Can someone explain to me what does IPv6 offer that's IPv4 doesn't? Apart from way more addresses. A good article would suffice.
> A good article would suffice.
IPv6 Watch
11–20 of 107 posts
Re: IPv6 Watch
#12There’s probably a good reason for it, but I’ve never understood why IPv6 couldn’t be fully backwards compatible. Then there would be no need to migrate - everyone would be already on IPv6 by definition.
If I recall correctly, ipv6 addresses beginning with 0::0:ffff are mapped 1-to-1 with ipv4 addresses.
Re: IPv6 Watch
#13How accurate is this? Steam I know has some ipv6 support for downloads whilst here it says it has no support at all.
Seems like it tests a limited list[0] of domains associated with the site or service, with the final result based on a check of their DNS records. For Steam, looks like it only checks , , and .
It'd be nice if the site provided an explanation of the process, maybe with some way to expand a particular entry and see which associated domains were tested and which succeeded/failed.
[0] https://github.com/andir/ipv6.watch/blob/master/conf.yaml
Re: IPv6 Watch
#14How accurate is this? Steam I know has some ipv6 support for downloads whilst here it says it has no support at all.
Like another commenter mentioned, it would be nice if there was a detail page showing what no, partial, or full support means. I plugged a few of these into https://ipv6-test.com/validate.php (a random site I found) and store.steampowered.com has no AAAA record, twitter.com has no AAAA record (this site says it has partial support), www.ubuntu.com has an AAAA DNS record, an IPv6 webserver, but not an IPv6 DNS server (this site says its supported).
Re: IPv6 Watch
#15A basic understanding of what an IPv6 world will look like really didn't click for me until I read the IPv6 Address Planning book by Tom Coffeen. Before that, I really just saw it as IPv4 with longer addresses.
Once you dig into the details, you come to the realization that it's a nearly complete reinvention of IPv4. Network planning looks quite different (especially when it comes to subnets) when you plan them with only IPv6 in mind.
Earlier this year, I was like:
"Wow, Comcast gives me a /60! That should be more address space than I could ever want or use."
Now, I'm thinking:
"A /60 is way too limited, I wish I had a /52 or a /56 instead -- why is Comcast so restrictive with giving out address space?"
I'm currently reading the IPv6 for IPv4 Experts book to try to fill in more details:
https://sites.google.com/site/yartikhiy/home/ipv6book
The more I read about it, the more I feel like I have a long way to go before I really get an intuitive understanding.
Re: IPv6 Watch
#16There’s probably a good reason for it, but I’ve never understood why IPv6 couldn’t be fully backwards compatible. Then there would be no need to migrate - everyone would be already on IPv6 by definition.
How does an IPv4-only host send a packet to an IPv6-only host?
Re: IPv6 Watch
#17Can someone explain to me what does IPv6 offer that's IPv4 doesn't? Apart from way more addresses. A good article would suffice.
The Case for IPv6 (1999):
https://web.archive.org/web/20100805233650/http://go6.net/ip...
Re: IPv6 Watch
#18A basic understanding of what an IPv6 world will look like really didn't click for me until I read the IPv6 Address Planning book by Tom Coffeen. Before that, I really just saw it as IPv4 with longer addresses. Once you dig into the details, you come to the realization that it's a nearly complete reinvention of IPv4. Network planning looks quite different (especially when it comes to subnets) when you plan them with…
Could you give a brief overview of your current understanding? I'm curious as to why /60 would be too limited, and how it's different from IPv4.
Re: IPv6 Watch
#19A basic understanding of what an IPv6 world will look like really didn't click for me until I read the IPv6 Address Planning book by Tom Coffeen. Before that, I really just saw it as IPv4 with longer addresses. Once you dig into the details, you come to the realization that it's a nearly complete reinvention of IPv4. Network planning looks quite different (especially when it comes to subnets) when you plan them with…
They should have had either a smaller scope / simpler extension to IPv4 with a better backwards compat story for IPv6 only clients (some have since shown up a bit).
Or really done the reinvent - there were some interesting ideas especially for folks with lots of link handoffs (ie cell phones driving down a road etc) - can't find the write-up quickly.
Re: IPv6 Watch
#20There’s probably a good reason for it, but I’ve never understood why IPv6 couldn’t be fully backwards compatible. Then there would be no need to migrate - everyone would be already on IPv6 by definition.
How does an IPv4-only host send a packet to an IPv6-only host?
They could have at least let ipv6 only folks talk to ipv4 more easily. Something like 464XLAT maybe built in out the gate more? You go ipv6 until next hop is IPv4. If you are in IPv4 mapped address space translate to IPv4 there and continue.