IPv6 - should I be 'on it'?

[dortmunder]

Hi. I went wireless for the first time today - many thanks to Brizer2k7 for kindly sending me a USB wireless adapter. I was having some problems getting everything to work but eventually it did, even although the disc provided by Tiscali for their router installation never got to the end. It was hanging for so long I had to use Task Manager to exit it but then I noticed I had a connection. Installing new hardware never goes smoothly, I find. Even the installation disc for the ZyXEL USB didn't work properly - I had to get drivers from their site. Anyway, to my question:

Here's a snap of a couple of screens I pulled up after going wireless. On one, I have a 'tick' against IPv4 AND IPv6. To me, that suggests I can use either. Screen 2 tells me that IPv6 connectivity is no-go. As far as I know, IPv6 is just 'better' and, if that's the case, I'd prefer to be using it. Do I need IPv6, should I be able to use it and, if so, how do I go about getting it?

Thanks in advance

[RecQuery]

Did my honours dissertation on IPv6 and its implementation actually. I think its better in many ways.

While you can use it (either internally with a 4-to-6 NAT or externally with a tunnel) I wouldn't recommend it right now.

While the Internet is running out of public IPv4 addresses with about 2 years worth left, even when they run out I imagine most ISPs will do 4-to-6 NAT to hide it from customers and to prevent them having to buy new equipment.

[dortmunder]

NAT's and tunnels, eh? Not a clue but I'll accept your assertion that I don't need to worry. Many thanks for the reply.