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

201–210 of 350 posts

Re: IPv6 is the only way forward

#201

Post by pmezard »

direwolf20 wrote: post #191
gertrunde wrote: post #176

Earlier quoted context omitted.

There's a few things here that are a bit iffy tbh! I can't see why an ISP is dynamically changing the IPv6 addressing for a client, but if that's what is going on, then v6 NPT is your friend (RFC6296 - https://datatracker.ietf.org/doc/html/rfc6296 ). But pfsense's behaviour is a bit iffy too, unless when you say 'public IP', you mean the IPv6 address being used on the pfsense facing the clients? (I'm assuming it's us…

It's a legal requirement in Europe for privacy. A long term static address is a personal identifier.

Any vague source for that?

Asking as a European who did not have his IPv4 address changed for months or even years. Or is it IPv6 specific? But I cannot see why.

Re: IPv6 is the only way forward

#202

Post by wpm »

opan wrote: post #152
boredatoms wrote: post #128

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Telling people to use ULA subnet fddd:: with dhcpv6 is my way. fddd::7 is easier to type than 10.0.0.7

"ten oh oh 7" (how I'd say it or remember it) still seems simpler than "eff dee dee dee colon colon 7". While with ipv4 the dots can be assumed for pauses, v6 doesn't put colons as often, also I could easily see myself forgetting the amount of "d"s. I don't wanna seem too anti-v6, though, I am in favor of everyone adopting the more modern thing. edit: Well, you said easier to type. I guess I probably agree with that.

There is also the fact that an IPv6 IP has a maximum and minimum number of characters and separators, but not a set one, so the length of any given address is variable.

Instead of being able to run a groove in my head mentally, and read with any sort of rhythm, I have to read them like binary bytes. Every address feels like a foreign phone number where your normal rhythm doesn't fit, but it never gets better.

Perhaps, IMO, the greatest and only sin of IPv6. That and using fucking colons.

Re: IPv6 is the only way forward

#203

Post by artooro »

I'm surprised how few people are talking about ULAs. For any home network where you don't have a reserved global address space from your ISP, it makes sense to configure a ULA on your router and use it for all internal hosts, and the ISP assigned address is only used for Internet access. This does not require NAT/Npt and you have the best of both worlds.

Re: IPv6 is the only way forward

#204

Post by wpm »

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.

My workstation used to have a public address system it was awesome.

Re: IPv6 is the only way forward

#205

Post by skybrian »

artooro wrote: post #203

I'm surprised how few people are talking about ULAs. For any home network where you don't have a reserved global address space from your ISP, it makes sense to configure a ULA on your router and use it for all internal hosts, and the ISP assigned address is only used for Internet access. This does not require NAT/Npt and you have the best of both worlds.

First I heard of it. Apparently they are private Ipv6 addresses:

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Unique_local_address

If your intranet has no IPv4 addresses, this is better than a NAT somehow?

Re: IPv6 is the only way forward

#206

Post by wpm »

orangeboats wrote: post #144
isodev wrote: post #31

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I think you’re making my point - someone decided to surface a very low level concept “as is” (without a suitable abstraction) on a level where people also need it for use cases that don’t justify knowledge of the arcane. Or dealing with gatekeepers for that matter.

There are already abstractions that allows you to deal with IPv6 without actually typing in the addresses. It's the DNS, but every time this topic pops up, someone rejects DNS and proceeds to continue sprouting something about how IPv6 is unusable because you can't memorize the addresses.

What happens when DNS is down

Re: IPv6 is the only way forward

#207

Post by wpm »

everdrive wrote: post #187

Here comes the flood of IPv6 evangelists who thinks everyone is confused about NAT and firewalls. I don't know where they get their talking points, but they descend onto these threads with their sanctimony. "Oh, you must be confused about how NAT works, allow me to educate you." It's very tiresome.

[flagged]

Re: IPv6 is the only way forward

#208

Post by throw0101d »

jcgl wrote: post #100
wmf wrote: post #98

Earlier quoted context omitted.

DHCPv6 now exists and every OS except Android supports it.

> except Android That alone is significant. Furthermore, DHCPv6 holds you back from various desirable things like privacy addresses and (arguably even more importantly) IPv6 Mostly.

> Furthermore, DHCPv6 holds you back from various desirable things like privacy addresses and (arguably even more importantly) IPv6 Mostly.

Why would DHCPv6 hold back privacy addresses? Can't DHCPv6 servers generate random host address bits and assign them in DHCP Offer packets? Couldn't clients generate random addresses and put them in Request packets?

See perhaps OPTION_IA_TA (Temporary Address):

* https://datatracker.ietf.org/doc/html/rfc8415#section-21.5

* https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/DHCPv6#Option_Codes

    DHCPv6 temporary addresses have the same properties as SLAAC
    temporary addresses (see Section 4.6).  On the other hand, the
    properties of DHCPv6 non-temporary addresses typically depend on the
    specific DHCPv6 server software being employed.  Recent releases of
    most popular DHCPv6 server software typically lease random addresses
    with a similar lease time as that of IPv4.  Thus, these addresses can
    be considered to be "stable, semantically opaque".  [DHCPv6-IID]
    specifies an algorithm that can be employed by DHCPv6 servers to
    generate "stable, semantically opaque" addresses.
* https://datatracker.ietf.org/doc/html/rfc7721#section-4.7

How does DHCPv6 hold back IPv6-mostly? First, most clients will send out a DHCPv4 request in case IPv4 is the only option, in which case IPv6-mostly can be signalled:

* https://datatracker.ietf.org/doc/html/rfc8925

And hosts would also have to send out an IPv6 RS, and the RA can signal IPv6-mostly:

* https://datatracker.ietf.org/doc/html/rfc8781

* https://datatracker.ietf.org/doc/html/draft-ietf-v6ops-6mops...

Re: IPv6 is the only way forward

#209

Post by yrjrjjrjjtjjr »

j1elo wrote: post #51
IsTom wrote: post #38

Earlier quoted context omitted.

How do you squeeze that in IPv4 packet? Especially in a way that won't get mangled by random ossified devices in between?

In IPv4 you only need to transmit IPv4 addresses. If the "cannot be" in parent post is referring to the exact byte disposition in packets, then I go the other way around to claim that I agree. Because the only way that a UTF8 character can pretend to be ASCII is because ASCII didn't use all of the 8 bits in a byte to begin with. Only way to have something similar in this case, would be that IPv4 didn't use all of the…

The protocol field in the ipv4 header seems like a reasonable choice. A value would be associated for ipv6 and if that value is chosen then additional header data follows the ipv4 header.

Re: IPv6 is the only way forward

#210

Post by icedchai »

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.

I think we'd be surprised how much address space is actually wasted, not announced or routed.

I have my own /24 that I registered back in the 90's. It is, in fact, routed and announced globally. I know several "early Internet" nerds with the same.

I know three local companies with /16's that aren't even announcing their blocks! Perhaps they use them internally.

Post reply on HN