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

Roku devices don't support IPv6 in 2023 and it's costing ISPs

community.roku.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

101–110 of 233 posts

Re: Roku devices don't support IPv6 in 2023 and it's costing ISPs

#101

Post by vetinari »

xxpor wrote: post #65
hitpointdrew wrote: post #50

Earlier quoted context omitted.

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…

Why would you need a DNS server? That's what mDNS is for.

Some people might have more than one subnet. Or road-warrior VPN and VPN-ing in. It is nice when your networks name resolution works, even if you are outside your network.

Re: Roku devices don't support IPv6 in 2023 and it's costing ISPs

#102

Post by JohnFen »

outworlder wrote: post #95
bonsaibilly wrote: post #60

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Congratulations on completely failing to understand how CGNAT loads work & their costs, and jumping to a wildly incorrect understanding of the situation

Yeah, and that's currently the top comment. Which leads me to believe that the main barrier to IPV6 is just that people don't want to re-learn anything.

> the main barrier to IPV6 is just that people don't want to re-learn anything.

I disagree, actually. I think the main barrier is that networking folks have been pretty bad at explaining this to non-networking folks. IPv6 isn't exactly simple to understand.

I'm a reasonably network-savvy guy, and I'm sure that I understand less about IPv6 than I think I do. I just don't know what parts I'm not understanding properly, and what parts I just don't know about.

It's pretty hard to find good explanations of this stuff that aren't aimed at networking experts.

Re: Roku devices don't support IPv6 in 2023 and it's costing ISPs

#103

Post by outworlder »

megous wrote: post #28
jmclnx wrote: post #16

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> It's probably harder to tie devices in a single household together with IPv6 than with IPv4, or so they think So I wonder if this means it is harder to ID the consumer with IPv6 ?

It's easier. You'd be using SLAAC and your devices would have globally unique IP address based on the MAC address of their network interface.

Expect that some systems use random temporary IPv6 exactly to make it harder to track (even Windows)

Re: Roku devices don't support IPv6 in 2023 and it's costing ISPs

#104

Post by totallyunknown »

slaymaker1907 wrote: post #94
totallyunknown wrote: post #84

I have reviewed the logs for our video CDN and out of 150,000 sessions, only 48 were identified to be using IPv6. These sessions were identified by the user-agent Roku/DVP-12.0 (12.0.0.xxxx-xx), indicating that the recent update to the operating system now supports IPv6.

I wonder if it's just a bunch of old and outdated Roku boxes causing problems? They probably work off of a ~3-5 year support cycle like phones but are updated even more infrequently by endusers (why should they if it's still working for them?).

All other streams are made with 11.5 - which is the official latest version.

Re: Roku devices don't support IPv6 in 2023 and it's costing ISPs

#105

Post by jedberg »

znpy wrote: post #35

The amount of idiocy and ignorance around ipv6 is crazy. I’ve seen many supposedly senior engineers that claimed they didn’t want to implement ipv6 because anyone could connect to hosts from “outside”. Nat has become so engraved in people’s thinking that they can’t even understand the actual role of a firewall anymore. We’re going to see many stories like this, where networking incompetence will start costing pretty…

Basic corporate and home networking with NAT and sane default firewalls have been solved for so long now that even senior engineers have never had to deal with it. I haven't had to deal with firewalls in 15 years now.

So I can't entirely fault them for not understanding, but you're right, it's kinda nuts.

Re: Roku devices don't support IPv6 in 2023 and it's costing ISPs

#106

Post by nemothekid »

manicennui wrote: post #54
dimgl wrote: post #39

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> I couldn't name a smart TV system that doesn't have ads. What do you consider to be ads? Apple TV is pretty tasteful in this regard. It never feels like I’m getting served an ad at all. In fact, with all Apple products I never feel like I’m getting served an ad.

Apple TV shows promotions for apps in the top row. These are ads. They are often shows the user isn't interested in, but the service is interested in pushing.

I'm pretty sure thats a feature for any app you put in the top row. If you have Netflix in that row it will show you recommended.

Re: Roku devices don't support IPv6 in 2023 and it's costing ISPs

#107

Post by outworlder »

CoolGuySteve wrote: post #43
dragonwriter wrote: post #10

Earlier quoted context omitted.

You can’t just change the size of an IPv4 address without creating a whole new thing.

You can though, there is an options field in IPv4 that could have been made to hold extended address values. It was used as part of the Extended Internet Protocol: https://www.rfc-editor.org/rfc/rfc1385 And the Address Extension protocol aka IPv7: https://www.rfc-editor.org/rfc/rfc1475

And now you need all routers in your path to support it. Effectively creating two incompatible networks and achieving a worse result.

Re: Roku devices don't support IPv6 in 2023 and it's costing ISPs

#108

Post by cmeacham98 »

zamadatix wrote: post #98
ArchOversight wrote: post #86

Earlier quoted context omitted.

464XLAT still requires IPv4 boxes on the edge to translate IPv6 traffic back to IPv4. Whether that is two boxes or 20,000, the same is true for other CG-NAT solutions. Someone somewhere is bearing the cost of translating.

Usually you need a special box at the consumer side to do 464XLAT, it's not something you can just ask your customer's Netgear to do and it's usually more expensive if you want to provide it as the customer's rented router. CG-NAT however looks completely normal to all gear (other than the particular numbers assigned) except the 2 edge boxes. It's the ultimate cost saving kludge.

Most modern OSes (I know for a fact Android, iOS, and Windows) support automatically doing the 4->6 translation on their side (as a matter of fact, some cellular networks in the US are ipv6 only).

I'm unsure if consumer routers would pass on the appropriate RA flag to tell the OS they need to do this in their default configuration however.

Re: Roku devices don't support IPv6 in 2023 and it's costing ISPs

#109

Post by brokencode »

ArchOversight wrote: post #91
brokencode wrote: post #71

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Why does the IPv4 address need to be publicly exposed outside of a customer’s LAN? I thought you could set up NAT on a router to translate local IPv4 addresses to something IPv6 that is exposed publicly. Is this simply bad planning from the ISP where they didn’t handle it correctly? Or is there something I’m not understanding about NAT? I think in an ideal world all devices would be using IPv6. But I thought it would…

Because the IP address the Roku is trying to reach is an IPv4 address. You can't just translate that to IPv6 and say "good luck little packet". If you translate at the customers router that's fine and all, but now you have an IPv4 packet in an IPv6 packet, that IPv6 packet needs to get routed to a device that knows how to then turn it back into an IPv4 packet so that it can then go travel on the open internet like th…

Oh, what a mess. I don’t like that at all.

I was assuming that there was some way to translate the IPv4 address of the server to an IPv6 one and process it that way, putting the burden of supporting IPv6 on the server side. I had no idea that Roku would actually need to be exposing an IPv4 server to handle these requests.

That makes sense then that the ISP would need some number of IPv4 addresses that it could use to communicate with IPv4 servers on behalf of IPv4 client devices.

Shame on Roku for perpetuating this problem.

Re: Roku devices don't support IPv6 in 2023 and it's costing ISPs

#110

Post by zamadatix »

totallyunknown wrote: post #84

I have reviewed the logs for our video CDN and out of 150,000 sessions, only 48 were identified to be using IPv6. These sessions were identified by the user-agent Roku/DVP-12.0 (12.0.0.xxxx-xx), indicating that the recent update to the operating system now supports IPv6.

Release notes don't say anything about that change but it wouldn't surprise me if it was left out.
Post reply on HN