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

Is there hope for IPv6?

internetgovernance.org

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

81–90 of 399 posts

Re: Is there hope for IPv6?

#81

Post by zzzcpan »

Someone1234 wrote: post #41
kens wrote: post #36

Earlier quoted context omitted.

It seems like a lot of technology transitions go smoothly, while others painfully drag on for a decade (ipv6, Python3). Are there any common root causes for the semi-failures? Has anyone written about why some succeed and some don't?

Backwards compatibility seems to be the largest. Look at the deployment of TLS as a success story. Everyone kept on supporting both old and new, watched the percentages, and then dropped the old when the new had enough penetration. The whole thing is also a bit of a shell game. Nobody wants to invest in it until they feel like they're "behind" if they don't. So you have a big player or two in order to make it feel li…

> So you have a big player or two in order to make it feel like that's the way the wind is blowing.

This assumes markets with little to no competition. But most ISPs are in competitive markets with no trend setting big players and they can't waste money investing into IPv6 or anything else that has no demand if they want to keep the business alive and healthy.

Re: Is there hope for IPv6?

#83

Post by apple4ever »

geofft wrote: post #14

This article completely fails to mention that IPv6 is not just an extension of the address space but a whole different worldview about how to run a network: - IPv6-to-IPv6 NAT has only been accepted very recently and very begrudgingly. Whatever your views are on NAT, the fact is that lots of people have network designs that rely on it, and if you want them to stop, you're now asking them to couple two major transitio…

This this this.

IPv5 could’ve been the extending IPv4 address space, and IPv6 could have all the other changes.

But they didn’t want that, because reasons.

Re: Is there hope for IPv6?

#84

Post by paulddraper »

CydeWeys wrote: post #40
rawoke083600 wrote: post #25

how about ipv5 and we just add an extra .255 ? Im sure our kids wilk figure out a better solution... ?

Assuming you're not joking, the nice thing about IPv4 is that it uses 32 bits, so you can store addresses in an unsigned int and use memory efficiently. Just adding one octet takes you up to 40 bits, which has alignment issues. You may as well go up to 64 bits (half of IPv6), which could be represented as 16 hex characters, e.g. 06A4.6E1B.12C9.95C8. That way you're kicking the can much farther down the road too.

I always wish IPv6 had done example this -- use 64 bits.

The address space is still enormous: a couple billion for every currently living person (yes, I know allocating isn't 100% efficient, but even at 0.001% efficiency, that's still tens of thousands per capita).

And, the address could fit in a common word size, and be significantly more readable.

As is, IPv6's one-address-per-atom-on-Earth is unnecessary, the addresses are horrendous to read, and the collapsing colon stuff is just obnoxious.

Re: Is there hope for IPv6?

#85

Post by j1vms »

apple4ever wrote: post #69
Someone1234 wrote: post #41

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Backwards compatibility seems to be the largest. Look at the deployment of TLS as a success story. Everyone kept on supporting both old and new, watched the percentages, and then dropped the old when the new had enough penetration. The whole thing is also a bit of a shell game. Nobody wants to invest in it until they feel like they're "behind" if they don't. So you have a big player or two in order to make it feel li…

TLS is a great example of how to do it. IPv6 is a great example of how not to.

> TLS is a great example of how to do it.

ASCII -> UTF8

VHS -> DVD

not as successful:

DVD -> BluRay : timing was rather close to the rise of streaming services like Netflix, Hulu, etc.

Re: Is there hope for IPv6?

#86

Post by apple4ever »

joeseeder wrote: post #21

Yup, now you have to go out of your way to not support it. Literary, every modern ISP, hosting or Cloud provides it. Every Operating System, be it server or client or router, supports IPv6.

FIOS doesn’t support it.

Give that its a fiber ISP, I would consider that “Modern”.

Re: Is there hope for IPv6?

#87

Post by keypress »

lisper wrote: post #56
keypress wrote: post #45

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I still like the idea of a peer to peer web, with something like hosting in your own browser. This could be a great alternative fallback network with distributed DNS. Most phones are capable. Energy, speed and security are concerns, but in cracking them you'd probably make the web a better place.

I like that idea too. A lot of geeks like that idea. But ordinary people couldn't care less. All they care about is that their latest instagram photo gets a lot of likes. They neither know nor care what goes on under the hood. Unfortunately, that ignorance and apathy is what drives the market.

I can't really comment about what other's care about and use the web for. I've never met anyone that even uses Instagram!

Re: Is there hope for IPv6?

#88

Post by chrononaut »

AnIdiotOnTheNet wrote: post #74
krylon wrote: post #38

I have been getting native IPv6 from my ISP for nearly six years now. It is not quite as cool as it could be, because I get assigned a new prefix every 24 hours, but still, IPv6 is there, and it "just works". When I connect to machines on my home network in any way involving avahi/zeroconf, the machines talk to each other via IPv6 by default. At work, it's a different story. I have drifted from a sysadmin/helpdesk ro…

> because I get assigned a new prefix every 24 hours Which kinda defeats the purpose of having a globally reachable unique address in a lot of respects. How am I supposed to allow connections to this device in my firewall if the address is always changing?

There's advantages and disadvantages to this approach. When we're talking about residential networks, some consumers won't care about the inability to do that, some will. Those that do care also have to weigh the privacy concerns about the fact that they have a now static prefix for their networks, much like static IPv4 addresses.

Personally I'd prefer ISPs to take an approach like this by default, but allow the option for the consumer to have a statically assigned IPv6 prefix for free if they want it, who understand its implications.

Re: Is there hope for IPv6?

#89

Post by zzzcpan »

tambre wrote: post #79
vnw wrote: post #62

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Then, given that CG-NAT solutions have proven to work well and they don't bother most end users, it's no wonder the transition to IPv6 has stopped.

> it's no wonder the transition to IPv6 has stopped Where are you getting that from? Looking at public IPv6 statistics from big companies shows that it's going up. Google's shows a 4.5% increase in IPv6 of total traffic during the past year[0]. Facebook's shows a 6% increase and at 55% for the US [1]. Meanwhile Mexico went from 5% IPv6 to 25% this year [2]. [0]: https://www.google.com/intl/en/ipv6/statistics.html [1]…

These statistics are meaningless propaganda. What you should be interested in is the velocity of IPv6 adoption growth among ISPs and countries where adoption stopped all together, to know what to expect from actual adoption in coming years. (it's basically a failure btw)

Re: Is there hope for IPv6?

#90

Post by apple4ever »

SlowRobotAhead wrote: post #32
rawoke083600 wrote: post #25

how about ipv5 and we just add an extra .255 ? Im sure our kids wilk figure out a better solution... ?

You joke, but I’m pretty sure ipv6 suffered by removing the familiar octets system in favor of something most people can’t understand.

Absolutely. Its so much easier to read 10.59.271.49 than 2001:ACE3:26CF:0192:6A42:18A3:018F2:3752.
Post reply on HN