
Ok,

A further nonsense point:

IPv6 has no killer app.

@tschaefer

> IPv6 has no killer app.

DirectAccess could have been.
However companies could not deploy it while their employees' ISP (or the public Wi-Fi they connected to) were not IPv6-enabled.

Unfortunately, there can't be a killer-app while the lower layers are not ready.

@Baa

@ledeuns @tschaefer We use DirectAccess.
Sometimes people's Windows copy downgrades from Enterprise to Pro and Direct Access gets disabled.
We then can't access the machine to fix it and they have to bring it into the office.

So when it works it's decent but MS have sabotaged it