My guess is because it scares people. I’ve had other people ask me about it before because they think internal IPv6 is a ridiculous concept and IPv4 just makes so much more sense and is easier to remember. I personally don’t get it but that’s my guess. Dual stack is definitely the easiest way to go tho.
Definitely this. Some people say “IPv6 is complicated” just because the address is longer and uses hexadecimal. They actually know nothing about IPv6, not SLAAC or DHCPv6, not address types, or anything… They just know that it’s long and apparently that’s intimidating enough.
It’s why you actually see people advocating for their “IPv5” solution, aka IPv4-with-2-more-octets. I swear… every month there’s someone saying that.
It is interesting how we’ve got this replacement that while slow is clearly taking off and yet people are still out there trying to re-engineer IPv4 as a replacement. Does that qualify as Stockholm syndrome?
My guess is because it scares people. I’ve had other people ask me about it before because they think internal IPv6 is a ridiculous concept and IPv4 just makes so much more sense and is easier to remember. I personally don’t get it but that’s my guess. Dual stack is definitely the easiest way to go tho.
Definitely this. Some people say “IPv6 is complicated” just because the address is longer and uses hexadecimal. They actually know nothing about IPv6, not SLAAC or DHCPv6, not address types, or anything… They just know that it’s long and apparently that’s intimidating enough.
It’s why you actually see people advocating for their “IPv5” solution, aka IPv4-with-2-more-octets. I swear… every month there’s someone saying that.
Sigh.
It is interesting how we’ve got this replacement that while slow is clearly taking off and yet people are still out there trying to re-engineer IPv4 as a replacement. Does that qualify as Stockholm syndrome?