Hacker News Board Hacker News, browsed like a classic message board
Live data from Hacker News

So Long Last /8 and Thanks For All the Allocations

labs.ripe.net

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

81–90 of 201 posts

Re: So Long Last /8 and Thanks For All the Allocations

#81

Post by 3pt14159 »

tialaramex wrote: post #74
EE84M3i wrote: post #38

IPv4 address utilization is incredibly low. For example, consider 44.0.0.0/8 - it's sitting around almost entirely unallocated. UCSD Caida uses it for their network telescope (pretending to use it for amateur radio) and won't give it back. Just look at how dark it is: https://benjojo.co.uk/internet-2018.png (from https://blog.benjojo.co.uk/post/scan-ping-the-internet-hilbe... ) Discussion on r/amateurradio - https://…

The fact something looks "dark" on that plot doesn't tell you anything about how much of the space is allocated. The site linked by that many years old Reddit post says that in fact loads of this space is allocated, to specific people, in this case "Hams", I see alphanumeric designations which I seem to remember Hams call "handles" as well as geographic locations and some human names. Is the Amateur Radio "Ham" commu…

I had this thought too, but do we realistically know anything about what types of devices are likely to respond to ping? What's the alternative? Try to initiate a TCP handshake to every port of every IP? How many servers are in UDP listen only mode or whitelist IPs to whats on their network?

Re: So Long Last /8 and Thanks For All the Allocations

#82

Post by WorldMaker »

wrs wrote: post #79
Beltiras wrote: post #50

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Apple has an /8 but Microsoft does not? How did that happen?

Due to the efforts of a small number of people in Apple engineering (notably Erik Fair), Apple was a pretty major internet presence in the early 90’s. Though, oddly, the exec level pretty much didn’t know it existed. Remember eWorld? (Probably not.) How did Apple get a /8? “We asked.” ( https://www.quora.com/How-did-MIT-end-up-with-an-entire-clas... )

The odd man out in the corporate /8 space seems to be Ford Motor Company.

Re: So Long Last /8 and Thanks For All the Allocations

#83

Post by philjohn »

chedabob wrote: post #18
cm2187 wrote: post #9

Even in developed countries IPv6 is barely deployed (my UK ISP - BT - pretends that they rolled it out but half of the time my modem tells me IPv6 is not availabled until I force it to reconnect, and no sign of IPv6 on mobile networks). Was looking at whether it was more economical to buy a small address block vs rent it from a datacentre. A /24 address block seems to cost around $4,000 upfront but then you need to p…

Ah I thought I'd imagined the BT router saying it supported IPV6. By the time I'd enabled DHCPv6 on my Mikrotik hardware, it had disappeared from the HomeHub dashboard.

Works fine on the superhub, or on the HG612 standalone VDSL modem.

Re: So Long Last /8 and Thanks For All the Allocations

#84

Post by d3ckard »

Faaak wrote: post #29
d3ckard wrote: post #27

Is it time to just admit IPv6 is a failure and move on to new standard? Adoption is very slow though economical needs are already here. Instead of complaining about users maybe we should do something so they actually want to switch?

Why would IPv6 be a failure ? It sounds like you don't know what you're talking about

It's terrible from UX point of view.

1. 128 bit is likely an overkill. 64 bit would give more or less 2 billion addresses per every human for earth. Likely enough. 2. It's unreadable. Why the hell use hex? 3. It's been proposed in 1998. It became a standard last year. Not exactly quick adoption and it tells something.

Yes, it will probably be deployed out of necessity, but it's weird nobody noticed that if something doesn't get traction for 20 years, there is probably something wrong with it.

Re: So Long Last /8 and Thanks For All the Allocations

#85

Post by zAy0LfpBZLC8mAC »

3pt14159 wrote: post #81
tialaramex wrote: post #74

Earlier quoted context omitted.

The fact something looks "dark" on that plot doesn't tell you anything about how much of the space is allocated. The site linked by that many years old Reddit post says that in fact loads of this space is allocated, to specific people, in this case "Hams", I see alphanumeric designations which I seem to remember Hams call "handles" as well as geographic locations and some human names. Is the Amateur Radio "Ham" commu…

I had this thought too, but do we realistically know anything about what types of devices are likely to respond to ping? What's the alternative? Try to initiate a TCP handshake to every port of every IP? How many servers are in UDP listen only mode or whitelist IPs to whats on their network?

The alternative is to switch to IPv6. There is no requirement to offer any particular publicly reachable service on an IP address, a machine or device might be completely firewalled off from directly communicating with the public internet, and it is still perfectly acceptable for it to have a globally unique IP address, so it is ultimately pointless to try and measure "the real utilization" using packets.

Re: So Long Last /8 and Thanks For All the Allocations

#86

Post by takeda »

beobab wrote: post #34
space_fountain wrote: post #10

Earlier quoted context omitted.

We do have more and more people in the world. Things like NATing can help get around it to some extent, but at the end of the day there aren't enough addresses to give every human alive today even one IP address. That doesn't strike me as a problem that can be solved by buybacks.

Trouble is that NAT solved a huge chunk of the problem. The current setup is not quite painful enough for people to want to fix it. The good is the enemy of the great, as it were.

Interrent would be very different (better) today if not for NAT.

NAT restricts what is possible to do over network for example we only use TCP and UDP protocols, because those protocols are supported by most devices. Similarly we have very minimal number of peer to peer applications. P2P currently is mostly popular with piracy, but it could be beneficial for other uses.

NAT + asymmetric speeds (which started because of DSL, but ISPs decided to keep things that way even though it is no longer necessary) are responsible that's why we haven't a lot of services that are centralized. IPv6 has chance to fix this and I am so glad NAT wasn't included in its design.

Re: So Long Last /8 and Thanks For All the Allocations

#87

Post by ceejayoz »

ulzeraj wrote: post #16
grenoire wrote: post #6

Earlier quoted context omitted.

What are the main issues with IPv6? Edit: I did not mean this as a derogatory question. It's legitimate. I simply posted it under the wrong OP. Calm down people.

IMO retarded greedy ISPs issuing /64 prefixes to customers. Now you aren’t supposed to NAT but you can’t have multiple subnets either.

Not a network guy, but I thought IPv6 made subnetting mostly unnecessary? Certainly on an individual consumer level?

Re: So Long Last /8 and Thanks For All the Allocations

#88

Post by icebraining »

d3ckard wrote: post #75
sp332 wrote: post #48

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I think you'd be surprised if you looked up actual adoption numbers. http://www.worldipv6launch.org/measurements/

Just did. 7 operators over 90%. On 7th page you get under 50% adoption if sorted. Well, given how old is IPv6, it's a failure.

Well, given how old is IPv6, it's a failure.

Why?

Re: So Long Last /8 and Thanks For All the Allocations

#89

Post by majewsky »

d3ckard wrote: post #84
Faaak wrote: post #29

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Why would IPv6 be a failure ? It sounds like you don't know what you're talking about

It's terrible from UX point of view. 1. 128 bit is likely an overkill. 64 bit would give more or less 2 billion addresses per every human for earth. Likely enough. 2. It's unreadable. Why the hell use hex? 3. It's been proposed in 1998. It became a standard last year. Not exactly quick adoption and it tells something. Yes, it will probably be deployed out of necessity, but it's weird nobody noticed that if something…

2. is because of 1.

3. Eh, what? IPv6 was published in 1998, as you say. What makes you think it became a standard only last year?

Re: So Long Last /8 and Thanks For All the Allocations

#90

Post by z3t4 »

ozim wrote: post #59
beobab wrote: post #34

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Trouble is that NAT solved a huge chunk of the problem. The current setup is not quite painful enough for people to want to fix it. The good is the enemy of the great, as it were.

Also I do not need to have directly accesible stuff on my home network. I can use dropbox or buy cheap VPS if I want to keep my data in sync. One is security, NAT is nice for that a lot smaller attack surface. Second keeping your stuff always running at home is unreliable and annoying. Would be nice if I would not have to pay for VPS but $5 a month cheapest linode is more than enough for my hobby projects.

ipv6 solve the problem of one ip per device, with ipv6 you can have both local and public IP's on the same interface! Then your app's and services can choose whether they like to listen on local or public IP's.

Without NAT you can do so much more stuff, like peer-to-peer (p2p) networking. Yes, you can do p2p with ipv4 behind NAT but it's super complicated and brittle.

Also bypassing the NAT is complicated, you have to fiddle with the router settings, and often you have to call your ISP to give you a public IP. This makes it hard or impossible to sell "Internet of things" (IoT) devices to regular people as you can't just plug them in.

Networks today are very good with high bandwidth and low latency, which enables some interesting use cases, for example virtual reality (VR) where you just have a thin client plugged in to the network and then have all the compute power located in a data-center a few miles away, with sub ms latency.

Another usecase is apps with service like functionality, like decentralized Facebook, and chat messengers.

Post reply on HN