61–70 of 233 posts
IPv6... Can it just go away already? Adoption has been declining for years. Many devices don't support it. Many services seemingly support it but break in strange ways. And not to mention it's a subtle and yet powerful privacy attack vector.
do temporary addresses do nothing?
Earlier quoted context omitted.
Are Rokus Linux based? I'd love to install an alternate distribution on one.
What would the point be, exactly? The stuff that makes a Roku worthwhile are all the apps and the proprietary drivers and networking stack stuff. If you're going to put an alternate distro on it, you might be better off getting a whitebox Android TV/Kodi/whatever box off of Aliexpress than trying to get around the limitations on the Roku hardware.
There are also some scenarios (admittedly pretty contrived in our compute-rich world) where your TV computer is the only one available to you, and so it would be in your interest to expand its functions. Imagine a kid in a poor neighborhood - theoretically with just a keyboard and a USB stick he could be using that TV as an internet-connected computer to learn how to program. That's a lot more value than running Netflix, IMHO.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
You can’t just change the size of an IPv4 address without creating a whole new thing.
Yes, but let's not pretend that IPv6 was just IPv4 with a larger addr size. A lot of other unnecessary cruft got changed. That is kinda the issue. Add an extra octet to IPv4, call it IPv5. Done. DHCP (as is) can already handle variable-length addresses so it'll work unmodified for 5-byte addrs, for example. Same for ARP.
Who the hell is giving their Roku a public IP? How is this remotely a problem? This is 100% not the fault of Roku, and 100% the fault of the ISP. The ISP should have an IPv6 to IPv4 gateway built into their modem/router. You have a WAN port that is IPv6 and an LAN port that IPv4. IPv6 for local networks, makes no sense is completely unnecessary, and is a hill I will die on. IPv4 is here to stay.
The ISP said they got only a limited set of IPv4 addresses, those are assigned to their CGNAT gateways. Which are expensive, especially for an Indian Reservation, not the deep pockets of some MSP. The users are behind CG-NAT. But instead of using IPv6 which is cheaper (no need to maintain CG-NAT, translation devices, or deal with traffic that is being routed way more expensively) the Roku devices are only streaming o…
Earlier quoted context omitted.
> IPv6 for local networks, makes no sense is completely unnecessary, and is a hill I will die on. IPv4 is here to stay. Why would you make everything gratuitously complicated by having two separate forms of addressing? All that IPv4 gains you is new and exciting ways to mess up your networking. Just give every device a normal public address (of course you probably want to firewall off inbound traffic from the WAN to…
Why would I want any of my devices on my network to have a publicly route-able address? > Why would you make everything gratuitously complicated by having two separate forms of addressing? How is IPv6 itself not "gratuitously complicated". You think I am going to remember the IP of my firewall, my network switch, if it is that mess of characters that is an IPv6 address? I can easily recall 10.10.10.1 is my gateway, o…
Earlier quoted context omitted.
> IPv6 for local networks, makes no sense is completely unnecessary, and is a hill I will die on. IPv4 is here to stay. Why would you make everything gratuitously complicated by having two separate forms of addressing? All that IPv4 gains you is new and exciting ways to mess up your networking. Just give every device a normal public address (of course you probably want to firewall off inbound traffic from the WAN to…
> you probably want to firewall off inbound traffic from the WAN to the LAN But all modem/routers are doing it anyway, they might as well do that on ipv6. Effectively all router appliances (at home and soho level) are linux appliances, and the firewall is built into the kernel (and in use anyway).
While people may say "NAT is Not security", it is in fact a layer (ahd huge one) in the security onion, that ipV6 is likely going to increase drastically the amount of ransomware and other malware on the public internet simply because that NAT layer is gone
Earlier quoted context omitted.
That's par for the course nowadays, unfortunately. I couldn't name a smart TV system that doesn't have ads. Roku is far from being the worst offender, my LG C2 that I paid out the nose for has the majority of the home screen taken up with ads.
Apple TV doesn’t have ads.
By traffic it seems like "if only we didn't have these Rokus!" but it's a streaming device, it generates a lot of traffic compared to the other IPv4 only devices. Inevitably the long tail of devices is what's costing them extra (sounds like CG-NAT dual stack or 464xlat at the gateway) not just the Roku devices. As someone who operates their own ASN with IPv6 because I like v6 so much the problem here was simply poor…
It may not reduce the need for IPv4, but it will reduce the need for costly CG-NAT devices and capacity for IPv4 when the streaming can happen over IPv6 which does not require the costly CG-NAT devices.
I just bought a brand new motherboard that still has VGA and PS/2 ports, so I would guess IPv4 isn't going away any time soon. Old standards seem to hang around forever for legacy support. Why an ISP would assume they could set up an IPv6 only network is beyond me.
Legacy compatibility is not an issue (unless it makes things complicated, unreliable or limited in the name of backward compatibility). Lack of modern functionality is.
Similarly, presence IPv4 support in devices is not a problem - lack of IPv6 support is. The comparable issue would be if you have bought a new motherboard but all it supports is VGA - now, that'd be quite inconvenient (even if it's a server board that runs headless 99.99% of the time).
IPv6... Can it just go away already? Adoption has been declining for years. Many devices don't support it. Many services seemingly support it but break in strange ways. And not to mention it's a subtle and yet powerful privacy attack vector.