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

Update: Approaching IPv4 Run-out

ripe.net

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

41–50 of 140 posts

Re: Update: Approaching IPv4 Run-out

#41

Post by tyingq »

icebraining wrote: post #40
tyingq wrote: post #28

I wonder if they will implement some kind of clawback for orgs that are sitting on large chunks of sparsely used blocks. Old tech companies and colleges come to mind. https://myip.ms/info/ip_ranges_blocks/Major_Biggest_IP_Addre...

As far as I understand from previous discussions, those blocks (1) can't be split among a bunch of providers, since it would bloat routing tables and (2) wouldn't extend the timeline very much, so it's not worthwhile engaging in that fight.

There's apparently a wait list for /24's now. Desperation might inspire a new set of discussions.

I believe BGP tables are close to crossing a threshold. (768k entries) that breaks a bunch of routers, so they need to address that anyway.

Re: Update: Approaching IPv4 Run-out

#42

Post by icebraining »

nathancahill wrote: post #36

How does this apply to email delivery? The biggest factor is having a "clean" IP address. Do these eventually become prohibitively expensive? Does email protocols switch to IPv6 and stop considering address reputation?

I think lots of these schemes use each /64 prefix as a single unit for reputation purposes.

Re: Update: Approaching IPv4 Run-out

#43

Post by alex_duf »

ThePhysicist wrote: post #9

We're still waiting for the processing of our application from beginning of September, I hope we can still get at least a /24 block. We mainly plan to use it to become independent of specific cloud / IT providers and control more of our infrastructure stack.

I'm not sure in what business area you are, but aren't domain names usually enough to abstract resolution from location?

Re: Update: Approaching IPv4 Run-out

#44

Post by icebraining »

lifty wrote: post #32

I'm curious if there are people here that have migrated their home network to IPv6 only, and if yes, what are the challenges encountered? I suspect the biggest problem is that there still are many websites that only have IPv4

If you have a beefy router, you can install Tayga[1] to do the translation from 6-to-4 for all client devices. Then you can use Google's DNS server or run your own, to translate IPv4 addresses in the replies into IPv6 equivalents.

[1] http://www.litech.org/tayga/

Re: Update: Approaching IPv4 Run-out

#45

Post by top256 »

nathancahill wrote: post #36

How does this apply to email delivery? The biggest factor is having a "clean" IP address. Do these eventually become prohibitively expensive? Does email protocols switch to IPv6 and stop considering address reputation?

With email deliverability the key factor is now domain name reputation and less ip.

Re: Update: Approaching IPv4 Run-out

#46

Post by gerdesj »

lifty wrote: post #32

I'm curious if there are people here that have migrated their home network to IPv6 only, and if yes, what are the challenges encountered? I suspect the biggest problem is that there still are many websites that only have IPv4

IPv6 only is a bit daft as yet because you'll need a 6 to 4 gateway of some sort to see much of the web/internets. For starters, this:

$ dig news.ycombinator.com AAAA

... fails

I have been running dual stack at home for around five years now with only a couple of wobbles that I can point at my ISP losing their IPv6 and not noticing for a while.

Re: Update: Approaching IPv4 Run-out

#47

Post by PappaPatat »

superkuh wrote: post #39
goatinaboat wrote: post #8

They were panicking about IPv4 running out 20 years ago, the amazing inventions of NAT and CIDR meant it never happened. I predict that we’ll be here in 20 years again.

If you look at the mobile telco IPv4 blocks, or lack thereof, you'll see that NAT is here, heavily, almost ubiqitously, as carrier NAT. It's destroyed the network functionality of mobile telecommunications (lacking routable ipv4) and made them essentially dumb terminals lacking any ability to participate in the 'net. They can only consume other's services.

Can you explain what you mean with "It's destroyed the network functionality of mobile telecommunications"? Since I can think of exactly zero reasons one needs his handheld to be reachable from the Internet (that has not been long solved).

Re: Update: Approaching IPv4 Run-out

#48

Post by icebraining »

pilif wrote: post #19
tambre wrote: post #14

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Supporting IPv6 natively would be cheaper as they'd need to invest less in NAT capacity.

They will more than make up the difference by increasing the rent for the public IPv4 addresses they got when they were still available.

Yeah, but it's not like offering IPv6 prevents those rents, so why waste that money on NAT capacity if they can pocket it instead?

Re: Update: Approaching IPv4 Run-out

#50

Post by icebraining »

PappaPatat wrote: post #47
superkuh wrote: post #39

Earlier quoted context omitted.

If you look at the mobile telco IPv4 blocks, or lack thereof, you'll see that NAT is here, heavily, almost ubiqitously, as carrier NAT. It's destroyed the network functionality of mobile telecommunications (lacking routable ipv4) and made them essentially dumb terminals lacking any ability to participate in the 'net. They can only consume other's services.

Can you explain what you mean with "It's destroyed the network functionality of mobile telecommunications"? Since I can think of exactly zero reasons one needs his handheld to be reachable from the Internet (that has not been long solved).

What solution do you know for getting two clients behind CGNAT to talk to each other reliably, without relying on a third-party service?
Post reply on HN