Re:IAB Statement on IPv6
by mitchty on Tuesday November 08, 2016 @08:38AM
(#12900082)
The claim isn't about memory needed to flesh out an entire address range, but resources allocated to things like nat in ipv4.
Why am I trying to fill out in memory an entire /64? More importantly what purpose will doing that for a home network that will at best have 100 nodes even with ipv6? The memory needed to route and track 100 ipv6 nodes vs 100 ipv4 is a rounding error. Even if I enabled privacy extensions the amount of addresses is miniscule.
Nat sucks, end of story, and yes ipv6 requires more memory. It is a bigger address range after all. We also gain a lot of what we lost with ipv4 years ago.
Why am I trying to fill out in memory an entire /64? More importantly what purpose will doing that for a home network that will at best have 100 nodes even with ipv6? The memory needed to route and track 100 ipv6 nodes vs 100 ipv4 is a rounding error. Even if I enabled privacy extensions the amount of addresses is miniscule.
Nat sucks, end of story, and yes ipv6 requires more memory. It is a bigger address range after all. We also gain a lot of what we lost with ipv4 years ago.