From: mm+usenet-es@dorfdsl.de   
      
   On 27.11.2024 08:44 Uhr Computer Nerd Kev wrote:   
      
   >  IPv6 is a good case in point where the basic architecture of the   
   >  protocol, namely as an end-to-end address-based datagram   
   >  architecture, has become an imperfect fit for a client-server   
   >  network that makes extensive use of replicated service delivery   
   >  platforms.   
      
   I don't see where IPv6 has any disadvantage compared to IPv4 in that   
   case from a technical view.   
      
   Although, IPv4 is exhausted and new companies can't be created like 20   
   years ago anymore. This might be a reason for some companies to stay   
   with it.   
      
   >  Today's network is undertaking a transformation to a name-based   
   >  network, and running out of addresses to the extent that it is no   
   >  longer possible to uniquely address every attached client, is no   
   >  longer the catastrophic event that we once thought it would be. We   
   >  appear to have attached some 30B devices in today's Internet, yet   
   >  in terms of IPv4 use, we have achieved this using a little over 3B   
   >  unique IPv4 addresses visible in the routing system.   
      
   The NAT routers at ISPs are sometimes heavily overloaded, many   
   companies provide IPv6 to reduce the traffic on the NAT machines.   
      
      
   --   
   kind regards   
   Marco   
      
   Send spam to 1732693447muell@stinkedores.dorfdsl.de   
      
   --- SoupGate-DOS v1.05   
    * Origin: you cannot sedate... all the things you hate (1:229/2)