@leralle Good article. Loads of sense. Wish a real solution was being discussed.

@leralle Interesting and comprehensive take. I do disagree on the NAT thing though. NAT always complicated things and I haven’t been using NAT in IPv4 for 10+ years. Even at home. Yes I’m unsustainably fortunate. What I took away from this is: VoIP is always working. Huge time saver as concerns debugging stuff. Now if proper firewalling wasn’t an issue IPv6 without NAT would be golden (minus the rest of the complexity issues)

@leralle One more thing: The decision to ditch site-local was an unforgivable sin. It would have made dhcpv6 optional. Just run a dns server on the well known address. Even your provider could do that and you could easily and optionally override it with a local resolver. If there still was site-local I’d have adopted v6 by now, but so far? I still fail to see significant benefits other than the unsustainability of living in an IPv4 only network.

Thanks again for the post!

Sign in to participate in the conversation
Mastodon

Server run by the main developers of the project 🐘 It is not focused on any particular niche interest - everyone is welcome as long as you follow our code of conduct!