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

IP addresses through 2024

potaroo.net

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

51–60 of 90 posts

Re: IP addresses through 2024

#51

Post by exabrial »

I do want to point out one thing that is a common misconception by IT engineer types:

> The use of NATs force the interactions into client-initiated transactions... (abbreviated)

There is absolutely ZERO chance that that, let's say Roomba, is going to let you connect directly to your vacuum robot at your home, from your cell, over ipv6, without going through their proxy server in an AWS Datacenter in Virgina.

The nativity of engineers is face-palm inducing.

Roomba will _never_ give up that control over your device. Same with your Tesla, your iPhone, your security cameras, or your ring doorbell. Zilch, none, nada. Giving you direct control, even if ipv6 were fully implemented, is simply not on the roadmap for the companies. They want to control you. They want to control your devices. They will not release the death grip on this, as it releases their control over your property post purchase.

This sounds incredibly cynical but it's playing out in front of us. By restricting the use of their services, they now control and downstream resale of the device and can force people to buy new, rather than repair or renovate. And of course the leaders in all of this anti-repair initiatives are the so called "Green" companies of the world.

Re: IP addresses through 2024

#52

Post by pantalaimon »

immibis wrote: post #19
cyberax wrote: post #17

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Except that IPv6 is actually not that large. You effectively can't use networks that are smaller than /64, because stateless autoconfiguration can't use any other prefix size (there's an effort to fix it, but it'll take a decade at best)

You can absolutely use them, you just need static or DHCP addressing just like the old days. But thanks SLAAC for forcing my ISP to give me /64 or bigger so I can always subnet into /96 for example.

How many devices actually support DHCPv6? SLAAC is pretty much the standard way of assigning addresses these days.

Re: IP addresses through 2024

#53

Post by remram »

rvnx wrote: post #49
bruce511 wrote: post #10

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Hah - all of those examples use a planet as comparison. The first 16 bits of the address should be reserved to be used by the Planetary Internet Addressing Council (PIAC) Allocating all addresses to Earth seems very shortsighted. (Some sarcasm should be assumed.) It doesn't really matter how you explain large-number math to people who are bad at large-number math (aka all of us) - there's always some bright-spark who…

Well we could argue that this support for trillions of IP addresses is nice, except that IPv6 does not technically work in interplanetary environments due to various hardcoded timeouts. The first martians are likely to run their own local network and then use a VPN over DTN for their everyday communications by email (and appear coming from a single IPv6 address). One good thing though: since most of the humanity’s kn…

I see only one IPv6 timeout, for fragmented packet reassembly, in other words between reception of fragments. So it's a bound on jitter not latency, and I see no reason it couldn't be increased for interplanetary links.

Re: IP addresses through 2024

#54

Post by remram »

simne wrote: post #43
ironhaven wrote: post #7

I feel like this blog does not accurately describe how large the ipv6 address space even after accounting for it being reduced by 2^64 for the host portion of the address. If it did it would make the concerned comments about /28 ipv6 network sizes seem very misplaced. A single static ipv4 address is a /32 slice into the ipv4 space and is considered a reasonable to size give out to a single person or even a small busi…

> does not accurately describe how large the ipv6 It is not the limitation, but router hardware is. Now problem mostly eased, thanks to Moore law, but 20 years ago router memory need to store prefixes-routes graph was very expensive and have some problems with grow. For example, I know people, bought very expensive server PC boards (but cheap compared to enterprise networking hardware), with DDR2 capability, because…

There are attempts to address that like LISP https://www.rfc-editor.org/rfc/rfc9300.html

Re: IP addresses through 2024

#55

Post by sgjohnson »

nottorp wrote: post #26
mike_d wrote: post #11

Earlier quoted context omitted.

People get caught up in how many IPv6 addresses exist, as if we will always have enough to go around. Recently Capital One was assigned a /16, enough for every ATM in the US to be its own ISP and make its own customer allocations. We continue to repeat the same mistakes that made people believe we needed v6 in the first place. We will never run out of IPv6, but I believe in my lifetime you won't be able to get new v6…

> Recently Capital One was assigned a /16 So besides the bad design ipv6 is also badly managed?

No, it's ARIN that's badly managed.

Capital One would never get a /16 in RIPE.

Re: IP addresses through 2024

#57

Post by [deleted] »

ironhaven wrote: post #7

I feel like this blog does not accurately describe how large the ipv6 address space even after accounting for it being reduced by 2^64 for the host portion of the address. If it did it would make the concerned comments about /28 ipv6 network sizes seem very misplaced. A single static ipv4 address is a /32 slice into the ipv4 space and is considered a reasonable to size give out to a single person or even a small busi…

[deleted]

Re: IP addresses through 2024

#58

Post by icedchai »

gorgoiler wrote: post #24
mike_d wrote: post #11

Earlier quoted context omitted.

People get caught up in how many IPv6 addresses exist, as if we will always have enough to go around. Recently Capital One was assigned a /16, enough for every ATM in the US to be its own ISP and make its own customer allocations. We continue to repeat the same mistakes that made people believe we needed v6 in the first place. We will never run out of IPv6, but I believe in my lifetime you won't be able to get new v6…

A /16 is the first quarter of the network prefix. That is indeed like assigning an IPv4 /8 to General Electric in 1985 and then wondering why, 40 years later, we’re out of address space.

Except, we're not actually "out" out. There is a very active IPv4 transfer / resale market. There is a LOT of unused or underused address space out there. I know one local firm with a completely unused /16 that they have not announced in years.

Re: IP addresses through 2024

#59

Post by icedchai »

mike_d wrote: post #11
ironhaven wrote: post #7

I feel like this blog does not accurately describe how large the ipv6 address space even after accounting for it being reduced by 2^64 for the host portion of the address. If it did it would make the concerned comments about /28 ipv6 network sizes seem very misplaced. A single static ipv4 address is a /32 slice into the ipv4 space and is considered a reasonable to size give out to a single person or even a small busi…

People get caught up in how many IPv6 addresses exist, as if we will always have enough to go around. Recently Capital One was assigned a /16, enough for every ATM in the US to be its own ISP and make its own customer allocations. We continue to repeat the same mistakes that made people believe we needed v6 in the first place. We will never run out of IPv6, but I believe in my lifetime you won't be able to get new v6…

The IPv6 address space is so huge, I, as an individual, was able to get a /44 no questions asked. Back in the 90's, I was able to get a IPv4 /24, no questions asked.

Re: IP addresses through 2024

#60

Post by Ericson2314 »

exabrial wrote: post #51

I do want to point out one thing that is a common misconception by IT engineer types: > The use of NATs force the interactions into client-initiated transactions... (abbreviated) There is absolutely ZERO chance that that, let's say Roomba, is going to let you connect directly to your vacuum robot at your home, from your cell, over ipv6, without going through their proxy server in an AWS Datacenter in Virgina. The nat…

I connected my AC directly to my desktop. I can't be sure it isn't also phoning home, but I know I am controlling it without a remote server.

You are doing a "there can only be one binding constraint" analysis, and I don't think that is get. Yes, a lot of incumbents want client-server only, but IPv4 still gives them power enforcing the status quo. If we had IPv6 everywhere, they would need to try harder to enforce it, and we would have to try less hard to change it.

Post reply on HN