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

IPv6 Watch

ipv6.watch

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

41–50 of 107 posts

Re: IPv6 Watch

#41

Post by mgbmtl »

whoknowswhat11 wrote: post #19
fintler wrote: post #15

A basic understanding of what an IPv6 world will look like really didn't click for me until I read the IPv6 Address Planning book by Tom Coffeen. Before that, I really just saw it as IPv4 with longer addresses. Once you dig into the details, you come to the realization that it's a nearly complete reinvention of IPv4. Network planning looks quite different (especially when it comes to subnets) when you plan them with…

They should have had either a smaller scope / simpler extension to IPv4 with a better backwards compat story for IPv6 only clients (some have since shown up a bit). Or really done the reinvent - there were some interesting ideas especially for folks with lots of link handoffs (ie cell phones driving down a road etc) - can't find the write-up quickly.

Do you mean Mobile IP? https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Mobile_IP (part of IPv6)

Re: IPv6 Watch

#42

Post by quantico »

amarshall wrote: post #33
quantico wrote: post #7

It feels ironic to post this on a site which itself does not support IPv6.

It does support IPv6, though. $ dig +short ipv6.watch aaaa 2a01:4f8:1c1c:4b9f:: $ curl -6Is https://ipv6.watch/ | head -1 HTTP/1.1 200 OK Unless you mean HN? Feels strange to me to make that comparison.

I was referring to Hacker News' lack of support for IPv6, however it is nice to see that ipv6.watch does support it.

To elaborate: I feel that the irony comes from an apparent desire by this website's users towards supporting IPv6, as evidenced by a few articles about the topic on the first page today; Raising awareness of IPv6 support on a site that does not.

Re: IPv6 Watch

#43

Post by [deleted] »

Scene_Cast2 wrote: post #18
fintler wrote: post #15

A basic understanding of what an IPv6 world will look like really didn't click for me until I read the IPv6 Address Planning book by Tom Coffeen. Before that, I really just saw it as IPv4 with longer addresses. Once you dig into the details, you come to the realization that it's a nearly complete reinvention of IPv4. Network planning looks quite different (especially when it comes to subnets) when you plan them with…

Could you give a brief overview of your current understanding? I'm curious as to why /60 would be too limited, and how it's different from IPv4.

[deleted]

Re: IPv6 Watch

#45

Post by fintler »

adkadskhj wrote: post #38
fintler wrote: post #15

A basic understanding of what an IPv6 world will look like really didn't click for me until I read the IPv6 Address Planning book by Tom Coffeen. Before that, I really just saw it as IPv4 with longer addresses. Once you dig into the details, you come to the realization that it's a nearly complete reinvention of IPv4. Network planning looks quite different (especially when it comes to subnets) when you plan them with…

How useful would that book (IPv6 Address Planning) be to someone not working specifically in networking/ops? I like developing applications and i manage, of course, my home network. I'd love a book that gives me everything i need to know about IPv6. From justifications, to things to know when working with it, implementing it, using it in my local network, etc. I don't perhaps need or care to learn it at a super low l…

I would guess that the first two chapters would be useful.

Honestly, if your first thought isn't "oh wow, I would love to learn how to plan out IPv6 networks", it might not be worthwhile.

Re: IPv6 Watch

#46

Post by selfhoster11 »

gorgoiler wrote: post #31
Scene_Cast2 wrote: post #18

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Could you give a brief overview of your current understanding? I'm curious as to why /60 would be too limited, and how it's different from IPv4.

[not OP, but hey…] There’s no need for DHCP with IPv6. Clients choose the last 64 bits of an address randomly. The address space is huge — zero probability of a duplicate address . The first 64 bits therefore identify the network. If your ISP routes a /60 to you then you get to split that into 16x /64s. That’s probably fine, but the IETF recommendation is to dish out a /56 to small sites and give them a /48 if they a…

Some way of automatically propagating that network prefix to anything connected to the network would be nice. Otherwise we're just stuck punching in IP addresses like barbarians.

Re: IPv6 Watch

#47

Post by floatboth »

jtchang wrote: post #28

IPv6 has barely a carrot and no stick. Does anyone give me more money for using IPv6? Sure I might be able to save some money by not using IPv4 but that is rare. Government doesn't incentivize it. Ad networks don't either. There is very little penalty (financial or otherwise) for not going to IPv6. IPv6 will not happen until those sticks and carrots get bigger.

Just now on the frontpage also: a link to Hetzner's announcement of v4 address prices. Stick is coming on the hosting side.

Re: IPv6 Watch

#48

Post by ATsch »

Scene_Cast2 wrote: post #18
fintler wrote: post #15

A basic understanding of what an IPv6 world will look like really didn't click for me until I read the IPv6 Address Planning book by Tom Coffeen. Before that, I really just saw it as IPv4 with longer addresses. Once you dig into the details, you come to the realization that it's a nearly complete reinvention of IPv4. Network planning looks quite different (especially when it comes to subnets) when you plan them with…

Could you give a brief overview of your current understanding? I'm curious as to why /60 would be too limited, and how it's different from IPv4.

IPv6 has Stateless Address Auto-Configuration (SLAAC) as preferred method for address assignment. This allows clients to generate addresses for themselves as needed. For that to work efficiently, the address space needs to be sufficiently large that collisions are unlikely even in larger networks. Because of that, it mandates a subnet size of /64.

More generally, a big difference in v6 is that you no longer have to plan subnet sizes at all. Whereas previously you'd carefully choose the next available address to minimize address waste, with v6 you can just assign the addresses in whatever way makes sense to you.

Re: IPv6 Watch

#49

Post by p1mrx »

whoknowswhat11 wrote: post #20
duskwuff wrote: post #16

Earlier quoted context omitted.

How does an IPv4-only host send a packet to an IPv6-only host?

They could have at least let ipv6 only folks talk to ipv4 more easily. Something like 464XLAT maybe built in out the gate more? You go ipv6 until next hop is IPv4. If you are in IPv4 mapped address space translate to IPv4 there and continue.

NAT64/464XLAT exists and it works. It can't really be "part of the protocol" because it depends on stateful IPv4 devices in the middle of the network. Ultimately it's up to the ISPs which IPv4-as-a-service mechanism they want to deploy.

Re: IPv6 Watch

#50

Post by MayeulC »

woxko wrote: post #22
quantico wrote: post #7

It feels ironic to post this on a site which itself does not support IPv6.

In what way would using ipv6 enhance your experience using this site?

The site becomes reachable to IPv6-only hosts.

Some servers can work reliably with only IPv6, for instance, until you need to contact IPv4-only servers.

I would like my mail server to be IPv6-only, but that's not currently possible, for instance.

I wonder how many customers can realistically hide behind a single IPv4 (CGNAT), given that there are 65535 TCP/UDP ports.

Post reply on HN