Is there hope for IPv6?

#1

Post by danyork » Sat, Jan 05, 2019, 2:53 PM UTC

Is there hope for IPv6?
internetgovernance.org

Re: Is there hope for IPv6?

#2

Post by Proven » Sat, Jan 05, 2019, 3:54 PM UTC

I always disable IPv6 at home and computers I administer.

IPv6: for machines (IoT)

IPv4: for humans

Re: Is there hope for IPv6?

#3

Post by notbestcomment » Sat, Jan 05, 2019, 4:13 PM UTC

IETF: Makes a non-backward compatible change

Internet: Doesn't adopt it

Everyone: Pikachuface.png

Re: Is there hope for IPv6?

#4

Post by kevinoid » Sat, Jan 05, 2019, 4:22 PM UTC

These are some interesting insights into the economic incentives on the deployment side. I'm looking forward to reading the report.

It is also interesting to consider the incentives (or lack thereof) for IPv6 peering. The fact that HE and Cogent haven't resolved their peering dispute from 2009 suggests to me that there is insufficient incentive (particularly from their customers) to do so, even when there are obvious practical effects. (I can't reach openstreetmap.org via an HE IPv6 tunnel even now.)

Perhaps the technical effectiveness of Happy Eyeballs and other backwards-compatibility mechanisms necessarily reduces incentives for improving IPv6?

Re: Is there hope for IPv6?

#5

Post by csears » Sat, Jan 05, 2019, 4:28 PM UTC

What if we started charging a small but slowly increasing annual fee for each IPv4 address? And with the proceeds ICANN starts buying back IPv4 blocks and permanently retiring them.

Re: Is there hope for IPv6?

#6

Post by sverige » Sat, Jan 05, 2019, 4:28 PM UTC

> "Given that fundamental constraint, there are only three basic choices for network operators:

...

3. Run native IPv6 among compatible parts of their own network with some kind of tunneling or translation (i.e., converter technologies in economics) at the boundaries to make it compatible with IPv4

Among these viable alternatives, we show that dual stack will never get us across the finish line; it is not economical. It is the third category that shows promise for some growing networks."

So, basically a more complex version of NAT is what they're proposing for the "transition" from IPv4 to 6. Am I the only one who remembers that IPv6 was supposed to eliminate NAT?

Re: Is there hope for IPv6?

#7

Post by krkoch » Sat, Jan 05, 2019, 4:30 PM UTC

We tried setting up automatic DNS records on dhcpv6 and slaac on our company lan, and we just weren't able (opnsense). We have ipv6 working, but it still doesn't "feel finished".

Re: Is there hope for IPv6?

#8

Post by philjohn » Sat, Jan 05, 2019, 4:31 PM UTC

Proven wrote: post #2

I always disable IPv6 at home and computers I administer. IPv6: for machines (IoT) IPv4: for humans

if it doesnt do ipv6 it's broken

Re: Is there hope for IPv6?

#9

Post by qwerty456127 » Sat, Jan 05, 2019, 4:35 PM UTC

Perhaps I just misunderstand IPv6 but I prefer IPv4 with NAT and temporarily leased public router address for privacy and security reasons. AFAIK IPv6 means every device gets assigned a stable unique address everybody can identify and reach it by. And I have never seen a SOHO WiFi router that would support IPv6 anyway (perhaps latest fancy expensive ones do).

Re: Is there hope for IPv6?

#10

Post by pixl97 » Sat, Jan 05, 2019, 4:40 PM UTC

qwerty456127 wrote: post #9

Perhaps I just misunderstand IPv6 but I prefer IPv4 with NAT and temporarily leased public router address for privacy and security reasons. AFAIK IPv6 means every device gets assigned a stable unique address everybody can identify and reach it by. And I have never seen a SOHO WiFi router that would support IPv6 anyway (perhaps latest fancy expensive ones do).

Windows uses ipv6 temporary addresses by default. NAT isnt security, and lot of implementations are faulty, so dont depend on it for security.