51–60 of 114 posts
Honestly, can someone explain why it took so long? I mean, you can get IPv6 on a bunch of low-end budget VPSs. Why couldn't Amazon do it? And why cant GCE do it? Is it a lot of work?
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=0gjuVhph520
Granted, that isn't necessarily a pre-requisite for going dual stack (aka: just attaching a v6 address to a machine), but it shows the fun problems you run into.
I believe this doesn't mean there's IPv6 support for ELBs in a VPC yet. We unknowingly enabled dualstack configuration on Route 53 some time back and this led to users on devices which prioritised IPv6 over IPv4 to fail to connect.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
This honestly doesn't surprise me. Adding an infinite number of IPs is one way bot writers get around rate limits. I've done it before when I worked for a company that made a facebook/myspace/etc crawler.
Out of curiosity, why does Amazon consider it their responsibility to prevent that? I'm personally glad that they do, but bots use resources, which is good for Amazon (money in their pocket), and as far as I know Amazon doesn't have anything it wants to protect from bots (at least, anything that would be heavily limited by IP).
Earlier quoted context omitted.
I don't know enough AWS to understand the announcement, but if your servers and your clients can speak IPv6 and you can skip al the NAT, you don't have to debug NAT problems.
We probably won't ever be rid of NAT. The likes of Cisco, who thrive on making things enterprisey and needlessly complicated will definitely be peddling IPv6 NAT soon, if they aren't already doing it.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
Just curious but why is IPv6 support such a priority for you that it would be the deciding factor in your choice of hosting provider?
In 2017, one should instead ask why it wouldn't be.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
But if that exists, why should I as someone running on EC2 care if I can use IPv6 natively or have to make use of such proxying/routing?
The reasons are many. I'll name just a few: * You cannot send UDP packets to your IPv4 customers. * You cannot initiate TCP connections to your IPv4 customers. * You cannot use any application-level protocol that carries information about source or destination IP address. * IPSec more or less goes out the window
Pardon my ignorance, but why is this needed? I've seen dozens of "+1s" for ipv6 on both AWS and GCP, but no one says why really. Is there hardware out there on the public internet that cannot communicate over ipv4 already?
Earlier quoted context omitted.
The reasons are many. I'll name just a few: * You cannot send UDP packets to your IPv4 customers. * You cannot initiate TCP connections to your IPv4 customers. * You cannot use any application-level protocol that carries information about source or destination IP address. * IPSec more or less goes out the window
But even if my desktop does IPV6.. I am still going to firewall it. Seems like not a "benefit" to throw up my device directly on the internet.
Your firewall may start with a simple "deny all incoming SYN packets" rule, but IPv6 gives you the option to open up holes in the firewall to any device or devices on your LAN (port forwarding only works once per port through a NAT).
The real benefits probably don't exist yet. There are entire categories of network software that have remained unknown and unexplored because it didn't work behind a NAT. There were several projects I wanted to write ~15 years ago that I never even started because it required a real internet connection, not a NAT "party line".
Pardon my ignorance, but why is this needed? I've seen dozens of "+1s" for ipv6 on both AWS and GCP, but no one says why really. Is there hardware out there on the public internet that cannot communicate over ipv4 already?
Earlier quoted context omitted.
I'm kinda sick of all the AWS posts on here, but I'm trying to be fair since some of them are really interesting. This is one of those that's more of a "about damn time," features that'd I'd care about if I already didn't go with Digital Ocean/Linode instead just because of IPv6 support.
Just curious but why is IPv6 support such a priority for you that it would be the deciding factor in your choice of hosting provider?
It's sorta like the network neutrality argument, except you're talking about limits on who can offer services to everyone vs those with newer IPv6 devices and ISPs. You can end up with two different Internets.