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

191–200 of 353 posts

Re: 40% of Google users now connect via IPv6

#191

Post by oxplot »

ipython wrote: post #187
oxplot wrote: post #168

Earlier quoted context omitted.

IPv6 amounts to a firmware update which the current hardware is and any future hardware will be capable of. The major hurdle in scaling Starlink is fast and cheap deployment of 1000s of satellite hardware. At the moment, the sole focus of SpaceX in relation to Starlink is to get their V2 satellites to orbit in order to keep up with bandwidth demands. V2 requires the Starship system which is yet to make it to orbit. T…

It’s really too bad that ipv6 is only… checks notes… 26 years old now. I realize that may be an unreliable metric, so it’s roughly equivalent to 2.88 react.js lifetimes, or 3.25 vue.js lifetimes. When the ipv6 spec was released, the latest python release did not yet support list comprehensions. In other words, there is no reason to not support ipv6 out of the box in 2022.

> there is no reason to not support ipv6 out of the box in 2022

Use the age of a service as the metric, not the absolute year we're in. It's probably reasonable to say that there is little reason not to support IPv6 for an ISP with X years of operation. Starlink is young still.

An analogy is worldwide sales for a new laptop company. You can say that in the age of globalism, there is no reason not to ship to every continent right off the bat. But for a startup with limited cash that has lot of building blocks to lay out, it's a huge risk. They should plan for it, but only branch out when they've got a solid foundation.

Re: 40% of Google users now connect via IPv6

#192

Post by stingraycharles »

martinald wrote: post #134
mordae wrote: post #50

Earlier quoted context omitted.

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 are NATs getting costly? Don't quite understand.

To do NAT, you need to map (external) port numbers to (internal) IP addresses. This is done using connection tracking: tracking the state of the connection and the appropriate mapping.

And connection tracking gets expensive at scale.

Re: 40% of Google users now connect via IPv6

#193

Post by coredog64 »

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…

This is what stops me from turning on IPv6 from my provider. The modem has a reasonable IPv4 firewall but jack for IPv6 and I don’t have the time to figure it out.

Re: 40% of Google users now connect via IPv6

#194

Post by hnarn »

0x006A wrote: post #184

Its mostly impossible to run servers only with IPv6 since for some reason Canonical/Ubuntu decided to require IPv4 for snap, after years of not having any issues with IPv6 only deb mirrors. Go is also basically bound to IPv4 since it depends on github to pull packages its time to make hall of shame for software that does not allow developers to build IPv6 only going forward.

> Go is also basically bound to IPv4 since it depends on github to pull packages

Is this also true for the Go module proxy?

Re: 40% of Google users now connect via IPv6

#195

Post by ravis11 »

Semaphor wrote: post #99
skrause wrote: post #90

Earlier quoted context omitted.

In Germany, where the Google statistics show 64% IPv6 adoption, mobile carriers were actually the last to support IPv6, but even the last mobile carrier enabled it around a year ago. Now it's mostly businesses that are still not using IPv6.

I’m on Vodafone/Kabel Deutschland. IPv4 only, my only option would be to switch to CGNAT to get IPv6, which I’d rather not.

Not sure why thats the case for you. I'm on Vodafone/Kabel Deutschland too and got full ipv4/ipv6 dual stack? Is that one of those regional limitations that Vodafone seems to have?

Re: 40% of Google users now connect via IPv6

#197

Post by TekMol »

mgbmtl wrote: post #172
TekMol wrote: post #135

Earlier quoted context omitted.

pretty sure everything continues to hum along just fine Haha. Wishful thinking. Have you ever worked with a live system that grew for 10 years? There could be tons of IP specific things in there. To enforce rate limits. For security. To do statistics. To do A/B tests...

Sooner or later, you will have to support IPv6. May as well slowly start testing bits and pieces, and avoid doing it in a rush later on.

I'm not sure I will have to.

So far, nobody said IPv4 will be turned off.

Maybe it will work for another 1000 years?

Railroads have been around for over 2000 years and are still going strong. Despite cars and planes.

Postal service has been going on for 4000 years. Since the times of the pharaohs! And It's still going strong, too. Despite phone, email and WhatsApp.

Re: 40% of Google users now connect via IPv6

#198

Post by Taywee »

TedDoesntTalk wrote: post #167
kazen44 wrote: post #143

Earlier quoted context omitted.

because maintaining state for GCNAT tables is far more complex then just forwarding packets. routers doing NAT are thus more expensive then those just doing simple forwarding. Also, in some countries ISP's need to map the use of a specific ip address to a specific subscriber for law enforcment purposes. GCNAT is no exception to this and creates a large amount of overhead because the public IPV4 prefix space is shared…

> because maintaining state for GCNAT tables is far more complex then just forwarding packets. But it’s a solved problem with mature solutions, decades old. Is it really financially expensive?

A problem being solved doesn't mean the current solution is inexpensive or optimal.

Re: 40% of Google users now connect via IPv6

#199

Post by arccy »

hnarn wrote: post #194
0x006A wrote: post #184

Its mostly impossible to run servers only with IPv6 since for some reason Canonical/Ubuntu decided to require IPv4 for snap, after years of not having any issues with IPv6 only deb mirrors. Go is also basically bound to IPv4 since it depends on github to pull packages its time to make hall of shame for software that does not allow developers to build IPv6 only going forward.

> Go is also basically bound to IPv4 since it depends on github to pull packages Is this also true for the Go module proxy?

no:

    $ dig +short AAAA proxy.golang.org
    2a00:1450:4009:820::2011
Post reply on HN