101–110 of 316 posts
I actually keep a cheap Comcast connection as a second WAN just to get IPv6 enabled on my home network. (And also because I live in the woods in New Hampshire and having two ISPs means I have fairly ok uptime)
Earlier quoted context omitted.
Azure is copying this wholesale. I've lost track of all of the "Private Endpoints", "Private Links", "Service Endpoints", "Private Resolvers" and "Virtual WAN" products they've introduced... all to make IPv4 work at scale. Literally none of those products would be required if they had just made IPv6 work properly. Instead, they NAT IPv6, so you can't even use it to avoid the NAT forced upon you by IPv4. They also rel…
A lot of IT folks are still fearful of IPv6. I've been on calls where people disable IPv6 as a matter of "best practice." It's sad. People will gladly learn the latest flavor of the month web framework but won't take time to gain experience with a fundamental protocol.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
Maybe just maybe. Customers don’t really want IPv6 but are forced onto it. Ipv6 is not human usable and gets rid of a bunch of network design norms.
This “human usable” argument gets trotted out so much on here and elsewhere, but the same people would be surprised to know about HTTP/2, TLS and the like, which by that definition, isn’t human usable either because of binary formats and encryption. People never interact with these protocols directly and use a layer of indirection such as a HTTP/2 client for HTTP, and the same applies for IPv6: use DNS (or your hosts…
And for reverse DNS, PTR records? What should we use there?
The Principal PM in charge of the "regionalization" effort was asked in a Q&A "why didn't we just switch to IPv6?".
Her answer was something along the lines of "The number of internal networking devices we currently have that cannot support IPv6 is so large that to replace them we would have needed to buy nearly the entire world's yearly output of those devices, and then install them all."[0]
It's easy to presume malicious intent on the IPv4 front from Amazon, but with so many AWS systems being on the scale they are at, I find it easy to believe that replacing all of the old network hardware may just be a project too large to do on a short timescale.
[0] - At least, that's my memory of it. I'm sure that's not an entirely accurate quotation.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
Azure is copying this wholesale. I've lost track of all of the "Private Endpoints", "Private Links", "Service Endpoints", "Private Resolvers" and "Virtual WAN" products they've introduced... all to make IPv4 work at scale. Literally none of those products would be required if they had just made IPv6 work properly. Instead, they NAT IPv6, so you can't even use it to avoid the NAT forced upon you by IPv4. They also rel…
Comcast at some point stopped letting you administrate your own router. You can log in to it, but port forwarding is no longer available through the administration interface. If you want port forwarding, they recommend that you do... something. It's not clear what; what you can find on the internet is mostly just people complaining that they insisted to customer support that they needed port forwarding, customer supp…
I bought my own (plain) modem and manage WiFi/routing myself.
I get the direct Internet-facing IPv4 and IPv6 addresses.
No monthly equipment fee!
IPv6 is such a massive headache it’s kind of mind boggling. I used to be super enthused - but it is absolutely less useful and more annoying than it’s worth.
I've been listening to a very good IPv6 related podcast with knowledgeable hosts (IPv6 Buzz) and all it's done is convince me that IPv6 is a poorly thought out mistake. Every other episode seems to be about a different new RFC that's replacing another RFC because the original ended up having a bunch of holes and edge cases. That's somewhat understandable for a new protocol but the protocol have been around for almost…
I use IPv6 since 2006 and I just can't see how it can give you "a massive headache". I read a blog post about how overly complex HTTP/3 is. Better ignore it forever and never implement it then. ;-) Also, which successful RFC protocol doesn't have a see of follow-up RFCs?
Many years ago when I was a junior dev at Amazon, there was a massive project internally to split up every internal system into regional versions with limited gateways allowing calls between regions. The reason? We had run out of internal IPv4 addresses. The Principal PM in charge of the "regionalization" effort was asked in a Q&A "why didn't we just switch to IPv6?". Her answer was something along the lines of "The…
surely they started the process...
right? i cannot imagine AWS just sticking head in the ground and ignoring this...
Earlier quoted context omitted.
This “human usable” argument gets trotted out so much on here and elsewhere, but the same people would be surprised to know about HTTP/2, TLS and the like, which by that definition, isn’t human usable either because of binary formats and encryption. People never interact with these protocols directly and use a layer of indirection such as a HTTP/2 client for HTTP, and the same applies for IPv6: use DNS (or your hosts…
There are a number of relevant issues here, including the general problem that DNS is not trustable and is not reliable or not reliable enough to use for configuring routers and firewalls. It is not even necessarily accessible or usable for reverse lookup at all. DNS wasn't really designed for common cases where network administrators enter IP address prefixes. That could probably fixed to some degree using a name sy…
Unfortunately, such changes are quite common in networking; Linux networking has many moving parts these days, there was the move to iproute2 and nftables, and the like, so one can only try to best keep up with the changes.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
This “human usable” argument gets trotted out so much on here and elsewhere, but the same people would be surprised to know about HTTP/2, TLS and the like, which by that definition, isn’t human usable either because of binary formats and encryption. People never interact with these protocols directly and use a layer of indirection such as a HTTP/2 client for HTTP, and the same applies for IPv6: use DNS (or your hosts…
> the same applies for IPv6: use DNS (or your hosts file). And for reverse DNS, PTR records? What should we use there?