UK among nations that have done least

[#1]

Quote from: vilefoxdemonofdoom

@nanotm - I was enjoying some of your posts. They had the effect of causing some proper, understandable explanations to be written.

That thought had also occurred to me too,  which would have been fine if those explanations had been accepted, or questioned in a more constructive way.
Instead the helpful, understandable, and accurate answers were repeatedly rubbished, then yet another often unrelated argument with no factual basis would appear,  rather than trying to comprehend the replies.
It also didn't help that for those trying to provide clear an concise answers were having to deconstruct nearly every sentence because of the mix of unrelated or incorrect technical terminology, the written English which often made no sense, and a argument which was just wrong.
More than anything, it was the ongoing stating untrue assumptions as real facts, that caused the most concern.
I think most contributors to the IPv6 threads genuinely want to help,  but should not have to battle with having to correct line after line of complete nonsense.

[#2]

Quote from: purleigh

Quote from: vilefoxdemonofdoom @nanotm - I was enjoying some of your posts. They had the effect of causing some proper, understandable explanations to be written. That thought had also occurred to me too,  which would have been fine if those explanations had been accepted, or questioned in a more constructive way.

And this hits the nail on the head.
There is absolutely no such thing as a stupid question. Questions are good - not only for the asker but the answerer and observers too.
However, what is stupid is not being prepared to listen to the answers and that is exactly what went on here; repeatedly.

[#3]

I think everyone, myself included, is happy for posts to be made if someone wants to improve their understanding or ask questions. Posting things as facts or real information when it's incorrect isn't helpful though and just spreads mis-information.

[#4]

OK - a question!
How does bit torrent work properly on IPV6?

[#5]

Quote from: vilefoxdemonofdoom

How does bit torrent work properly on IPV6?

I'd expect it to work better than on IPv4 !
Basic premise : When a client wants to connect to another, it sends packets to it's IPv6 address - same as it would with IPv4. Assuming you've opened up a range of ports (or let uPNP do it) then those packets go through and the connection is made. Otherwise, some of the same tricks that are used to work round the broken networking that is NAT can be used - I assume something along the lines of : tracker tell 2nd client that 1st client wants to connect, so 2nd client sends packets to 1st client which creates the UDP session in client 2's firewall and so client 1's packets can get through. There's still the firewall traversal to deal with, but at least no address or port mangling.
Regardless of whether you are using IPv4 or IPv6 - you should have the firewall configured to allow inbound connections to the ports used for torrenting. With Ipv4 this also means NAT port forwarding.

[#6]

Why would bittorrent have any problem with IPv6? All that would be required for it to work is that when IP addresses are transferred from tracker to client or between clients, there must be something in the protocol to designate whether the addresses are IPv4 or IPv6.

[#7]

@VFDoD - As a say; questions are great - but do please start a new thread with them! Makes it much easier for others to follow and means we can be discussing more than one subject in parrallel.