Hacker News Reader

Comment by Hnrobert42 | Hacker News Reader

Understanding how to read/write an IPv6 address is WAY more complicated than for IPv4. That barrier to entry alone likely prevents a lot of casual adoption. You can come back that IPv6 isn’t all that bad, but the real world adoption rate amongst individuals, even skilled hobbyists, speaks for itself.

View on HN

That is probably the silliest argument against IPv6 you can make. Just look at the header structure and IPv6 becomes pretty clear. And without old cruft that IPv4 is burdened with, I would argue IPv6 is easier to grok.

I'm not that sure on how an adoption rate of 30-35% speaks for itself?

https://www.google.com/intl/ru/ipv6/statistics.html#tab=ipv6...

Maybe you mean that the increase in adoption is too slow, and I agree to that, but change always takes more time than we want, specially when there isn't clear financial incentives.

ipv6 is today older than the internet was when it was invented.

That’s why I said among individuals, specifically hobbyists. Sure, companies that consume vast quantities of IPv4 addresses have an economic incentive to use IPv6, so you will see some adoption. But the reason there is such a long tail is because the cost of adoption (learning it) is higher than the supposed benefits for most individuals and small corporations.

The ideal situation for both IPv4 and IPv6 is to not have to deal with raw addresses. If you are reading IP addresses over the phone or in a ticket to connect to computers on a regular basis, your company did IT on the real cheap and is likely suboptimal in many ways except for amount of money spent on IT.

Reply on news.ycombinator.com