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

Tell HN: Hacker News now supports IPv6

news.ycombinator.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

61–70 of 396 posts

Re: Tell HN: Hacker News now supports IPv6

#61

Post by kalleboo »

rumdz wrote: post #36

Does ipv6 result in higher latencies? I could see larger addresses increasing latency, but then again I could also see a more efficient protocol resulting in lower net latency. I should probably read a book describing the differences.

Real-world latency is impacted by configuration and hardware (e.g. your ISP may have different routes for IPv6 that can be either better or worse, it can be handled by different routers with different performance, IPv4 traffic may be going through CGNAT, PPPoE concentrators, etc) that dwarf any theoretical differences.

Google's IPv6 stats also measure latency compared to IPv4 and in most countries IPv6 has lower latency (e.g. in the US on average you get 10ms lower latency with IPv6). When this chart was new it was mostly the other way around, with early IPv6 implementations being poor https://www.google.com/intl/en/ipv6/statistics.html#tab=per-...

Re: Tell HN: Hacker News now supports IPv6

#62

Post by Kab1r »

p-e-w wrote: post #31
ceroxylon wrote: post #12

As someone who grew up on IPv4, i will miss it, but the leap to 340 undecillion unique addresses is exciting in many ways so i think i can learn to live with this transition. If we ever need more than that, i can't even imagine what that future would look like.

The last time I looked into this (which was a few years ago), ISPs were allocating blocks containing billions of IPv6 addresses to anyone who paid a nominal sum. So that vast address space might not last as long as it would seem...

Billions of addresses might seem like a lot, but every IPv6 network has at least 2^64 addresses and it doesn't make much sense (to me) to give any customer less than one network.

(Maybe you meant billions of /64 blocks? ISPs could be providing a /32 ≈ 4 billion /64 blocks, though there still are 2 billion of those in the entire IPv6 space)

Re: Tell HN: Hacker News now supports IPv6

#63

Post by Kab1r »

lmm wrote: post #52
londons_explore wrote: post #50

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> However, that only works with a /64 prefix Well it should be redesigned so it works all the way down to individual addresses.

> Well it should be redesigned so it works all the way down to individual addresses. Why? What's wrong with how it works at the moment?

I actually have the issue where my ISP gives me a single /64 and it makes it difficult to split between multiple LANs.

Re: Tell HN: Hacker News now supports IPv6

#65

Post by [deleted] »

tilwidnk wrote: post #28
SamuelAdams wrote: post #4

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Can you explain this more? Why are you so tied to ipv4? I recently enabled IPv6 on my home network, and roughly 30-40% of all internet traffic goes through IPv6. Things are noticeably faster, especially connection times to online games on Xbox Live. My only complaint is that my ISP keeps changing the prefix every quarter or so, so my static addresses need to be updated in the firewall and other places. I am looking i…

> Can you explain this more? Why are you so tied to ipv4? For me, IPv4 doesn't break the privacy barrier, IPv6 blasts a huge hole straight into each and every household, office and IoT device on the planet. No, privacy fixes put into IPv6 do not work.

[deleted]

Re: Tell HN: Hacker News now supports IPv6

#66

Post by lmm »

Kab1r wrote: post #63
lmm wrote: post #52

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> Well it should be redesigned so it works all the way down to individual addresses. Why? What's wrong with how it works at the moment?

I actually have the issue where my ISP gives me a single /64 and it makes it difficult to split between multiple LANs.

Published guidance says they're meant to give out at least a /56. I don't know that making autoallocation work on smaller subnets would help with this problem - ISPs that currently give out the smallest possible subnet would probably just switch to whatever the new smallest possible subnet was.

Re: Tell HN: Hacker News now supports IPv6

#67

Post by kccqzy »

lolinder wrote: post #56
tilwidnk wrote: post #28

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> Can you explain this more? Why are you so tied to ipv4? For me, IPv4 doesn't break the privacy barrier, IPv6 blasts a huge hole straight into each and every household, office and IoT device on the planet. No, privacy fixes put into IPv6 do not work.

Can you explain this more? I realize that one IP address per device poses a major problem for privacy, but I thought we somewhat mitigated that by dynamically reassigning IPs. What exactly is the problem with the privacy fixes that were put into IPv6? Why don't they work?

I'm guessing that the GP is talking about the fact that if there were two persons in a household using the Internet at the same time, with IPv4 they would connect from the same IP address (though of course with different port numbers), but with IPv6 they would likely connect from distinct IP addresses, and usually only sharing a /64 prefix.

You are correct that this isn't a big issue. SLAAC addresses are generally changed fairly frequently by the OS. As for stateful DHCPv6, well I turn it off for both this reason and the fact that Android doesn't support it.

Re: Tell HN: Hacker News now supports IPv6

#68

Post by Kab1r »

lmm wrote: post #66
Kab1r wrote: post #63

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I actually have the issue where my ISP gives me a single /64 and it makes it difficult to split between multiple LANs.

Published guidance says they're meant to give out at least a /56. I don't know that making autoallocation work on smaller subnets would help with this problem - ISPs that currently give out the smallest possible subnet would probably just switch to whatever the new smallest possible subnet was.

There probably is a way to ask my ISP for a larger block, but I think it would be nice to be able to subnet a /64 regardless.

Re: Tell HN: Hacker News now supports IPv6

#69

Post by p1mrx »

notatoad wrote: post #54
baby_souffle wrote: post #10

Ha! Beat me to it! For anybody that's curious, the IP-Foo [0] browser extension puts a little 4/6 icon in the address bar to make it clear at a glance which dialect you're speaking for $currentWebPage [0]: https://github.com/pmarks-net/ipvfoo

cool, but "read and change your data on all websites" is imho not worth the functionality. that seems ripe for takeover by some scammer.

IPvFoo author here. The problem is that there's no way to obtain the (hostname, ip) stream from Chrome/Firefox without requesting the "all websites" permission.

In theory, browser vendors could define a narrowly-scoped permission that only reports (hostname, ip), or roll this functionality into the browser UI, but neither seems likely to happen.

I made IPvFoo to promote IPv6 adoption, and wouldn't consider selling it for less than $10M USD. It probably won't ever be worth that much because it's an easily-cloned utility without a "moat", but it's more rational to set a price than refuse to sell under any circumstances.

Re: Tell HN: Hacker News now supports IPv6

#70

Post by cbracketdash »

notatoad wrote: post #54
baby_souffle wrote: post #10

Ha! Beat me to it! For anybody that's curious, the IP-Foo [0] browser extension puts a little 4/6 icon in the address bar to make it clear at a glance which dialect you're speaking for $currentWebPage [0]: https://github.com/pmarks-net/ipvfoo

cool, but "read and change your data on all websites" is imho not worth the functionality. that seems ripe for takeover by some scammer.

Just download the repo as a zip file and manually upload it as an extension to your browser.
Post reply on HN