Thinking about our passive exposure to IPv6 issues

Re:Thinking about our passive exposure to IPv6 issues by JohnFen on Wednesday April 26, 2023 @04:12PM (#35719332)

> After all, the writing has been on the wall for over two decades.

That IPv6 has been around so long and is still not ubiquitous means that writing is faded and partially obscured by graffiti.

[ Parent | on HN ]

Re:Thinking about our passive exposure to IPv6 issues by imoverclocked on Wednesday April 26, 2023 @04:33PM (#35719562)

Anything as large and hodgepodge as the Internet isn’t going to change in a day. I’d say that the writing has been kept fresh [1] and the underlying need hasn’t gone away.

[1] https://www.google.com/intl/en/ipv6/statistics.html

[ Parent | on HN ]

Re:Thinking about our passive exposure to IPv6 issues by JohnFen on Thursday April 27, 2023 @12:30PM (#35730586)

25 years is a whole lot longer than a day!

> the underlying need hasn’t gone away

That's 100% true. I think almost everyone sees the problem that IPv6 is addressing.

[ Parent | on HN ]

Re:Thinking about our passive exposure to IPv6 issues by robertlagrant on Thursday April 27, 2023 @03:22PM (#35733271)

> IPv6 is addressing

Exactly!

[ Parent | on HN ]

Re:Thinking about our passive exposure to IPv6 issues by xvilka on Wednesday April 26, 2023 @09:52PM (#35722304)

Biggest pain point in adoption are lazy ISPs who actively resist the transition. Once it's mandated, like in India or China, transition happens very quickly.

[ Parent | on HN ]

Re:Thinking about our passive exposure to IPv6 issues by JohnFen on Thursday April 27, 2023 @11:53AM (#35729933)

I don't think it's lazy ISPs, I think it's economics. I think it's that the cost/benefit ratio of making the change isn't clearly favorable to making the change.

[ Parent | on HN ]