Subj : Re: FidoNews submission
To : Michiel van der Vlist
From : Dan Clough
Date : Wed Jun 04 2025 08:12 am
-=> Michiel van der Vlist wrote to Gerrit Kuehn <=-
GK> My home network contains maybe 50 devices these days. A good fraction
GK> of those I would call "legacy" in the sense that they are not
GK> supported by their manufacturer anymore. Quite a few of them are older
GK> than 10 years. However, I would never call my home network anything
GK> but "small", even if it contained twice the number of devices.
MvV> Then we seem to have different - incompatible - notions of the concepts
MvV> of "large" and "small".
MvV> However. I still don't see how having a large number of so called
MvV> "legacy" devices stops anyone from adding IPv6 capability to their
MvV> system.
I still don't see why he, or me, or anyone, would want to do that when
it offers absolutely ZERO "capability" to what we already have. My IPv4
network works perfectly, and there is no sense making it more
complicated for NO REASON. There is NOTHING GAINED by flailing around
with configuring stuff endlessly, and even then.... as I've told you
already, I do not have native IPv6 available. So that would mean MORE
flailing around to get a kludged "tunnel", which again.... adds ZERO
capability to what I already have.
