Comment Re:IPv6 Mess and NAT64 and your web server (Score 1) 551
MOD PARENT UP.
MOD PARENT UP.
Mod parent up....
The mere presence of kludges like NAT64 and DNS64 (and these have to be proven useful) points to the fact that IPv6 is misdesigned, which is the article's complaint, and it's a rightful one.
Not so fast:
http://cr.yp.to/djbdns/ipv6mess.html
I don't agree at all with this article. The author claims that IPv6 should have been designed as an extension to IPv4 so that IPv4 and IPv6 hosts can communicate with each other directly. This is fundamentally impossible. The IPv4 host can only send packets to IP addresses with 32 bit. Any longer number is not understood by the IPv4 host. In order to make this work, the IP stack of every IPv4 host would need to be updated. Guess what has to be done to have IPv4 and IPv6 dual stack? The IP stack of every IPv4 host needs to be updated!
That's right. IPv4 should have been able to talk to IPv6 and vice/versa. Nobody wants to upgrade as long as IPv6 remains useless (because it can't talk to IPv4, and IPv4 can't talk to IPv6). The IPv6 design requires every server administrator to upgrade to IPv6 (but where is the incentive for this massive undertaking?) while it remains "useless" (since few clients have IPv6). Few clients have any incentives to upgrade to IPv6 because very few servers have IPv6. It's a really shitty situation, thanks to a shitty design.
IPV6 has implementation issues, AND it has some engineering mistakes built in. it's not that simple.
You don't get it - IPv6 itself is a misengineered piece of crap.
Not so fast:
http://cr.yp.to/djbdns/ipv6mess.html
http://marc.info/?l=openbsd-misc&m=128822984018595&w=2
Agreed. Mod parent up.
The hardest part of climbing the ladder of success is getting through the crowd at the bottom.
