Re: I STRONGLY OPPOSE ipv8 proposal.

wolfy <[email protected]> Fri, 17 Apr 2026 16:45:37 +0000
Newsgroups	gmane.ietf.general
Message-ID	<f4xUtBtqkqRNtS6XE0hy2w7Fg9pCrNaF5lfEqp3JDtEu_l7_d9qZ1nzrV5RNvAOmL0vowX7W5ApA2b1Jw8I8F4FT8TxG6MHGmeLE3mpQM-s=@shitwolfymakes.com>
Sorry, I failed to specify. Thain was the one missing the point, not you




Sent from Proton Mail for iOS.


-------- Original Message --------
On Friday, 04/17/26 at 11:40 sotrdg sotrdg <[email protected]> wrote:

> I am not missing a point at all. Just tell those 1 billion android phones that
> cannot unlock their bootloaders and vendors do not even provide security
> patches and become e-waste. Now the inflation problem globally is so bad now
> and people cannot afford a new phone easily. IPv8 even it is supposed to not
> change existing network stack, the OS kernel still cannot be easily updated.
> 
> 
> This is typical N+1 problem. Let's not make things worse. If address space is
> enough for company, then go use ipv6. It is that simple.
> 
> 
> From: wolfy
> Sent: Friday, April 17, 2026 16:26
> To: Jamie Thain
> Cc: sotrdg sotrdg; [email protected]
> Subject: Re: I STRONGLY OPPOSE ipv8 proposal.
> 
> You were missing the point.
> 
> You are proposing a surveillance state to fix an addressing and
> management issue, badly. I went into extreme detail on this.
> 
> https://open.substack.com/pub/shitwolfymakes/p/we-need-to-talk-about-the-ipv8-
> draft
> 
> Your proposal automate suppression at every conceivable scale, and violates
> the letter and spirit of multiple RFCs
> 
> - wolfy
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Sent from Proton Mail for iOS.
> 
> 
> -------- Original Message --------
> On Friday, 04/17/26 at 11:21 Jamie Thain <[email protected]> wrote:
> 
> > Sotrdg, 
> > 
> > Thank you for your words. The goal is not to deprecate ipv6. I believe most
> > of the mobile carriers will continue to use their ipv6 infrastructure. 
> > 
> > IPv8 is meant to fix the management issues in ipv4. 
> > 
> > It's to fix the global address structure. 
> > 
> > Ipv6 can be as easily intercepted and blocked as can ipv4. So it's not the
> > protocol allowing you access. It is the lack of implementation. 
> > 
> > When ipv6 grows to a meaningful level, China will add it to the great Wall. 
> > 
> > So with that said, ipv8 is not a social political issue, it's a technical
> > issue. 
> > 
> > Jamie 
> > 
> > 
> > 
> > 
> > 
> > 
> > 
> > 
> > On Fri., Apr. 17, 2026, 1:01 p.m. sotrdg sotrdg, <[email protected]> wrote:
> > 
> > > 1. IPv8 makes Governments across the globe much easier to block IP and
> > > censor internet. I am from China and i use ipv6 to bypass the great
> > > firewall. ipv8 makes this much easier to block since it reuses existing
> > > ipv4 (which is blocked for sure) and its address space is very small. this
> > > ipv8 proposal is just another attempt of big tech and governments around
> > > the world tries to kill open internet.
> > > 
> > > 2. Implementing ipv8 means deprecating ipv6 which is a huge problem.  it
> > > is not really solving anything
> > > 
> > > 3. it is not easy to implement ipv8 at all. Android OEMs locks down
> > > bootloaders and not mentioning routers too. That means billions of devices
> > > immediately e-waste since they will not get updated to support ipv8. It is
> > > just another N+1 problem.
> > > 
> > > 4. ipv8's address space is WAY too small. 2^64 may be enough for
> > > representing a machine but it does not count things like virtual machines
> > > which might use tons of ip addresses for a very good reason.
> > > 
> > > 5. To say ipv6 is not adopted is very untrue since i am using ipv6 every
> > > day to bypass internet censorship. All my traffic, even this email comes
> > > from ipv6. this is just completely bs proposal
publickey - [email protected] - 0x55F74778.asc (application/pgp-keys, 1.7 KB)
signature.asc (application/pgp-signature, 603 B)