351–360 of 433 posts
Earlier quoted context omitted.
You can use NAT64, it works with all the AWS services. Although it's pretty stupid that services like ECR don't have IPv6.
NAT64 requires you to have a NAT with a public ipv4 address. Or possibly pay to use someone elses NAT.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
This comment shows up like clockwork. How does a device with a 32-bit-sized addressing scheme construct an IP packet to a device with an address in a 128-bit-sized addressing scheme?
It could work like 4 socks requests wrapped in each other like onion. But LAN services wouldn't need to care about long addressing as they don't need to cross network boundary, while letting everything else use new approach, so you could use old stuff without changing anything and there would be no need for new ip6 drivers with new vulnerabilities that are yet to be fixed.
Same for network address translation, both NAT46 and NAT64 standards have existed for a while now and that also hasn't solved the "backwards compatibility" complaints for IPv6.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
> dhcpv6 Just skip DHCPV6, just use SLAAC. Plus I've never seen DHCP hostnames work. Now I just ping ff02::1 multicast to see what devices are on my network. Unfortunately much software makes it a pain to use link-local addresses but they're really convenient as they normally don't change across networks. > Half of the hosts don't implement prefix withdrawal, and keep both their ULAs and the normal addresses. Congrat…
> Now I just ping ff02::1 multicast to see what devices are on my network. Unfortunately much software makes it a pain to use link-local addresses but they're really convenient as they normally don't change across networks. How does that help? I don't want a list of IPs, I want to reach my devices by name (which DHCP makes easy).
If the US had the same IPv4 scarcity as the rest of the world (specifically, if major US ISPs were using CGNAT), the IPv6 transition would be happening much faster.
The addresses were allocated equally geographically, and then sold. The US will hit ipv4 scarcity when the US stops being the richest country.
Sure, when the RIRs were built they were assigned roughly equal shares of the remainder of IPv4 space, but it certainly failed to account for those early years of early adopter allocations, which did accidentally favor the US heavily.
> This is the same as looking at a linear trend line placed over the data series used in Figure 1, looking for the date when this trend line reaches 100%. Using a least-squares best fit for this data set from January 2020 to the present day, and using a linear trend line, we can come up with Figure 2. > This exercise predicts that we’ll see completion of this transition in late 2045, or some 20 years into the future.…
To some extent, Postel's Law suggests the only viable transition plan for the internet is "no transition plan"; expect both to continue to exist as long as they both need to and do your best not to break things or step on each other's toes.
Relatedly, a slow "dual stack" IPv4 to IPv6 transition is as much validation for Postel's Law, and that is has been applied to a useful extreme, as anything else: traffic shifts as traffic needs to shift; the internet not only survives, it thrives; most users don't notice nor care.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
> dhcpv6 Just skip DHCPV6, just use SLAAC. Plus I've never seen DHCP hostnames work. Now I just ping ff02::1 multicast to see what devices are on my network. Unfortunately much software makes it a pain to use link-local addresses but they're really convenient as they normally don't change across networks. > Half of the hosts don't implement prefix withdrawal, and keep both their ULAs and the normal addresses. Congrat…
> Just skip DHCPV6, just use SLAAC. Plus I've never seen DHCP hostnames work. Here's how a part of my IPv4 network looks in my router's control panel: https://imgur.com/a/xZDUfqw , I can easily set up permanent local IPv4 addresses for the fixed infrastructure, and I can easily see which hosts are alive. Yes, it's not 100% perfect, but it works most of the time just fine. Even with crappy IoT devices. Here's how it l…
I just wish routers had better / easier support for local DNS. Also a true tld reserved for internal network names would be awesome. Technically `.internal` is undefined.
That said, I do use ipv4 for easy local addresses just because local DNS is such a PITA to setup. Though I use ipv6 in my hosts file for setting reliable access to specific hosts where the ip doesn't change.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
> dhcpv6 Just skip DHCPV6, just use SLAAC. Plus I've never seen DHCP hostnames work. Now I just ping ff02::1 multicast to see what devices are on my network. Unfortunately much software makes it a pain to use link-local addresses but they're really convenient as they normally don't change across networks. > Half of the hosts don't implement prefix withdrawal, and keep both their ULAs and the normal addresses. Congrat…
> Plus I've never seen DHCP hostnames work Over half the workstations at my office use DHCP hostnames and they work just fine. In fact I'll say exactly the opposite: I've never seen DHCP hostnames not work.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
> Just skip DHCPV6, just use SLAAC. Plus I've never seen DHCP hostnames work. Here's how a part of my IPv4 network looks in my router's control panel: https://imgur.com/a/xZDUfqw , I can easily set up permanent local IPv4 addresses for the fixed infrastructure, and I can easily see which hosts are alive. Yes, it's not 100% perfect, but it works most of the time just fine. Even with crappy IoT devices. Here's how it l…
I mean both are fairly complex tables. The ipv6 addresses are longer, but really I'd use hostnames in either case. Ipv4 includes the client id's, dhcp lease time, Mac addresses, etc. I just wish routers had better / easier support for local DNS. Also a true tld reserved for internal network names would be awesome. Technically `.internal` is undefined. That said, I do use ipv4 for easy local addresses just because loc…
How? There is no way to associate hostnames with addresses in IPv6 that works unversally. Stateful IPv6 is _not_ _supported_ by Android, for example.
And since _each_ _device_ handles its own address selection, there's no central way to say "hey, this is an IP camera, let it have a static ::1:2:3:4 address suffix".
Moreover, with IPv6 I'm losing an ability to do quick checks of the network health.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
NAT64 requires you to have a NAT with a public ipv4 address. Or possibly pay to use someone elses NAT.
AWS supports NAT64 automatically if you have an Internet gateway attached, you just need to set it up in the VPC settings.
Says you need to have an AWS NAT for that to work. And AFAIK, setting up a NAT requires an ipv4 elastic ip.
And it makes since that AWS would want customers to have their own IP for NAT64, so that if one customer does something to get the ip address blocklisted it doesn't impact other customers.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
Hosting service A shouldn't mean that every user of service A can also figure out you host C, B and D. Also, the IP protocol does not care about ports at all. Ports are a thing for UDP and TCP.
> Also, the IP protocol does not care about ports at all. Ports are a thing for UDP and TCP. You're right, they are one level above. > Hosting service A shouldn't mean that every user of service A can also figure out you host C, B and D. It how are ports on a single IP address essentially different from multiple IP addresses within a subnet?