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

131–140 of 140 posts

Re: Update: Approaching IPv4 Run-out

#131

Post by Dagger2 »

judge2020 wrote: post #25
paulsutter wrote: post #20

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Wrong interpretation: the linked chart shows client-side adoption among Google users In practice today IPv6 is a kind of high functionality NAT for consumer devices. A more interesting statistic would be server-side adoption.

And more importantly, server-side adoption excluding Cloudflare, or at least a breakdown by IP and not by website.

This is much less important. A legacy v4-only server can be reached from v6 via NAT64 (which basically works like NAT but with v6 on the inside), so there's no particular need to get rid of all of them.

It's much more important to get rid of legacy v4-only clients, to make it possible to run v6-only servers.

Re: Update: Approaching IPv4 Run-out

#132

Post by Dagger2 »

gerdesj wrote: post #127
Dagger2 wrote: post #121

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Indeed it is, and it works fine. v4-only websites aren't a problem for running v6-only.

I am now at home and tried your experiment but I have IPv4 as well as IPv6. The wget forced to v6 does not work here. That's a bug somewhere. My eyes are no longer happy 8( ... 8) ... ahh, all OK now!

I have a NAT64 translator handling the translation, plus a DNS64 server to point clients to it. You probably don't have those, because it's typically easier to run native v4 instead. I just wanted to make the point that v4-only websites are totally not a problem.

Re: Update: Approaching IPv4 Run-out

#133

Post by pilif »

icebraining wrote: post #48
pilif wrote: post #19

Earlier quoted context omitted.

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?

Once IPv6 is available widely enough, prices for IPv4 addresses will plummet because there is a nearly unlimited amount of IPv6 addresses available for much cheaper or free

Re: Update: Approaching IPv4 Run-out

#134

Post by jaimex2 »

tyingq wrote: post #65
jaimex2 wrote: post #63

Earlier quoted context omitted.

ipv4 is the new bitcoin?

Don't know how credible it is, but these folks were predicting the current ~$20 price goes to ~$50 over a year's time: Chart: https://www.retevia.net/wp-content/uploads/2019/02/IPv4-Pric... Article: https://www.retevia.net/address-pricing-2019-and-beyond/

Yeah, I think there will be a small bubble as some try and buy all they can while we continue to transition to ipv6

Re: Update: Approaching IPv4 Run-out

#135

Post by cesarb »

Dagger2 wrote: post #132
gerdesj wrote: post #127

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I am now at home and tried your experiment but I have IPv4 as well as IPv6. The wget forced to v6 does not work here. That's a bug somewhere. My eyes are no longer happy 8( ... 8) ... ahh, all OK now!

I have a NAT64 translator handling the translation, plus a DNS64 server to point clients to it. You probably don't have those, because it's typically easier to run native v4 instead. I just wanted to make the point that v4-only websites are totally not a problem.

> I just wanted to make the point that v4-only websites are totally not a problem.

They will be once DoH breaks DNS64, unless Cloudflare invents a way to make it somehow work (perhaps hosting their own NAT64 gateway?).

Re: Update: Approaching IPv4 Run-out

#136

Post by oarsinsync »

the_mitsuhiko wrote: post #70
oarsinsync wrote: post #21

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> The more ISPs migrate to IPv6 and CG-NAT, the more free IPv4 addresses for everyone else. Uhhh, they're not returning their IPv4 addresses to any kind of free pool. Those IPs that they have allocated remain with them.

If they can make money selling them I don’t see that happening.

Current cost of an IPv4 address: $20

Value of product that can be sold per IP address: $5 - $1000/month.

Having worked in an organisation that had millions of addresses, we opted to carry on having a long term sustainable business over selling our IPs for short term gains.

Eventually the addressable market on IPv6 will reach a critical mass. At that point, the value of IPv4 will become relevant to niche markets only.

Re: Update: Approaching IPv4 Run-out

#137

Post by criddell »

guenthert wrote: post #128
criddell wrote: post #123

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Google is one of those influential companies and I could totally see them declaring that their crawler is going to stop visiting IPv4 after some date.

They would do that only once it costs them more money than they could make with the retrieved data. That's not going to happen anytime soon. You might as well wonder whether google is actually going to stop crawling IPv6 addresses (are there any significant IPv6-only servers?)

That's true. However, even if they just said IPv6 destinations will be used in the ranking algorithm as a positive indicator of a site that's being actively maintained, that alone would be enough to get some people moving.

Re: Update: Approaching IPv4 Run-out

#138

Post by Dagger2 »

cesarb wrote: post #135
Dagger2 wrote: post #132

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I have a NAT64 translator handling the translation, plus a DNS64 server to point clients to it. You probably don't have those, because it's typically easier to run native v4 instead. I just wanted to make the point that v4-only websites are totally not a problem.

> I just wanted to make the point that v4-only websites are totally not a problem. They will be once DoH breaks DNS64, unless Cloudflare invents a way to make it somehow work (perhaps hosting their own NAT64 gateway?).

Since they seem to want to take over the internet, I guess that would be right up their street.

Clients can also synthesize the DNS64 records themselves locally, or use 464xlat.

Re: Update: Approaching IPv4 Run-out

#139

Post by rstuart4133 »

bifrost wrote: post #99
JimDabell wrote: post #83

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Apple have made it a hard requirement for apps to operate correctly on IPv6-only connections for a few years now. If your app doesn't work unless it's on IPv4, Apple will reject it.

That can't be totally true, Twitter doesn't work on v6.

Not only can it be true I've done it at a conference, which is to say I've implemented an IPv6 only network for conference delegates and had zero connectivity complaints.

The ingredient you are missing is while the clients only talk IPv6, the gateway they go through (must) have both IPv6 and IPv4 addresses. There is a well defined mapping from IPv4 to IPv6 addresses, so if the IPv6 clients need to communicate with a IPv4 only host they use it's mapped IPv6 address. The gateway then NAT's all those mapped IPv6 addresses to it's IPv4 address.

Which only leave the problem of does an IPv6 client know to use an mapped IPv4 address, given it is supposed to know nothing about the IPv4 world. The answer is you make it use a DNS server that lies. I'll leave it to you to figure out exactly how it lies, but it isn't hard to figure out given it has clients that only understand AAAA records, and some hosts (such as twitter) that only resolve to A records.

Re: Update: Approaching IPv4 Run-out

#140

Post by bifrost »

rstuart4133 wrote: post #139
bifrost wrote: post #99

Earlier quoted context omitted.

That can't be totally true, Twitter doesn't work on v6.

Not only can it be true I've done it at a conference, which is to say I've implemented an IPv6 only network for conference delegates and had zero connectivity complaints. The ingredient you are missing is while the clients only talk IPv6, the gateway they go through (must) have both IPv6 and IPv4 addresses. There is a well defined mapping from IPv4 to IPv6 addresses, so if the IPv6 clients need to communicate with a…

> The gateway then NAT's all those mapped IPv6 addresses to it's IPv4 address.

Right, then its not a pure v6 network, its got v4 somewhere patched in. When I'm on my pure v6 network at home, Twitter does not work.

Post reply on HN