If you think that there’s a chance in hell that IPv8 is gonna see widespread adoption anytime soon when IPv6 is already not widely understood (self-inflicted, imo) or implemented, I have a bridge to sell you.

There are instructors and IT managers worldwide telling others to “not worry about IPv6” and calling it irrelevant, and it’s been this way for years. Super irresponsible.

The tech industry often sucks at pushing new and updated standards forward (unless there’s a heavy financial incentive, or there’s a low labour/time cost to implementation), though if you do you’re in the industry and do your part, we may yet see wider adoption of improved standards!

@maddy

IPv6 is what 20+ years behind on deployment and turning off IPv4?

@maya_b [in a mocking tone] <i>But NAT made it so we don’t have to change anything!</i>

I learned about and implemented IPv6 in my network, in spite of apathetic managers (and an ISP who doesn’t provide native IPv6).

If for no other reason, out-learn and out-perform your instructor/boss and make them look like a damn fool. It feels good.

@maddy

yea... not untrue... but ISP level NAT, under country level NAT is a silly self own. and yes, i've had to work with installations like that which were 2+ levels of NAT deep.

I mean it does force you to not ssh into remote sites, which is a complete anti-pattern for maintenance, but it makes ssh'ing into remote sites for a quick emergency fix a complete nightmare.

@maddy Anyone who actually takes IPv8 seriously is just clueless (as are the people actually making these proposals). People have been publishing nonsensical Internet-Drafts claiming to provide an IPv4-compatible IPv6 replacement (that’s actually not IPv4-compatible at all) for years (see also: IPv10 (since 2016) and IPv4+ (since 2018)), it’s nothing new and none of them will never get adopted because they don’t make any sense.

@maddy I'm surprised it managed to get this amount of attention on fedi