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

40% of Google users now connect via IPv6

google.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

51–60 of 353 posts

Re: 40% of Google users now connect via IPv6

#51

Post by sgt »

sneak wrote: post #44
NelsonMinar wrote: post #35

I sure wish Starlink supported IPv6. They're a brand new ISP planning for millions of customers and decided from the start they couldn't get enough IPv4 addresses for everyone. Fair enough! But we're stuck with Carrier Grade NAT and it is a drag. On Starlink it's impossible to host a server socket directly, which makes any peer to peer networking a PITA. Geocoding IP addresses doesn't work so I have to bend over back…

Get a raspberry pi, set up two vlans, run wireguard, and send 100% of your uplink traffic to a remote vpn endpoint. This gets you off their IP, and also has the added benefit of not letting them analyze your traffic.

Why two VLAN's? Are you worried the traffic is analyzed by the ISP locally?

Re: 40% of Google users now connect via IPv6

#53

Post by neilalexander »

mordae wrote: post #50
NelsonMinar wrote: post #35

I sure wish Starlink supported IPv6. They're a brand new ISP planning for millions of customers and decided from the start they couldn't get enough IPv4 addresses for everyone. Fair enough! But we're stuck with Carrier Grade NAT and it is a drag. On Starlink it's impossible to host a server socket directly, which makes any peer to peer networking a PITA. Geocoding IP addresses doesn't work so I have to bend over back…

A local ISP told me that they want to get into IPv6 as soon as possible. NATs are getting costly and moving just YouTube traffic to IPv6 would actually help a lot. The problem is with end user devices that do not use a stable DUID and when the client hits the reset button, it changes. We are probably going to work around this by responding from the closest hop and taking the MAC into account.

Why should an unstable DUID matter? The prefix won't change.

Re: 40% of Google users now connect via IPv6

#54

Post by aidenn0 »

xur17 wrote: post #8
vmoore wrote: post #2

Anyone go out of their way to disable IPV6 on all their systems, even at the hardware level, like on routers etc? What's a good reason to avoid IPV6?

I recently disabled it on my router because dns would fail to work after a day or 2. When I did more research, it looked like others were running into the same issue, but there was no known fix, so the easiest solution was to disable ipv6 entirely. I used to go out of my way to get ipv6 working (back when it was "new" I used a bridge service to get access), but I simply do not have the time to figure out what might b…

I run ipv6 but still use v4 for DNS

Re: 40% of Google users now connect via IPv6

#56

Post by ignoramous »

TekMol wrote: post #41

My website has a few hundred thousand users. My development is completely user driven. I get hundreds of feature requests and other emails regarding my site per month. So far, not a single user mentioned IPv6. So I never added an AAAA record. The codebase has grown for over 10 years now. God knows what subtle breakages would happen when IPv6 requests come in. I wonder if I ever will add IPv6 or just leave the site ru…

> So I never added an AAAA record.

IPv4 servers are reachable by IPv6-only clients. ipv6test.google.com famously has only an A (IPv4) record for a reason.

> God knows what subtle breakages would happen when IPv6 requests come in.

Unless your product deals with the nitty gritty of the networking stack itself, pretty sure everything continues to hum along just fine, if the basics are covered.

Re: 40% of Google users now connect via IPv6

#57

Post by neilalexander »

ajsnigrutin wrote: post #37
vmoore wrote: post #2

Anyone go out of their way to disable IPV6 on all their systems, even at the hardware level, like on routers etc? What's a good reason to avoid IPV6?

Firewalls are more complex on IPv6 (you need to pass a bunch of ICMPv6 through, to make it work), and some residential routers have very bad or even zero firewall support for ipv6, so your devices, that would otherwise be "protected" (not really) by NAT are now directly visible to everyone on the internet. This usually isn't a problem for power users (who know how to set up and (re)confgure a firewall) nor for most b…

> Firewalls are more complex on IPv6

This is not true. Firewall rules work exactly the same in IPv6 land as they do in IPv4 land.

> you need to pass a bunch of ICMPv6 through, to make it work

Indeed you shouldn't block ICMPv6, but that is not really making anything "more complex".

> some residential routers have very bad or even zero firewall support for ipv6

Is there a proven set of routers that go through the trouble of supporting IPv6 routing but not include a firewall?

Re: 40% of Google users now connect via IPv6

#58

Post by Dachande663 »

kingsleyopara wrote: post #52

Can anyone explain why the trend is cyclical with a period of a week?

The peaks are on Saturdays so my guess is residential ISPs/personal traffic peaking on weekends while the mon-fri 9-5 are on older legacy IPv4 systems. But that's just a guess as the reason why.

Re: 40% of Google users now connect via IPv6

#60

Post by neilalexander »

krnlpnc wrote: post #38

“In December 1998, IPv6 became a Draft Standard for the IETF,[2] which subsequently ratified it as an Internet Standard on 14 July 2017.” 40% adoption after 25 years? Really highlights how terrible IPv6 is in terms of backwards compatibility. What we needed was an internet protocol with the benefits of IPv6 that runs as an extension to the IPv4 stack. The current approach to duplicate everything into IPv6 is wasteful…

It's not as simple as that. There's no just "extending" the IPv4 stack unless you're going to "extend" every device that supports IPv4 with it. By that point you'd might as well just have IPv6.
Post reply on HN