= Сообщение: 3825 из 7440 ============================================= IPV6 = От : Michiel van der Vlist 2:280/5555 02 Dec 16 00:29:24 Кому : Nicholas Boel 02 Dec 16 00:29:24 Тема : Cable modem change FGHI : area://IPV6?msgid=2:280/5555+5840b5cd На : area://IPV6?msgid=1:154/10+58403af5 = Кодировка сообщения определена как: CP850 ================================== Ответ: area://IPV6?msgid=1:154/10+58417f91 ============================================================================== Hello Nick,
On Thursday December 01 2016 08:32, you wrote to me:
MV>> Not yet. But it will be an issue in the future. And I don't MV>> understand why they didn't make the web interface dual stack MV>> right away. HTML over IPv6 isn't rocket science. It is usually MV>> easier to do such things right away from scratch than to have to MV>> add it later.
NB> I'm not sure what the issue(s) would be in the future. As long as the NB> router itself supports dual stack, it's only a LAN IPv4 address, which NB> wouldn't matter if you actually had functional IPv4 outside your LAN NB> or not. Obviously if you wanted to access your router from outside the NB> LAN (not me), it would present a problem.
There is that, but I was thinking a bit further ahead. Dual stack is not the end goal, it is also a transition mechanism. A sensible engineer does not want to maintain duality forever. On the contrary, once you got the new syetem in place, you want to get rid of the old system ASAP. Keeping two systems in the air side by side increases the effort of maintenace and increases the chanco oe errors. Mars landers and planes have crashed because of using metric and the imperial measures in the same project.
IPv4 only stuff is an obstacle on the road to IPv6 only.
MV>> That probably illustrates one of the propblems with IPv6. Lots of MV>> developers are still stuck in IPv4 think. IPv6 is added as an MV>> afterthought...
NB> Hasn't that always been the case (IPv6 being an afterthought)? At the NB> time IPv4 was created, they had no idea they would ever need something NB> more.
That was than, but just like the first cars were designed to function is a horseless society, IPv6 was designed to operate in an environment without IPv4.
NB>>> If "please.send.me.somewhere.cool" was a viable address, even NB>>> that could be used to access your router inside your LAN.
MV>> Some might want to access it from outside. (Not me..)
NB> Agreed. My router would never be open to the public.
"Open to the public" and accesible from outside is not the same thing. YOU may want to access it from outside, but not giving that access to anyone else.
