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

IPv6 is the only way forward

ankshilp.in

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

121–130 of 350 posts

Re: IPv6 is the only way forward

#121

Post by BenjiWiebe »

tonymet wrote: post #101
throw0101c wrote: post #84

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> It’s clumsier than ipv4. It’s unnecessary since NAT was invented. This is a privileged view of someone whose ISP has enough money (or was around early enough) to get enough IPv4 addresses to assign one to every customer's WAN interface. Not everyone is so lucky. A lot of folks get non-publicly-routable 100.64.0.0/10[1] on their WAN interface with no way to do hole punching because they're behind CG-NAT. [1] https:/…

so ipv6 is now a social justice issue? I'll send you the $2 a month for a elastic IP .

Can I have it on my home network connection for $2/month? I could do VPS+VPN, but that's another company to deal with, another bill to pay, and several more things to break. And more latency too.

Re: IPv6 is the only way forward

#122

Post by BenjiWiebe »

tonymet wrote: post #99
Hikikomori wrote: post #87

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Why would you be typing of remembering ipv6 addresses? Representation has always been consistent, if you learn the rules, like how 1337::1/64 is a valid address.

that address doesn’t even work in the address bar

It's a valid address, just not a valid _URL_.

Re: IPv6 is the only way forward

#123

Post by BenjiWiebe »

tonymet wrote: post #61
Chu4eeno wrote: post #48

Earlier quoted context omitted.

... and annoying casting from `sockaddr ` to either `sockaddr_in ` or `sockaddr_in6*` while you pass around a socklen_t. 10 years ago I was all gung-ho about IPv6, but it's annoying at every level.

Having 2 sockets for loopback or multiple interfaces is a huge pain

Bind to '::' and you can get v4 and v6 traffic on one socket.

Re: IPv6 is the only way forward

#124

Post by bombcar »

flumpcakes wrote: post #69

One of the biggest, I would assume in the current year, blockers to an IPv6 only world would be the fact that the major "cloud" vendors do not support it.

The companies that rent you IPv4 addresses don’t support v6 well or at all? Do tell. I wonder why.

Re: IPv6 is the only way forward

#125

Post by BenjiWiebe »

lgunsch wrote: post #3

If IPv6 was going to be successful, it would have been successful years ago. It seems, people are just more comfortable with layers of NAT than native IPv6 everywhere. I'd guess that it should have been more backwards compatible. Similar to UTF-8 and ASCII.

My Verizon connection has a CGNAT IPv4 and a publicly routable IPv6 address. It's at least partly a success, if you're using a cell phone on Verizon in the US.

Re: IPv6 is the only way forward

#126

Post by BenjiWiebe »

tsoukase wrote: post #94

If IPv6 doesn't dominate in the next, let's say, 10 years, they might publish the IPv8 which will be an 64bit space, backwards compatible with IPv4. It will be the only case where a newer version of software comes back closer to an older one.

How do you plan to let IPv4 (32 bit address space) actually address and communicate with an IPv8 (64 bit address space) host? You don't have enough bits to identify the v8 host.

Re: IPv6 is the only way forward

#127

Post by 9rx »

bluGill wrote: post #19
isodev wrote: post #15

Someone should’ve thought about the UX of IPv6 before declaring it to be “the way”. It’s like having to learn Klingon just to setup your printer. IPvNext could sort that out… maybe it’s time to consider moving on.

People claim this all the time, but every time I push I discover they have no clue how networks work and just handwave away as "easy" or "details" the very reasons people who understand networks say it can't work.

> but every time I push I discover they have no clue how networks work

Obviously. Anyone who does understand how networks work aren't going to spend any time talking about it. People don't talk about things they are certain about. They talk about what they don't know much about to feel out what they're missing. You will never find a discussion where pushing back reveals that you found the world's utmost expert. The world's utmost expert is bored with the subject and has moved on to talking about the things he has gaps in.

Re: IPv6 is the only way forward

#128

Post by boredatoms »

NekkoDroid wrote: post #97
kstrauser wrote: post #75

Earlier quoted context omitted.

That's literally impossible, to hear some people tell it. "And also, look how hard it'd be to memorize that address", say the people who remember like 2 IPv4 addresses, one of them being 127.0.0.1.

I remember like 10 different IPv4 addresses, 6 of which are DNS servers where each octet is a single number, 1 is my router, 1 is my home network switch, 1 is my home server and the last one localhost. The main thing all those have in common is they are either something I frequently use (all mentioned local IPs) or just stupid easy to remember (DNS servers), neither of which isn't possible for IPv6. From memory isn't…

Telling people to use ULA subnet fddd:: with dhcpv6 is my way.

fddd::7 is easier to type than 10.0.0.7

Re: IPv6 is the only way forward

#129

Post by kalleboo »

general1465 wrote: post #109
dogleash wrote: post #28

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Yup. People learn parts of v4 through osmosis because it's the default. Then when networking topics come up, it's easier to keep going with stuff that looks familiar rather than un-learning assumptions. Why bother with the weird other thing that's not even mandatory?

Because IPv4 is logical and makes sense. First thing which IPv6 came up with? No NATs everything will have a public address. It turned out that this was hare brained idea so let's just cover it up with firewall. However misconfigured firewall means that everything is open... IPv6 has been designed by people who were unable to think further than what is going to be tomorrow for a lunch.

IPv4 came out in 1982 and was designed for every device to have a unique public address. Protocols like FTP were designed to literally pass an IP address to connect directly to.

As addresses started running out, the NAT RFC was published in 1994 and described NAT as a "short-term solution". NAT was never meant to be an integral part of IPv4. https://www.rfc-editor.org/rfc/rfc1631

NAT broke a ton of things which required more and more hacks piled on, making it more complex to build services on top if it (e.g., a server in the middle to proxy all the traffic needed between peers is a 100% requirement, with all the maintenance and scaling headaches that come with it).

Re: IPv6 is the only way forward

#130

Post by miladyincontrol »

blinded wrote: post #120
bluGill wrote: post #22

The US doesn't have excessive IPv4 Addresses. We have a real shortage and big pain because we don't have anywhere near enough. Sure we have 40% of them all - but that has no indication of what enough is.

100% this, my college had 2 /16s for no reason. The printers were all public, was a mess.

I mean having a public address doesnt mean it has to be publicly routable. Same thing applies to ipv6.

I speak as someone who worked at an institute that had similar abundance of address space.

Post reply on HN