RB wrote:
This question comes back up every few months, and every time I wonder: what is the justification case for IPv6? Aside from those home hackers that are desperate for a full 128 bits of addressing to route the twelve devices on their network (never mind my public wifi network that eats an entire /17 with all its churn), where are the potential users? Who has put off rolling out pfSense or a similar platform because it didn't implement IPv6? What about the fact that for the huge majority of users, the magical IPv6 land of ponies and sugar cakes will end at their border unless they tunnel it out to some 3rd-party provider? Yes, some ISPs are starting to offer v6 connectivity, but those are few and far between.
It is not that I cry out that it is an emergency, but if you like a certain product and yes I really like pfsense, you would like to see that it does everything that you would like it to do.
At this moment I have installed a separate box to handle the ipv6 tunnel termination and firewalling of the connection. I would love to see this all done just by pfsense. It is just the same as I would like to see multicast support within pfsense.
I'm not against IPv6, I just disagree with the periodic Slashdot-induced handwaving 'emergency'. We've been "on the cusp" of "an addressing crisis" for years, and the fact that someone has slapped a ruler on the current allocation trend and come up with a number of days under 1000 doesn't really cause me concern. Who can present a reasonable case for adoption before the current 2-3 year timeline?
Personally I do not care about the addressing crisis, but I do care about me being able to get knowledge on new technologies and I think ipv6 is one of them.
Regards, Richard --------------------------------------------------------------------- To unsubscribe, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED] For additional commands, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
