IPv6 to be or not to be

Go To Last Post
9 posts / 0 new
Author
Message
#1
  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5
Total votes: 0

Guys, I've thinking of implementing a IPv6 IP stack.  Do you think it is worth while?

Also, does wireshark debug IPv6?

  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5
Total votes: 0

Fianawarrior wrote:
Also, does wireshark debug IPv6?
Likely yes as the following page mentions IPv6, 6LoWPAN, and Wireshark in the first paragraph :

Budget 802.15.4 6LoWPAN Protocol Analyser using Wireshark - BeyondLogic

10 January 2014

https://wiki.beyondlogic.org/index.php?title=Budget_802.15.4_6LoWPAN_Protocol_Analyser_using_Wireshark

 

"Dare to be naïve." - Buckminster Fuller

  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5
Total votes: 0
  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5
Total votes: 0

I know I've asked the same question before.

Last Edited: Wed. Oct 24, 2018 - 03:22 AM
  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5
Total votes: 0

angelu wrote:

More answers here.. https://www.avrfreaks.net/forum/...

Fianawarrior wrote:

I know I've asked the same question before.

And in post 14 of that other thread you answered the question yourself.....

Despite all the advice and information given ;)

  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5
Total votes: 0

This is the annual IPv6 question.

  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5
Total votes: 0

Fianawarrior wrote:
I know I've asked the same question before.

Are you going to repeat all your questions?

 

In the last week I've seen 2 different threads about "multiple defined" errors while compiling, and at least one of those was from you.

Both of them also did not have any clear question, just "something is going wrong, can you help me" followed by some (partially ?) copy of compiler output.

Doing magic with a USD 7 Logic Analyser: https://www.avrfreaks.net/comment/2421756#comment-2421756

Bunch of old projects with AVR's: http://www.hoevendesign.com

Last Edited: Wed. Oct 24, 2018 - 08:08 AM
  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5
Total votes: 0

I stand by #10 in the previous thread. If you are making routers for Cisco (backbone of the internet) then you do need to worry about IP6, but in most sites, because of NAT, the IP allocation is IP4. So why bother adding needless complexity?

  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5
Total votes: 0

Internet is plenty full of IPv4 and IPv6 and translations between those, as clawson nicely pointed out.

Mere mortals do not have to concern themselves with it, which is why IPv6 stacks for uC's are not widely available. There is no need for them.

 

In 2016 there was a pretty important problem on the Internet, though you may not have noticed it.

It is called "512k day" because on that day the adress book for routing IPv4 adresses was updated and it exceeded 512k entries, and a bunch of the (older?) routers for internet trafic overflowed on that.

IPv4 adresse have been scarce sine 10+ years, with the results that routing has gotten progressively more difficult.

 

One of the rare cases where a "hobbyist" may get confronted with IPv6 is probably with LoRaWan, where small uC's are supposed to connect directly to the Internet.

I've never looked into that, but it is supposedly some RF standard and I've heared rumors that there are plans for rolling out country wide coverage here in the Netherlands.

Those Might work with IPv6, but probably complete developent kits will be available, together with some payment structure based on bandwith or actual data.

Doing magic with a USD 7 Logic Analyser: https://www.avrfreaks.net/comment/2421756#comment-2421756

Bunch of old projects with AVR's: http://www.hoevendesign.com