Why isn't ipv6 being mass adopted yet? They were shilling this crap for over 10 years now

>when DNS is down
Learn to read, faggot.

Plus, there's legacy environments where a DNS rollout doesn't make sense and IPv6 serves absolutely no fucking purpose outside of forcing the company to rebuy the entirety of their production machinery.

>at work
>no bookmarks

the absolute state of Jow Forums

This works until we are at another of our locations because of some hardware shit, then get a call that requires us to remote in. So we grab a worker's thin client and type in the IPs that we need.

>dns is down
>blames ipv6

How the fuck can your dns go down? what kind of shithole do you work at? Never heard of HA?

Go and get a raspberry pi and use it as a backup. fucks sake.

>Learn to read, faggot.
turns out I spent about as much time reading your post as you did trying to figure out a solution to your problem, guess we're both faggots then

This reminded me I didn't have my IPv4 set in my torrent client.

The addresses are too long. People can memorize ipv4 addresses easily, not so with ipv6

Ive been told most of china has ipv6

Don't need it for my natted network.

>Never heard of HA?
We don't have that fancy shit in general.

We don't have DNS at two thirds of our locations and none of our thin clients are connected to our domain. There's no ticketing system and documentation is done in a variety of file types.
We also hacked a document management system to do some functions of accounting software.

I'm not exactly acquiring best practices, but every member of the IT department has some form of job security - as in, shit only they understand. And I've only been here half a year or so.

it sucks that ipsec was taken away from ipv6 requirement

2001::1
2001::2
2001::3

Not hard

ipsec is insecure trash, glad that pile of shit is gone

>:3
kys

i guess its biggest security issue is complexity. it's not easy to set up.

No it's biggest issue is that it's security theater half-written by the NSA and provides literally no benefit despite causing significant slowdowns during handshake.

>ipv4
>ipv6
What are these? I only know them as names I see 5 layers down the rabbit hole when I'm furious and my internet isn't working.

Attached: 1533763478907.jpg (434x430, 40K)

back to /v/ kiddo

>>>/normie/

Because it isn't actually needed. NAT means IPv4 is still viable for most ISPs and users, so why bother switching?

Stop bullying me
Every time I try to learn about networking on my won I end up more ignorant than when I started

Attached: 1532223251565.jpg (770x702, 65K)

ipv6 has security options, it doesn't need ipsec

baka baka

Attached: 775.png (271x293, 122K)

ok you want to learn?
start reading:
en.wikipedia.org/wiki/IPv4_address_exhaustion
follow the link of any concept you don't understand. soon you'll know what's going on

cr.yp.to/djbdns/ipv6mess.html

Infrastructure upgrades are always a super slow transition. There's no reason to ISPs to invest in IPv6 until they're more or less forced by the government to do so.

It's the same reason why most doctors and hospitals in the United States didn't adopt ICD-10 until 2015 whereas most of the rest of the world did so in the early 90 and 2000s.

They should've just used IPv5, but the morons just HAD to overengineer it as much as possible.

tell me moar

Attached: bb.jpg (700x622, 65K)

I learned everything networking-related by using nmap and reading the documentation on the side.

>tfw there's literally enough ipv6 addresses to give every grain of sand on planet earth its own address, followed by doing the same thing on a few thousand other planets.

It's not mass adopted yet because we need everyone on board and all hands on deck for this. All ISPs and other global BGP peers need to upgrade *all* their IP stacks on *all* of their hardware and for a lot of countries and parties involved that is apparently still too big a feat, even in anno 2018.

Second, NAT is the devil that also dramatically slowed down mass adoption of IPv6 because it's basically a hack to postpone the fast depletion of available IPv4 address space.

NAT, we hate you. There, I said it.

Third, IPv6 was not designed to be backwards compatible. You could argue the Internet is divided in 2, with some overlap due to some percentage being dual stack IPv4/IPv6.

Fourth, there's still not enough (business) incentive to move to IPv6 because the majority of Internet traffic is still on IPv4. This is basically a catch 22, because in order to gain more incentive, a majority of traffic needs to shift from IPv4 to IPv6, but there isn't enough incentive because only a minority supports IPv6 - are you starting to see a pattern here?

TL;DR: The world sucks and at this point IPv6 costs more money than what corporations like to invest in.

My guess, at this rate, without any significant technological advances, it will take another decade to see a more noticeable shift to IPv6. But we don't live in a technological vacuum and big tech changes happen all the time. And I still have no magic 8 ball I asked Santa for each year so I'm kinda left to my own guesstimates. Damn you, Santa.

IPv4 will coexist alongside IPv6 for a looonngg time, even if the whole industry switched now

It is, it just requires every single device between a source and its destination to be ipv6 compatible for and ipv6 connection proper to exist.

>what is IPAM

What are it’s insecurities?

You could have googled it.
en.wikipedia.org/wiki/IPsec#Alleged_NSA_interference

Yes, he could've, but please refrain from product placement

ok satya

Nice try, FBI. IPv6 isn't even compiled into my kernel, and it never will be...

It's shit, literally just SJW kikery so third world shitters can have their own personal IP address (FUCK OFF!!!!)

Try memorizing an ipv6 address, I fucking dare you.

This guy is legit.

>I dunno how to run my own resolver

because they paid for ipv4 blocks for a certain time and therefore since its already full they are giving NAT ips to the outside by rotating them up until the time pass

>bing is the only alternative to google

"Yeah dude, the game server is hosted at, uh... fuck, the server browser doesn't resolve URLs? Well, it's at... 2607:f8b0:4003:c00::6a:80, no that was two semicolons..."

Mate, I used to remember ten phone numbers back in the day back when we didn't have such fancy address books on our phones. I also used to wait tables and cpuld remember what a table of 10 people ordered up to a few days later.

>what is a resolver

IDC. Just let us buy our own ipv4 address at market price, solves every problem. Poorfags can NAT behind someone else

>proposing NAT
There's a special place in hell for you and your kind

The westernized countries have high adoption rate ~30%. US has ~38% adoption rate. Globally its around 20-25% of the internet users. The numbers have been increasing over the years.

>google.com/intl/en/ipv6/statistics.html

Attached: ipv6.png (992x637, 86K)

>hating NATs
why do networking faggots love the NSA so much?

Its an absurdity. There is no current way, given the laws of our present universe, to even hold the routing table for IPV6 in memory. To combat this, brainlet engineers use absurdly large netmask, which only recreates IPV4/5 in a very awkward and retarded way.

>what is RINA

>IPV5
confirmed for not knowing what the fuck they're talking about

The Royal Institution of Naval Architects, of course

>what is a search engine
en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Recursive_InterNetwork_Architecture_(RINA)

read Computer Networks by Tanenbaum

>Why isn't ipv6 being mass adopted yet?
CGNAT works too good

/thread
You don't want ip6 unless you enjoy all your information being attached to a single ip. Great for govt and hackers though

This guy here.

IPv6 would already be adopted had it been designed to work seamlessly with IPv4. Set aside a 1:1 conversion from existing IPv4 to IPv6 with all netblocks preserved. Every query returns an IPv6 compatible result. This will not be as well-engineered as an abrupt change to a new protocol, but it has the advantage of not requiring any work on the part of the hoi polloi to comply.

>tfw ipv4 is easy to remember ip addresses
>tfw ipv6 is a string of gibberish with letters and numbers and even more confusing

Why didn't they just make ipv6 be the same format but with more bytes? ie: ###.###.###.###.###.###.### instead of this hex or some shit.

If your job requires a task like that and you can't perform it, then the problem is with you.

Nobody said ipv6 has to be static. It has to be white though.

They're what your PC actually connects to.

Hex is easy as fuck and makes the binary conversion easier

>makes the binary conversion easier

I mean, isn't taking a 0-255 number (ie: ipv4), casting to int, and storing as a byte/char a lot easier? Assuming the ip string is valid.

I have a non-NAT public ipv4 address. The trick is to not be stupid.

ipv6 addresses are already in int form, they don't need to be converted from a string.

I've been wondering the same thing, my dude. They've been crying about the finite number of ipv4 addresses (1.1.1.1-255.255.255.255) for fucking EVER and yet not many ISPs offer ipv6, and those that do almost certainly only have it available in limited markets. I got excited TWO years ago when a firmware update on my router/gateway added an ipv6 menu, but then everything was grayed out. Then a few months ago another update actually let me turn on ipv6 and adjust all of the related settings, so I turn it on expecting it to work.... NOPE. No ipv6 lease available because, though my ISP offers ipv6, it's not available in my market yet.

Oh well. As long as my static ipv4 IP is available for my 1Gbps/1Gbps connection for my servers, idgaf.

Last time I checked if I give any programming language a hex string it's not in "int form". It has to be converted to an integer and stored in however many bytes. Even for compile time statics that is what the compiler does for you.

Did you even read what I wrote?
It's hexadecimal which is a number. You can store them in numerical format in an int of capable size. You do not store them in string format so there is no need to convert.

Considering there's enough ip addresses for everyone there's nothing more than internet companies and the govt want than to keep track of everyone like what att already does but easier. There's no reason for it not go be static

The same can be said for for ipv4 since each decimal is one byte. There is no difference here in conversion using your logic.

If you go and type "ping 2001:0db8:85a3:0000:0000:8a2e:0370:7334" "ping" does not immediately know the integer value of "2001". It will have to do a hexadecimal conversation to integer. Have you ever programmed in C before?

>If you go and type "ping 2001:0db8:85a3:0000:0000:8a2e:0370:7334" "ping" does not immediately know the integer value of "2001". It will have to do a hexadecimal conversation to integer. Have you ever programmed in C before?
That's a side effect of ping using text stream-based interfaces, and has literally nothing to do with IPv6. An HTTP client forming packet headers will not need to convert strings.

NAT prolonged IPv4's life

he has a point
once we transition to IPv6, our dependence on DNS will be greater than before
if they get attacked, you'd better have a text file saving all those IPv6 addresses so you can copy and paste them into your browser

Attached: 139306.jpg (309x230, 25K)

>add letters a-z to the current IPV4 naming scheme
>6 gorillion more possible addresses

i.e. "192x.168y.ws0.abcd"

Attached: 1524438606937.png (684x599, 97K)

a-z can't be represented as a number, only a-f can

It can be with a new standard, but that would be beyond retarded.

>not keeping a local dns cache

What is base 36

let's just have our addresses be one digit in base 1024

wait, it hasn't?
all my shit's fine with ipv6 these days
my IP gets detected as ipv6 when I look it up
and I see sites resolve to ipv6 addresses
really, I forgot about the whole issue

there's incentive to be dual-stack and add v6 capability to existing v4 stuff. But there's no incentive to make yourself v6-only, and as long as any significant amount of the internet is v4-only, a powerful disincentive to.

Also they really should have seen this coming. They came along with v6 to relieve the address-exhaustion problem. That benefits people who didn't already have v4 addresses - that is, people not on the internet. People who had v4 addresses and were on the internet were the ones that they wanted to do all the work of adding v6 support, though. Somehow they greybeards were shocked that the internet spent fifteen years saying "Nah".

Takes too long to type an address out.

But anyways, phones are exclusively ipv6 when using cellular networks now.

>phones are exclusively ipv6 when using cellular networks now.
My phone gets a publicly-routable (that is, non-RFC1918) v4, in addition to a v6.

4G uses IPv6

*snap*

>DNS for ipv6 addresses
>will be a million times slower than ipv4
Can't wait

fuck that gay shit! I've turn it off

Attached: Untitled.png (363x468, 10K)