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

AWS adds an extra 5.5M IPv4 addresses

github.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

101–110 of 283 posts

Re: AWS adds an extra 5.5M IPv4 addresses

#101

Post by Symbiote »

john2010 wrote: post #68
skuhn wrote: post #43

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I actually think that what will really drive IPv6 adoption is if the price of IPv4 space continues its upward trajectory unabated. The price has about doubled at auction in the last year. How are those two things related? 1. There are a ton of owners sitting on inefficiently used IP space. Any company (not doing cloud hosting or network transit) that's holding a /8 is almost certainly using it very inefficiently, but…

I know few universities that still use static ipv4 for computer pools. The admins claim easy for us to monitor for misuse.

This is correct use of IP space.

With a routeable IP on every computer, no one would be a second class (consume-only) user of the Internet.

Re: AWS adds an extra 5.5M IPv4 addresses

#102

Post by ThatPlayer »

skuhn wrote: post #43
anthropodie wrote: post #6

IPv6 will never happen without someone forcing hands of big corps and ISPs to switch to Ipv6. Imagine all social media and streaming services, disable ipv4 within a month. These are not critical services but still will force ISPs to make the switch.

I actually think that what will really drive IPv6 adoption is if the price of IPv4 space continues its upward trajectory unabated. The price has about doubled at auction in the last year. How are those two things related? 1. There are a ton of owners sitting on inefficiently used IP space. Any company (not doing cloud hosting or network transit) that's holding a /8 is almost certainly using it very inefficiently, but…

Another one I've heard is that CGNAT shared IPv4 addresses lead to higher hardware requirements to manage that CGNAT. So just by having IPv6 support and having more traffic go through native IPv6 saves ISPs hardware that would've been required to manage the CGNAT.

Found the video: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=75h4gm7t1oI

Re: AWS adds an extra 5.5M IPv4 addresses

#103

Post by laurent92 »

Another huge problem is that companies are handling out IPv6 by bulks of /128 subnets per machine, and many experts encourage “one IP per service on the machine”, adding “it’s good for security since it’s harder to scan all ports of all subnet IPs. So at that pace, I still wonder how IPv6 will not run out of IP as quickly as IPv4.

One IP per server should be the norm.

Re: AWS adds an extra 5.5M IPv4 addresses

#104

Post by tolien »

2Gkashmiri wrote: post #10
Ambroos wrote: post #3

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I guess there's a large pool of IP addresses used by residential ISPs that could be recycled relatively easily. When I lived in Ireland I only got a public IPv6, my IPv4 was behind CG-NAT. The nerd in me wasn't a fan of that on paper, but in reality I didn't have any issues with it. I could see ISPs making a quick buck by switching to CG-NAT on IPv4 so they can sell off their IPv4 blocks. Those IPs being recycled for…

I find the ipv6 address scary because IP geolocation gives that in the same city district. Cgnat would be better because the server would see ipv4 of the ISP. I don't know, is there a way to not show my ipv6 and fall back on cgnat address because that looks much more secure in terms of not getting doxed and ad tracked.

That’s not inherent to IPv6 though, your ISP chose to be more specific in the location data for those addresses. If it’s sufficiently detailed as to “dox” you, maybe ask them not to do that?

Re: AWS adds an extra 5.5M IPv4 addresses

#105

Post by StreamBright »

korethr wrote: post #2

low whistle I imagine they paid a pretty penny for those /12s. A thought comes to me: If IPv6 adoption continues to drag along, and AWS/Azure/GCP continue to expand their IP blocks like this, how quickly are we in danger of the cloud providers effectively being the Internet?

IPv6 is trying to do too much in my opinion. This is partially why adoption is slower than it could be.

Re: AWS adds an extra 5.5M IPv4 addresses

#106

Post by audron »

laurent92 wrote: post #103

Another huge problem is that companies are handling out IPv6 by bulks of /128 subnets per machine, and many experts encourage “one IP per service on the machine”, adding “it’s good for security since it’s harder to scan all ports of all subnet IPs. So at that pace, I still wonder how IPv6 will not run out of IP as quickly as IPv4. One IP per server should be the norm.

Even if you reduce it down to /48 subnets you have 281,474,976,710,656 of these, ~65k times more than the entire IPv4 space, your usual assignment to a machine is a /64 which are about 4.2 billion times the amount of the IPv4 address space, about 18 quintillion.

Thats enough addresses to give every one of the 8 billion humans on this planet, two billion /64 subnets. Which I'd say should be enough for the moment.

Re: AWS adds an extra 5.5M IPv4 addresses

#107

Post by hohl »

Aeolun wrote: post #89
anthropodie wrote: post #6

IPv6 will never happen without someone forcing hands of big corps and ISPs to switch to Ipv6. Imagine all social media and streaming services, disable ipv4 within a month. These are not critical services but still will force ISPs to make the switch.

I will never be able to use IPv6 without someone making those things easier to read. I can barely remember a IPv4 address, but v6 is just insane.

Lucky you, somebody already did that for you. It‘s called DNS. :P

On a more serious node: IPv6 can be short and if used right they are actually short. Unfortunately, people continue not to care about relearning their habits and treat IPv6 as if it‘s a 1:1 replacement of IPv4 (you can even see it in this threat when people ask „why would you need more than a /64“). A major blocker in IPv6 aren‘t just the IPs but that all sys admins out there are trained to treat IPs as they got used to from the v4 world and can‘t stop to think of them as scarce resources instead of applying a hierarchical approach.

Re: AWS adds an extra 5.5M IPv4 addresses

#108

Post by jon-wood »

indigodaddy wrote: post #96
jgrahamc wrote: post #70

Earlier quoted context omitted.

We do default IPv6 on. https://blog.cloudflare.com/always-on-ipv6/ And the chart in that blog shows the dent we made.

This will show my lack of ipv6 knowledge but I’ll ask anyway. Say I have an endpoint service somewhere listening only on ipv6. Let’s take any sort of CDN out of the equation for simplicity. Can I use Cloudflare DNS for the service, such that anyone using ipv6 will connect directly to my service, of course— but can CF do some magic ipv4->ipv6 translation/bridge sort of thing, so that someone on ipv4-only will also be…

You should be able to advertise your ipv6 endpoint in the AAAA record, going direct to the origin, while make the A records pointers to Cloudflare which can then proxy back to your v6-only origin servers.

Re: AWS adds an extra 5.5M IPv4 addresses

#109

Post by zauguin »

laurent92 wrote: post #103

Another huge problem is that companies are handling out IPv6 by bulks of /128 subnets per machine, and many experts encourage “one IP per service on the machine”, adding “it’s good for security since it’s harder to scan all ports of all subnet IPs. So at that pace, I still wonder how IPv6 will not run out of IP as quickly as IPv4. One IP per server should be the norm.

We have less than 8 billion people on the world which corresponds to about 2^33. Let's assume that (given that we already have issues with sustainability) we will have much bigger issues than IP addresses if we ever reach more than 128 times that. So we are at less than 2^40. (Realistically I would expect much less, but let's be safe)

Than the question is how many addresses everyone needs. Currently we assign subnets. Let's provide everyone with 1024 subnets for client devices and an additional 1024 servers each with their own subnets. So 2^11 subnets each.

So we end up requiring 2^51 subnets, while we have 2^64 available, thereby only using less than 0.013% which provides plenty of room to reconsider if any of these approximations turn out to be wrong.

Re: AWS adds an extra 5.5M IPv4 addresses

#110

Post by wu_187 »

korethr wrote: post #2

low whistle I imagine they paid a pretty penny for those /12s. A thought comes to me: If IPv6 adoption continues to drag along, and AWS/Azure/GCP continue to expand their IP blocks like this, how quickly are we in danger of the cloud providers effectively being the Internet?

I've worked in the cloud hosting industry for a decade and a half. The entire time, we were warned about the IPv4 shortage and how we needed to switch to IPv6 soon(tm). Well, things haven't changed. Everyone is dragging their feet on IPv6 adoption from hosting providers, ISPs, hardware manufacturers, and software developers. I predicted this years ago and always said that it would require a government mandate to move on from IPv4. I honestly believe we are going to ramp up NAT in the coming years before really doing away with IPv4.
Post reply on HN