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

The IPv6 Transition

potaroo.net

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

31–40 of 433 posts

Re: The IPv6 Transition

#31

Post by robocat »

Kelteseth wrote: post #2

I've mentioned this previously. Without government-mandated standards, implementation could take years. We apply this approach to numerous areas; why should IP be an exception?

A world of being told what to do was not the "dream" of freedom for the internet.

If you want the government to mandate standards, vote with your feet and move to China where it has been mandated.

I thought the point of the article is that perhaps IPv6 is ultimately unnecessary: worse is better?

Why are we engineers so attracted to authoritarianism? The idea of just telling everyone to use the new version seems attractive to me too. Then again I often deeply admire practical engineering compromises. (edited: clarified)

Re: The IPv6 Transition

#32

Post by smallupdate »

alexchamberlain wrote: post #16
gorgoiler wrote: post #3

> In 2024 it’s estimated that 20 billion devices use the Internet, yet the Internet’s IPv4 routing table only encompasses 3.03 billion addresses … sharing each individual IPv4 address across an average of 7 devices. …but the graph below that text shows 40% of traffic is IPv6, so the v4 space is only shared across 12e9 devices? In my experience the big holdouts these days are corporate networks. All my domestic ISPs (…

FWIW, domestic ISPs in the UK are lagging on IPv6; I'm with Vrigin Media and, afaict, there is no immediate plan to deploy it either.

Both BT and Sky are fully IPv6, many altnets are too, it's actually Virgen Media that is the problem in the UK. In the case of Sky they are now running MAP-T and starting the transition to IPv6 only.

Re: The IPv6 Transition

#33

Post by Semaphor »

alexchamberlain wrote: post #16
gorgoiler wrote: post #3

> In 2024 it’s estimated that 20 billion devices use the Internet, yet the Internet’s IPv4 routing table only encompasses 3.03 billion addresses … sharing each individual IPv4 address across an average of 7 devices. …but the graph below that text shows 40% of traffic is IPv6, so the v4 space is only shared across 12e9 devices? In my experience the big holdouts these days are corporate networks. All my domestic ISPs (…

FWIW, domestic ISPs in the UK are lagging on IPv6; I'm with Vrigin Media and, afaict, there is no immediate plan to deploy it either.

Germany, Vodafone. They support it, so I could get v6, but chances are that that'll switch me to CGNAT for v4, so I'm not willing to risk it.

Re: The IPv6 Transition

#34

Post by AStonesThrow »

kijin wrote: post #17
Dylan16807 wrote: post #11

Earlier quoted context omitted.

NAT is mostly okay, but carrier grade NAT where you can't forward a port causes real problems. IPv4 exhaustion is a real problem, it's just not enough to motivate people much.

If it was a real problem, market pricing would reflect the increasing severity of that problem. The truth is that people who care about port forwarding are such a small minority -- especially now that P2P file sharing has lost its hype -- that they don't make a visible dent in the rate of IPv4 exhaustion.

The truth is that major cloud providers such as Amazon AWS have begun to charge [more] for static, routed IPv4 addresses.

Last I checked (a few years ago, I suppose), AWS APIs were incapable of using IPv6 internally, so a VPC still needed to dual-stack it in order to use AWS cloud features. That may have changed by now.

Re: The IPv6 Transition

#35

Post by abhinavk »

Animats wrote: post #20

China's IPv6 transition is 74% complete.[1] Conversion to IPv6 was specifically called out in China's 14th Five Year Plan, which gives the goal high visibility within the government and the Party. Conversion is quite far along. The current goal is everything IPv6 enabled by 2025, IPv4 turns off in 2030. 99% of the top 100 mobile applications in China are on IPv6. China Mobile's backbone is now IPv6 only. [1] https://…

India is also around 75%. Both of them cover quite a bit of humanity. The regions where growth is going to happen don't own a lot of blocks so they will focus on IPv6.

Re: The IPv6 Transition

#36

Post by Semaphor »

imaguska1 wrote: post #25

All big German internet providers (DTAG, Telefonica, 1&1, Vodafone) are IPv6 Dual Stack or CGNAT'ed for many many years now. Same for all mobile providers. So everybody is using IPv6 in their home networks without problems.

Legacy account on Vodafone (from Kabel Deutschland days), no v6, no CGNAT.

Re: The IPv6 Transition

#38

Post by gorgoiler »

alexchamberlain wrote: post #16
gorgoiler wrote: post #3

> In 2024 it’s estimated that 20 billion devices use the Internet, yet the Internet’s IPv4 routing table only encompasses 3.03 billion addresses … sharing each individual IPv4 address across an average of 7 devices. …but the graph below that text shows 40% of traffic is IPv6, so the v4 space is only shared across 12e9 devices? In my experience the big holdouts these days are corporate networks. All my domestic ISPs (…

FWIW, domestic ISPs in the UK are lagging on IPv6; I'm with Vrigin Media and, afaict, there is no immediate plan to deploy it either.

Virgin neé ntl: has always been complete trash. Are they representative of UK ISPs in general? BT and Sky completed their v6 rollout years ago and they account for over half the market.

Re: The IPv6 Transition

#39

Post by qwertox »

BrandoElFollito wrote: post #26
hairyplanter wrote: post #10

I have fully implemented IPv6 in my home network. I have even implemented an IPv6-Only network. It fully works, including accessing IPv4 only websites like github.com via DNS64 and NAT64 at my router. The only practically useful thing about my IPv6 enabled network is that I can run globally routable services on my lan, without NAT port mapping. Of course, only if the client is also IPv6. Other than this one use case,…

I had to reluctantly deploy ipv6 on my home network because of ISP requirements + will to use pihole. Ipv6 is hard. I had to learn quite a bit to make it work and not only I see no value, but it is significantly more difficult to use dire to the address length. I think IPv6 is a missed opportunity, it was probably designed by experts that did not take into account the population that will use it (not the one users wh…

What requirement could an ISP impose on you for you to be forced to migrate the intranet to IPv6 (because of PI-hole)?

You could always place a small NAT-enabled router between your ISP's device and your home network.

The only problem I could see would be the lack of a (semi-)static public IPv4 address, which one could solve by renting a VPS.

Re: The IPv6 Transition

#40

Post by erinaceousjones »

hairyplanter wrote: post #10

I have fully implemented IPv6 in my home network. I have even implemented an IPv6-Only network. It fully works, including accessing IPv4 only websites like github.com via DNS64 and NAT64 at my router. The only practically useful thing about my IPv6 enabled network is that I can run globally routable services on my lan, without NAT port mapping. Of course, only if the client is also IPv6. Other than this one use case,…

Fun reasons why my home network is still on IPv4: IPv6 drains my girlfriend's phone battery :-)

Something to do with Router Advertisement intervals being too short, though I don't get why that only affects her ~5yo android phone. And IPv6 is so complex, I haven't figured out if the RA interval is something I can or should tweak, whether that comes from the PiHole or whether I'd have to flash OpenWRT on my router, or whether my ISP ultimately controls that upstream. Like, I can't figure out as easily where the boundary between me and "the internet" ends with things like the /64 prefixes and SLAAC and RDNSS and all the other acronyms.

Yeah, yeah, I should RTFM, and eventually I might figure out what makes a "good" home IPv6 network. But I can't be arsed to do that in my free time yet, and neither can most software companies cough cough Google/Android and that one guy causing IPv6 drama in the android team

Like.... Ehhh... I'll come back to it in a few more years. "Are we IPv6 yet?"

Post reply on HN