Slashdot Mirror
Apple Under Fire For Backing Off IPv6 Support
alphadogg writes "Apple Computer came under fire for back-pedaling on its support for IPv6, the next-generation Internet Protocol, at a gathering of experts held in Denver this week. Presenters at the North American IPv6 Summit expressed annoyance that the latest version of Apple's AirPort Utility, Version 6.0, is no longer compatible with IPv6. The previous Version, 5.6, offered IPv6 service by default. While home networking vendors like Cisco and D-Link are adding IPv6 across their product lines, Apple appears to be the only vendor that is removing this feature."
Actually, the expertsare divided on whether IPv4 addresses will be exhaused.
IPV4 addresses have already been exhausted for a year now.
Any so-called 'experts' claiming otherwise may not be reliable sources.
Actually its this kind of stupidity that has always had me hating IPV6. Frankly they should have included backwards compatibility with IPV4 private networks because who in the hell is EVER gonna have more devices than a class A private address can provide?
Which brings us to the second stupid ass move with IPV6 the removal of NAT. That was stupid because it relies on what i call "Star trek thinking" where they only see the bright side of life, never the dark. engineer: "With IPV6 you'll have so many addresses you won't NEED NAT so everything can just be online!" Me-What about those of us who don't want to have everything online ALL the time, but don't want to switch back and forth between private and public addresses? What about the security risk as now I'll have to worry about the possibility of security weaknesses in every damned device like TVs, game machines, PMPs, etc? Engineer: "-------". Whether you love it or hate it you have to admit NAT WORKS, it makes it a hell of a lot harder to target an individual device on a network.
But Apple has probably figured out what I could have told them years ago, that without backwards compatibility getting IPV4 and IPV6 to play nice is a giant PITA. Because so few use it either you default to IPV4 in which case you are just dragging around IPV6 for nothing, or you default to IPV6 in which case you have to wait for it to time out before switching to IPV4 which just slows every damned thing down. why they couldn't have encapsulated the IPV4 address INSIDE the IPV6 so that one could simply use IPV6 is anyone's guess but I bet Apple has done some surveys and found nobody is using the thing and it makes things more of a PITA. Considering Apple's "It just works" mantra making something a bigger PITA simply isn't on the agenda so no wonder they are scaling back support.
BTW everyone here should pray that IPV4 lasts as long as possible because when the switch is flipped? May God have mercy upon your data packets because frankly the flyover states is gonna be fucked. The corps have royally screwed IT for so long when it comes to pay and hours most of the older guys rather than deal with the massive headaches that IPV6 will bring are just quietly getting other jobs and because again the corps are greedy shits the kids they are hiring to replace them just don't have the experience which is gonna make troubleshooting a nightmare. Then add in the fact with so few using it its a royal PITA to get any real hands on so when that switch is pulled shit that would have taken a few hours tops under IPV4 to fix will take days or even weeks under IPV6 simply because the experience isn't there. Anybody remember the clusterfuck that civilian Internet was during the 80s? How shit would just break and even the tech support was "uuuhhhh"? Frankly this is just one more reason I'm glad I'm out of corp IT because i wouldn't wish this trainwreck on my worst enemy and I don't blame Apple for just wanting to skip it when it just adds cost and shows no benefits to the majority of their customers whom I'm sure aren't using it.
ACs don't waste your time replying, your posts are never seen by me.