Meh, it doesn’t really offer anything for a home network.
And this is why it really hasn’t be adopted even by business - there’s already a network in place that works. Migrating to 6 doesn’t offer any meaningful benefit to balance the effort and risk of the change.
Now if you’re an SMB with 3 servers and a handful of computers, would you spend what little IT money you have making this change?
And if you’re an enterprise with a thousand servers and tens of thousands of users, are you making this change?
Imagine the cost of reconfiguring routers, and the outages you’d experience doing this.
There’s just no pressing urgency to change, and LOTS of cost and risk to do so.
I guess the advantage of IPv6 would be to get rid of NATs.
If we just keep the same architecture and switch to IPv6 while retaining NATs, then I really see no advantage in switching. It would just be a pain in the ass.
Meh, it doesn’t really offer anything for a home network.
And this is why it really hasn’t be adopted even by business - there’s already a network in place that works. Migrating to 6 doesn’t offer any meaningful benefit to balance the effort and risk of the change.
Now if you’re an SMB with 3 servers and a handful of computers, would you spend what little IT money you have making this change?
And if you’re an enterprise with a thousand servers and tens of thousands of users, are you making this change?
Imagine the cost of reconfiguring routers, and the outages you’d experience doing this.
There’s just no pressing urgency to change, and LOTS of cost and risk to do so.
I guess the advantage of IPv6 would be to get rid of NATs. If we just keep the same architecture and switch to IPv6 while retaining NATs, then I really see no advantage in switching. It would just be a pain in the ass.
And if you’re in a larger company, you’re the guy or team that gets blamed for every. goddamn. network. problem. that happens after the transition.
Fuck that.