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

United States IPv6 adoption over 50%

google.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

61–70 of 164 posts

Re: United States IPv6 adoption over 50%

#61

Post by sliken »

throw0101a wrote: post #46
scoopertrooper wrote: post #14

Am I the only one that hates IPv6 ergonomics? I have to transcribe IPv4 addresses all the time, I'd hate to try and do it with a 128 bit address. Could they not have gone with 64 bit addresses, was 18,446,744,073,709,551,615 addresses really not enough?

> Could they not have gone with 64 bit addresses, was 18,446,744,073,709,551,615 addresses really not enough? Consider the counter-factual: what if 64 bits ended up being not enough? Given all the effort that needed and still needs to be done to move from IPv4 to IPv6, if we eventually needed to move to IPv7/8 it would even more difficult given how much IP in general has/is pervading civilization. It's better to have…

Heh, I'd argue that ZFS would be better if they went with 64 bits, especially since it's 2^128 blocks, not bytes, or bits.

I did the math and it was something like a decade of the worlds production of disks, in a single filesystem. I could somewhat understand if it was a distributed filesystem, but it's not.

Re: United States IPv6 adoption over 50%

#62

Post by Retric »

orev wrote: post #26
sneak wrote: post #10

Earlier quoted context omitted.

There is a lot of cultural inertia that instantly biases against anything new in sysadmin/netadmin circles. It's super annoying, tbh. A subset of technologists only seem comfortable with the technology that was available when they were 18-24, regardless of how old they get. "What's this? I never needed it before, what's the sysctl to turn it off?"

There is a lot of cultural inertia that instantly biases against anything old and stable in developer circles. It's super annoying, tbh. A subset of developers only seem comfortable with technology invented in the past 18-24 months, regardless of how untested and unstable it is. “What's this? It was written 2 years ago? It must be old and useless. I’m going to require my app to use the latest version and I don’t care…

How odd, I find the opposite with most developers having close to zero tolerance for buggy tools.

Trying to keep jumping to the new hotness is simply a survival strategy.

Re: United States IPv6 adoption over 50%

#63

Post by novok »

pjc50 wrote: post #39
sneak wrote: post #10

Earlier quoted context omitted.

There is a lot of cultural inertia that instantly biases against anything new in sysadmin/netadmin circles. It's super annoying, tbh. A subset of technologists only seem comfortable with the technology that was available when they were 18-24, regardless of how old they get. "What's this? I never needed it before, what's the sysctl to turn it off?"

Well, yes. Getting up to speed on the new thing is work, and unless it's clear what the benefit is then I'm disinclined to do that work. IP6 requires a bunch of new tooling and configuration, and if running dual stack provides plenty of new opportunities for failure.

In 2021 IP6 is still 'new' to you?

Re: United States IPv6 adoption over 50%

#65

Post by VectorLock »

sliken wrote: post #59
vidanay wrote: post #8

About 5 years ago, I asked the owner of my fixed wireless ISP if he was planning to support IPv6 and I received a 500 word email rant about the uselessness of v6. I haven't asked again. (I still get a 0/10 score at https://test-ipv6.com/ )

Heh, well of course, if you have enough IPv4, there's not much IPv6 does for you. However if your a normal consumer with a single network visible IP (if that), it's REALLY useful. I've got a /60 (16 /64s'), and I have one per port on my router and it's quite nice to be able to get to anything inside my home network from anywhere on the internet. Filesharing, monitoring home automation, opening/closing my garage door,…

>to anything inside my home network from anywhere on the internet

When you put it like that, it sounds kind of scary.

Re: United States IPv6 adoption over 50%

#66

Post by normaler »

syshum wrote: post #58
Latty wrote: post #42

Earlier quoted context omitted.

That article was really very optimistic about NAT traversal, while being very pessimistic about solutions to avoiding memorising IP addresses, which I think says something about their perspective going in. NAT is a nightmare that has directly lead to the crappy world of every "IoT" device relying on some remote service that can shut down any time, instead of just... connecting to your device. Also every game having c…

NAT not being designed for security does not negate the effect of security it does have. This goes to the 80/20 rule, IPv6 is a security nightmare if not deployed correctly, and I am surprised more home users have not gotten hit with this security time bomb

I feel that. I have a VPS that i run OpenBSD on. I messed up my config and now my phone was publicly reachable via its /72 ipv6 from the /64 adress i was assigned.

Kinda scary/weird

Re: United States IPv6 adoption over 50%

#68

Post by magila »

notreallyserio wrote: post #56
sneak wrote: post #10

Earlier quoted context omitted.

There is a lot of cultural inertia that instantly biases against anything new in sysadmin/netadmin circles. It's super annoying, tbh. A subset of technologists only seem comfortable with the technology that was available when they were 18-24, regardless of how old they get. "What's this? I never needed it before, what's the sysctl to turn it off?"

> "What's this? I never needed it before, what's the sysctl to turn it off?" Of course, turning off IPv6 fixed a lot of connectivity issues, at least back in the day. Maybe it's better now, but I see no benefit in re-enabling it. What's the value-add?

The value is that you don't get caught with your pants down when IPv4 addresses get expensive enough to shaping businesses' decisions. It's going to be a lot less stressful to come to grips with IPv6 now rather than waiting until it becomes a critical path dependency of some business goal.

Re: United States IPv6 adoption over 50%

#69

Post by jolux »

orev wrote: post #26
sneak wrote: post #10

Earlier quoted context omitted.

There is a lot of cultural inertia that instantly biases against anything new in sysadmin/netadmin circles. It's super annoying, tbh. A subset of technologists only seem comfortable with the technology that was available when they were 18-24, regardless of how old they get. "What's this? I never needed it before, what's the sysctl to turn it off?"

There is a lot of cultural inertia that instantly biases against anything old and stable in developer circles. It's super annoying, tbh. A subset of developers only seem comfortable with technology invented in the past 18-24 months, regardless of how untested and unstable it is. “What's this? It was written 2 years ago? It must be old and useless. I’m going to require my app to use the latest version and I don’t care…

One developer's "old and stable" is another developer's "filled with vulnerabilities that nobody will ever find let alone bother to fix because everyone assumes it's old and stable."

IPv6 has been a draft standard since 1998. Get a better argument.

Re: United States IPv6 adoption over 50%

#70

Post by kstrauser »

sliken wrote: post #61
throw0101a wrote: post #46

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> Could they not have gone with 64 bit addresses, was 18,446,744,073,709,551,615 addresses really not enough? Consider the counter-factual: what if 64 bits ended up being not enough? Given all the effort that needed and still needs to be done to move from IPv4 to IPv6, if we eventually needed to move to IPv7/8 it would even more difficult given how much IP in general has/is pervading civilization. It's better to have…

Heh, I'd argue that ZFS would be better if they went with 64 bits, especially since it's 2^128 blocks, not bytes, or bits. I did the math and it was something like a decade of the worlds production of disks, in a single filesystem. I could somewhat understand if it was a distributed filesystem, but it's not.

According to back-of-the-napkin math, my home NAS has more storage than was manufactured globally in the year I bought my first computer.

It doesn’t seem impossible that someone might have a single pool too big for 2^64 by the end of ZFS’s useful life.

Post reply on HN