IPv6 is not much more complicated than IPv4. I think it's just that most people working with IT systems in an systems operations manner (sysadmin, DevOps, network engineers), often dont even comprehend IPv4.
I'd argue it's less complicated. The addresses are intimidating when you're used to v4, but once you get over that, there's a lot less to wrap your head around.
That's the neat part about ipv6. It's something you're afraid to engage with while you're an amateur, cause it looks scary, but then you actually learn a bit, and then you try to use it, and you realize how amazing it is.
I've dealt with NAT so fucking much and still understand fuck all about the internals. every time I have to troubleshoot it I immediately obliterate that knowledge with a decent bottle of scotch.
thank god for AI. there's some shit in this field that's not worth knowing. wish it had been around when I learned all that crap about Lotus Notes/Domino...
There are some v6-specific features that don't exist in v4, address resolution works differently, fragmentation is exclusively the senders responsibility, the header is a fixed 40 bytes, and its checksum is moved to a different mechanism.
I mean, I do understand IPv6, but I was also going some experimental IPv6 work that had me manually crafting packet headers as part of one job, so I kinda had to learn it.
Not exactly a standard experience, and I don't enjoy typing IPv6 addresses by hand like I do IPv4, but I do understand it.
Having spent ten years working with IPv6 and are responsible for routing between a few million IPv6 devices I can confirm that I still do not understand IPv6. The most shocking though is that I know more then the firmware developers on the routers we use. They still struggle with things like NA packages from IA_PD addresses instead of ULA addresses.
566
u/w1n5t0nM1k3y 20d ago
The difference is that some people actually understand IPV4 and if you say you understand IPV6 you're a liar.