91–100 of 148 posts
One interesting observation about IPv6 I've made is that in Europe IPv6 and FTTx seem inversely correlated. For example Spain is one of the leaders in FTTx with 87% of homes covered, but have only 3% IPv6 adoption according to Google. Meanwhile Germany has one of the highest IPv6 adoptions in Europe, 52%, and one of the lowest FTTx coverages (16%). Latvia, Lithuania, Belarus, and Iceland all have 90% FTTx and 10% IPv…
Earlier quoted context omitted.
I don't know how long ago that was, but I kinda have to call bullshit on her claim (even if it was hyperbole for the sake of making a point). Companies exist to make bespoke solutions for this very purpose, and nowadays outsourcing that kind of work is just natural for Amazon. Hell, they made a deal with Rivian to get a fleet of electric delivery trucks, getting some Chinese manufacturer to slap a Cortex m53 into a s…
A core or edge router in a terabit+ scale network is a far cry from getting someone in China to make you a bunch of Netgear clones. The Cisco 5500 series chassis is about 21 rack units (or about 3 feet) tall to give you an idea of the scale of these devices in the real world. They are also jam packed with custom ASICs that allow packet switching at extremely high speeds, which would need to be redesigned to handle 16…
Assuming you’re talking about the NCS 5500, I thought the whole point of that platform was that it wasn’t using Cisco proprietary ASICS and was just using Broadcom chips with IOS-XR wedged on it anyway to give it the appearance of being a budget competitor to the ASR9K while lacking the majority of the feature set because ... it’s not using Cisco’s proprietary ASICS that support all those features.
Also, they have full ipv6 routing and switching support. So does the C6500, which is ancient (and still in production in many places)
It boggles my mind that IPv6 has such a slow roll out (it's been a thing since the early 2000s = twenty years ago). I would have thought that all the major tech companies supported it years ago on all their infrastructures, websites and apps. But there are still a lot of hold outs. What about IPv6 makes it such a chore to become widespread?
Give it another 20 years... https://www.google.com/intl/en/ipv6/statistics.html
Earlier quoted context omitted.
> It boggles my mind that IPv6 has such a slow roll out (it's been a thing since the early 2000s = twenty years ago). IPv4 had just as slow a roll out in some ways. TCP/IP had its flag day in 1983: * https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Flag_day_(computing) There was early commercialization of the Internet around ±1990, but it didn't really start taking off until around 1994: * https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Commercializatio…
So it took 15 years to build the entire Internet from scratch but it's taking over 20 years to upgrade to a new version.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
I don't know how long ago that was, but I kinda have to call bullshit on her claim (even if it was hyperbole for the sake of making a point). Companies exist to make bespoke solutions for this very purpose, and nowadays outsourcing that kind of work is just natural for Amazon. Hell, they made a deal with Rivian to get a fleet of electric delivery trucks, getting some Chinese manufacturer to slap a Cortex m53 into a s…
A core or edge router in a terabit+ scale network is a far cry from getting someone in China to make you a bunch of Netgear clones. The Cisco 5500 series chassis is about 21 rack units (or about 3 feet) tall to give you an idea of the scale of these devices in the real world. They are also jam packed with custom ASICs that allow packet switching at extremely high speeds, which would need to be redesigned to handle 16…
It boggles my mind that IPv6 has such a slow roll out (it's been a thing since the early 2000s = twenty years ago). I would have thought that all the major tech companies supported it years ago on all their infrastructures, websites and apps. But there are still a lot of hold outs. What about IPv6 makes it such a chore to become widespread?
From the service provider point of view, as long as their customers can reach them with ipv4, they have no reasons to switch.
From the customer ISP point of view, as long as services people use provide an ipv4 option, there is no reasons to switch.
Maybe the ones that have the most reasons to switch are new internet services and new ISP which might have a hard time getting ipv4 blocks. But that's just one more reason for established services not to move too fast :/
Earlier quoted context omitted.
Years ago, the French ISP `Free`, after much dragging of feet, enabled IPv6 support for their customers. Performance was abysmal, 2x-10x slower than IPv4. Turns out many of the routers out there can perform IPv4 table lookups in the data-plane (fast-path), but IPv6 is delegated to the control-plane (slow-path), for much slower performance.
I see the opposite right now, with transfer rates being about the same but latency over IPv4 being quite bad compared to IPv6: Pinging www.google.com with IPv6: $ ping www.google.com PING www.google.com(sc-in-x67.1e100.net (2404:6800:4003:c02::67)) 56 data bytes 64 bytes from sc-in-f103.1e100.net (2404:6800:4003:c02::67): icmp_seq=1 ttl=108 time=4.46 ms 64 bytes from sc-in-x67.1e100.net (2404:6800:4003:c02::67): icmp…
Earlier quoted context omitted.
> In consumer routers, port forwarding is the exact same thing as an inbound traffic firewall. But when I turn on IPv6, what is the equivalent? Is my printer still protected from random inbound internet traffic? Copy-pasting from a previous discussion a little while ago: --- IPv4+NAT does not remove any more classes of problems than IPv6+firewall. Firewalls under IPv6 work exactly the same way as they do with IPv4. A…
All right, but assuming I have a dynamic DNS setup, how do I connect to one of the hosts in my network? I think most OSes do that privacy thing where they periodically randomize the suffix of their v6 address.
The 'management' address won't be used as the source addrrss packets originating _from_ the host unless the use of temporary/privacy addresses is disabled.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
I dug into IPv6 a few weeks ago. If you learn it from the ground up, as if you were first learning IPv4, it truly is not more complicated than IPv4+ARP. Length of address may be a reason people don't look at it at first, but if you look at it from an engineering perspective, it makes sense. The only thing I don't like about it, is how they created SLAAC (a way for a client to auto-configure its own IP address without…
In what way doesn't Ubiquity sorry it? I'm using only Ubiquity gear at home, and my network is fully IPv6. My router is an Edgerouter by the way. I do recall seeing some of the configuration wizard stuff not having options for IPv6 in the past, but that's just for initial configuration anyway. Once you are done with that you do everything from the config tree anyway.
It boggles my mind that IPv6 has such a slow roll out (it's been a thing since the early 2000s = twenty years ago). I would have thought that all the major tech companies supported it years ago on all their infrastructures, websites and apps. But there are still a lot of hold outs. What about IPv6 makes it such a chore to become widespread?
For me it's a few things that keep me from fully embracing it, & largely the problem is perception, as others have noted. 1. I'm a small-time self hoster. I need/want to control access to geographic locations and using IPv4 makes that pretty easy. Last time I checked, IPv6 was just so wrong that it's no good to use at all, and most IPv6 addresses were "unknown" in origin. 2. I'm used to the pseudo security that a NAT…
Depends on the exact rule you're writing, but nftables can remove a lot of duplication. Many rules cover both IPv4 and IPv6. It's the default since Debian 11.