Subj : FidoNews submission
To : Gerrit Kuehn
From : Michiel van der Vlist
Date : Sat May 31 2025 02:45 pm
Hello Gerrit,
On Friday May 30 2025 20:59, you wrote to me:
MvdV>> Contrary to the global nodelist, there is very little dead wood
MvdV>> in that list. So maybe the "about half" is not all that far
MvdV>> off. Also, some or even many of the systems in Fidonet may be
MvdV>> IPv6 capable without the sysop being aware of it. Except for
MvdV>> the ones running very old hardware or some archaic OS, the
MvdV>> systems themselves are IPv6 capable.
GK> I always thought "old hardware or some archaic OS" was the very
GK> definition of a FTN system these days... ;-)
Today it wouid seem that way. But in the haydays of Fidonet syssop were always eager to try out new technology and even spend considerable amount of mobney on it. ISDN was embraced and so wsa DSL. Now FOIP is the rule rather than te exception. So why the reluctance to embrace IPv6? Contrary to ISDN, it doenn't have to cost anything in most cases. Complexity? Oh c'mon, ISDN was far more complex to install than IPv6.
MvdV>> Windows has IPv6 enabled by default since W7 and
MvdV>> Linux is not far behind.
GK> I think the question is not so much about the technical support (for
GK> Linux or *BSD, IPv6 is available since around 2000). I know a couple
GK> of admins who -even if their provider supports IPv6- simply disable it
GK> on all machines due to the unnecessary complexity it comes with.
Than these admins have not understood or they are just lazy. Yes, a dusl stack system is moe complex than a single stack IPv4 system. But IPv6 by itself is not more complex than IPv4. On the contrary I would say. IPv6 is less complex. But it is different, there is a learning cuve and one has to "unlearn" some of the "IPv4 think". But once past that, it is relatively easy. And unavoidable in the long run anyway...
Cheers, Michiel
--- GoldED+/W32-MSVC 1.1.5-b20170303
* Origin:
http://www.vlist.org (2:280/5555)
