![[personal profile]](https://www.dreamwidth.org/img/silk/identity/user.png){kind=small}
Slashdot had a post this evening about the update to the O'Reilly IPv6 book.
I took a scan of the comments, and got the usual bits - why would someone bother? What's the killer app? We're not running out of oil^Waddresses! While I don't claim to be an expert on the topic, where I have used IPv6 succesfully is on my home network. Where NAT is really annoying for geeks is that our ISPs give us one IP address, make it move around occasionally, and tell us we can't run servers on it. Add an IPv6 tunnel to this, and it doesn't really matter what my ISP thinks. My machines remain trivially addressable. Scanning the address space to try and hammer on the boxes is a non-trivial task and by-and-large, Windows zombies aren't usually talking on IPv6.
This isn't a permanent nirvana, but if general attitudes about v6 are the same as the drones on /., then my little workaround hack will persist for a while.
I took a scan of the comments, and got the usual bits - why would someone bother? What's the killer app? We're not running out of oil^Waddresses! While I don't claim to be an expert on the topic, where I have used IPv6 succesfully is on my home network. Where NAT is really annoying for geeks is that our ISPs give us one IP address, make it move around occasionally, and tell us we can't run servers on it. Add an IPv6 tunnel to this, and it doesn't really matter what my ISP thinks. My machines remain trivially addressable. Scanning the address space to try and hammer on the boxes is a non-trivial task and by-and-large, Windows zombies aren't usually talking on IPv6.
This isn't a permanent nirvana, but if general attitudes about v6 are the same as the drones on /., then my little workaround hack will persist for a while.
