Am I the only one who sees that as the "adult" version of siblings in the back seat: "I'm not touching you, I'm not touching you!".

It's broken because it subverts democratic representation and allows the already fantastically wealthy to get a bit more wealthy at the expense of moving everyone else closer to a situation like East Germany before the fall.

The thing is, it wouldn't just suck for people who know what they're doing. VOIP and some games won't work well that way either. Anything like that needs to be seen as a stopgap only running in parallel with IPv6 deployment. There actually are people claiming that more NATting faster is an actual solution to the problem INSTEAD of IPv6.

It's important not to mistake the bridge to the solution for the actual solution.

One way it might help is that it will make IPv4 feel very much like the second class citizen.

I have no doubt you will have a few id10t's calling rattling off (fake) credentials or actually meaning they managed people who did those things.

But honestly, is it so much to ask that the card flipper automatically ping the customer's router and others on their street before haranguing them to reboot their modem, router, PC, car, cell phone, and cat before even considering the possibility that they might know what they're doing?

Quite honestly, with some very basic training and proper tools, there's no reason any of my connection down calls should take more than 30 seconds to result in a truck roll even if they don't believe a word I say. For that matter, with proper monitoring, the truck should be rolling by the time I call.

To top it off, in addition to better customer satisfaction, they would save money by keeping the calls short and especially by avoiding rolling a contractor truck that has no ability to fix the actual problem on the line.

In the general case, 60+ year old adults DO have the most problem with that simply because computers were not part of their life until recently. There are, as usual, exceptions in the form of people who actually worked in the field and so had access to computers (and a reason to access them) much longer.

It'snot that younger people are somehow smarter or better, it's just that they have had longer (in general) to learn about computers.

The experience thing goes both ways. I found it amusing in a "Kids React" video where they were looking at an old desk phone and were thoroughly confused about things like rotary dialing. The best comment though was that it was too bulky to fit in your backpack, clearly not understanding that it was expected to remain on the desk. Again, not a matter of intelligence or other virtue, just a matter of life experience.

ISPs are a problem here, but so are equipment vendors. There has been a push for v6 over 2 or three hardware upgrade cycles. In theory, the vast majority of hardware in an ISPs plant should be just awaiting configuration. Alas, much of that equipment was only v6 checkbox capable rather than meaningfully capable. Cisco sold a lot of gear that used the custom ASICs to route v4 and the anemic CPU to route v6. It all looked fine in the demo, but falls right down under a production load.

Part of the problem is that the incumbents have massive blocks of IP addresses that they got when they were handed out like water. Back when nobody really looked at the justification section of the IP request. It's the new players that have a real problem getting addresses assigned. Next I suppose there will be a place to attach your latest colonoscopy report.

But it isn't feasible. On the server side, you can stuff a number of virtual websites behind a single IP, but many customers want their own VM (sometimes for very good reasons). There are things other than http(s) on the net.

On the client side, there is a matter of administrative control. Who will own the NAT device that you and your neighbors all sit behind so that you can be NATed behind a single IP? Do you want to leave it up to your ISP if a rule can be added to the NAT box so you can ssh into your network through a selected port? What if your neighbor wants the same port for something else?

It sounds more like a desperate last resort than a real solution. Compared to that kind of pain, upgrading to IPv6 is a no-brainer.

That's interesting. I hereby amend my comment: s/lettuce/regular non-medicated lettuce/

It seems like they didn't so much flip the switch as jam a penny in the fusebox.

6rd is for when you want v6 but your uplink doesn't support it, so not an issue here. The DNS lookup doesn't cause much delay.

Some operations did indeed screw up initially but others got it right first time.

No, but it *IS* what I said that you apparently didn't comprehend the first time.

If you offer coaching for a marathon, you are doing nothing wrong. Nor is the runner who hires you.

Are you one of those people who got suckered into believing that if you zipped the zipped zip file enough iterations you could store everything in just one byte?

There's only so much NAT can do and it's doing it now.

You seem to have fallen into a parallel reality. In mine, all of those Windows versions can and do use IPv6. Even XP if you explicitly configure it in the network settings.

I have Comcast and one day I noticed they were announcing v6 addresses. So I turned off my 6to4 tunnel. I haven't had any problems. Modem running out of RAM is a modem problem, not an IPv6 problem. Perhaps it's old or cheesy.

For the average home user, there is no learning curve. One day their ISP will flip the switch and they'll just go on using the internet as before, unaware that anything changed.