Has IPv6 been a failure?
All I know is that IPv4 is still around.
And without knowing the IP Addresses of devices on my LAN, by home network would be harder to manage!
All I know is that IPv4 is still around.
And without knowing the IP Addresses of devices on my LAN, by home network would be harder to manage!
Google has IPv6 support at 50%. Most of the major sites I use have IPv6. Google, Facebook, Amazon, Youtube.
Things like peer to peer calling can actually work though without NAT.
I would suggest using either fec0 or fd00. Which is still not best practices, but it's a lot closer.
(fec0 is deprecated, and fd is supposed to be followed by a randomly chosen 40 bit site ID but you can lie and say your random number was 0)
fec0 is the site-local addresses. Nobody should be assigning addresses in that range since they are made automatically. Using site-local addresses makes sense for single subnet network like most home networks.
fc00::/7 is the ULA range.
It is made out of two halves. fc00::/8 and fd00::/8
fc00::/8 is reserved. People are only allowed to use fd00::/8
> fec0 is the site-local addresses. Nobody should be assigning addresses in that range since they are made automatically. Using site-local addresses makes sense for single subnet network like most home networks.
None of my adapters have automatic fec0 addresses, they only have global and fe80. So can you elaborate on that?
I got fe80 and fec0 confused. It looks like the latter is the deprecated site-local range. It is unlikely that will be reassigned, but lots of people said the same with IPv4 and got burned. It is safer to use ULA.
So what? IPv6 coexists with IPv4 just fine. As has been made abundantly clear over the years, there's no need to have a flag day for a big cutover in order to adopt IPv6.
It was an honest question!