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

131–140 of 201 posts

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

#131

Post by urda »

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…

1. Perhaps it seems too much now, but if we're taking the time to migrate our global network to a new standard, we might as well get a ton of addresses out of it for many years to come.

2. Why are you reading it? Networking addresses do NOT need some special UI / UX interface. For most users, they are never going to see it.

3. Neat, but that's not really a point. If you find yourself setting time limits on about everything in life, well let's just say you're boxing yourself in for failure.

Over the past 20 years we've seen the explosion of growth in devices, networking, and communication. It comes with no shock (to experts and experienced technical people alike) that it's taking a long time to switch over. There isn't some magical "press this button for everyone to be IPv6" FYI.

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

#132

Post by urda »

majewsky wrote: post #89
d3ckard wrote: post #84

Earlier quoted context omitted.

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?

Not OP, but for 3) I believe they are referring to: https://www.internetsociety.org/blog/2017/07/rfc-8200-ipv6-h...

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

#133

Post by theandrewbailey »

jjoonathan wrote: post #71
rasz wrote: post #47

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Not to mention DOD, its not like they will one day plug all those intranet computers to the internet.

No, but they probably have a bunch of probes along the lines of "if you see any traffic in these ranges on the public internet, raise all the alarms," which is arguably a kind of usage in its own way.

Can someone troll them by spoofing addresses and find out?

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

#134

Post by dfox »

throwaway2048 wrote: post #130
cortesoft wrote: post #125

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Everything having a publicly routable IP isn't an automatic good thing.

NAT does nothing meaningful securitywise that a firewall cannot achive, and causes a lot of stupid problems.

Particularly notable example of this is that the three ip6tables rules needed to get NAT-like everything out nothing out behavior are exactly the same three rules that you need in v4 iptables for the NAT to have any security effect at all.

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

#135

Post by JoblessWonder »

WorldMaker wrote: post #82
wrs wrote: post #79

Earlier quoted context omitted.

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.

I think Prudential Insurance (48.0.0.0/8) is even weirder.

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

#136

Post by d215 »

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://…

Using ping is a really crude way of establishing the 'darkness' of a prefix.

Complete prefixes just block off all ICMP incoming traffic, as do many core internet infra-structural devices (although they may pass them on, they won't answer pings directed to them).

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

#137

Post by teddyh »

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://…

As far as I understand the situation, it would be pointless to chase “unused” address ranges and try to claw them back because:

1. It would be technically very difficult, and old equipment is frequently hardcoded.

2. With the rate the allocations are going, you’d get maybe an additional few months or a couple of years out of this enormous effort. After that, all the addresses really would be allocated, and now what do you do?

Considering the huge effort, technical and political, it would take to do such a thing, it is easier to just adopt IPv6.

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

#138

Post by d215 »

maccam94 wrote: post #117
ancarda wrote: post #114

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Why do they do that? They already have an /8 to themselves -- 10.0.0.0/8. Did they need an additional 16M IP addresses?

There was a time before NAT, where every machine had a publicly routable IP, and things were good. Any machine could talk directly to any port on any other machine (firewall willing). Until one day, IP exhaustion attacked. Thankfully NAT doesn't exist in IPv6, because 2^128 addresses should be enough for everybody.

I don't know if you're being ironic, but NAT64[0] is (sort of unfortunately) an actual existing technology and in use as well.

[0] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/NAT64

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

#139

Post by notyourday »

toopsss wrote: post #73
Beltiras wrote: post #50

Earlier quoted context omitted.

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

Microsoft pretty much had an anti internet strategic policy until 1995, that’s why. Back in the day a tcpip stack was a third party add on.

Microsoft got lots of its address space by buying Nortel assets.

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

#140

Post by smsm42 »

throwaway2048 wrote: post #130
cortesoft wrote: post #125

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Everything having a publicly routable IP isn't an automatic good thing.

NAT does nothing meaningful securitywise that a firewall cannot achive, and causes a lot of stupid problems.

NAT of course is not the best solution ever, but vast majority of currently used network nodes do not need publicly routed IPs in a limited global space. If anything, many of them are much better without one. Yes, I know, firewalls. But why not just avoid the issue by not having publicly accessible address for non-public systems in the first place?
Post reply on HN