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

Using the Internet without IPv4 connectivity

jamesmcm.github.io

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

101–110 of 133 posts

Re: Using the Internet without IPv4 connectivity

#101

Post by p1mrx »

murderfs wrote: post #84
bigstrat2003 wrote: post #79

Earlier quoted context omitted.

IPv6 is not actually hard to implement or maintain. A lot of people have repeated that meme, but it isn't true at all.

Okay, then please reimplement the equivalent of the following code to work with both IPv4 and IPv6: int fd = socket(AF_INET, SOCK_STREAM, 0); struct sockaddr_in addr = { .sin_family = AF_INET, .sin_port = htons(1234) }; addr.sin_addr.s_addr = htonl(INADDR_ANY); bind(fd, (struct sockaddr*)&addr, sizeof(addr)); listen(fd, 128); int client; while (client = accept(fd, 0, 0)) { // ... }

https://beej.us/guide/bgnet/html/ section 5.6

Re: Using the Internet without IPv4 connectivity

#102

Post by p1mrx »

allyourdatas wrote: post #32

Why would I ever need IPv6 at home or in my office? Explain to me logically why I need it in my house or in my office? I do not care about using up the last internet address because that is akin to the 'think of the children' crap used to justify things on an emotional level in order to manipulate people. There's no way I'll exhaust the private address spaces and I not not see NAT as a negative. I do not want my frid…

It's much easier to build an IP layer 6-to-4 gateway (like NAT64) than a 4-to-6 gateway, because the IPv4 header doesn't have room for a 128-bit destination address.

The most practical "4-to-6 gateway" would be a SOCKS or HTTPS proxy, because those let the client connect directly to a hostname and not care about IP addressing. But configuring a proxy for all your home devices is probably more tedious than deploying IPv6.

Re: Using the Internet without IPv4 connectivity

#103

Post by bigstrat2003 »

ok123456 wrote: post #94
kstrauser wrote: post #71

Earlier quoted context omitted.

If you don’t understand the engineering benefits, fine, not everyone needs to be an expert. I wouldn’t proudly brag about my ignorance of the subject, though.

What exactly are the "engineering benefits" beyond a larger address space? Most companies rely on private address spaces to logically separate them, and will ultimately end up using NAT66, ending up exactly where they started, but with significantly more complexity. Every time this comes up, people come out of the woodwork to say, "Well, akually we talked about this exact thing in 1995 and decided this was the right…

> Most companies rely on private address spaces to logically separate them...

Which is a hack driven by address scarcity. You can, and should, separate address spaces just fine if they're publicly routable.

> ...and will ultimately end up using NAT66, ending up exactly where they started, but with significantly more complexity.

Then those companies are managing their network very poorly. Which is their choice, but not really an argument against IPv6.

Re: Using the Internet without IPv4 connectivity

#104

Post by wizzwizz4 »

xyzzyz wrote: post #64
daneel_w wrote: post #57

Earlier quoted context omitted.

That's a depressingly shallow knee-jerk-y way of reasoning around something so fantastically open as the Internet... You're offering the deplorable solution of "let the money vote" instead of reason and restraint. The consequence if we had asked for money from the get-go would've been a corporate-ruled scenario where connectivity and Internet foothold were primarily in the hands of the businesses that had the most mo…

The fact of the matter is that “let the money vote” works much better than alternatives. “Reason and restraint” is precisely how we got to where we are.

Have you looked at the state of the world? "Let the money vote" works better than "let anyone just commandeer the finite resource, but only once", if nobody immoral enough to exploit it learns about vulnerabilities in your system.

If I can use my money to vote for "give me more money" at a profit, and I have no qualms about doing so, then I win – and if we play multiple such games with the same money, then we end up with a situation that's worse than "let anyone commandeer the resource".

Re: Using the Internet without IPv4 connectivity

#105

Post by paulddraper »

kalleboo wrote: post #24
simonjgreen wrote: post #3

Slightly misleading title, this is more “getting to the IPv4 internet via an IPv6 tunnel through a VPS”. Also just called 4in6. Interesting nonetheless! We find at our ISP that if we break something with IPv4 we experience a very different type of support issue to if we break IPv6. Breaking v4 results in, broadly, a pretty hard “down” state. While folks are unhappy, it is at least simple. Breaking v6 results in weird…

There's certainly a long tail of IPv4, but the last time IPv4 broke at home, my wife didn't even notice since Google, Facebook, Apple/iCloud, and most CloudFlare-hosted properties all still worked over IPv6.

GitHub is definitely a part of that long tail.

Re: Using the Internet without IPv4 connectivity

#107

Post by heffer »

xyst wrote: post #74

I run my own tailnet (headscale as the coordinator server). Tailscale stack is essentially built on top of wireguard. I have an exit node setup with dual stack IPv4/IPv6 addresses. So in theory if my ISPs CG-NAT failed or IPv4 was inaccessible, then configuring my device to use my exit node to reroute traffic _should_ work without having to mess with WG internals like the author in this article. I suppose there are s…

CloudFlare and friends use a multitude of factors, AS being only one of them. I am a TekSavvy customer (Canada's largest independent, i.e. not owned by one of the incumbents, ISP). Pretty clearly an eyeball network, and I get the CloudFlare captcha multiple times per day on different sites. I'm guessing it may have to do with the fact that I use custom reverse DNS entries (instead of their default schema of 127.0.0.1.dsl.teksavvy.com) for my internet facing IPv4 and IPv6 subnet.

Re: Using the Internet without IPv4 connectivity

#108

Post by immibis »

jeroenhd wrote: post #31
simonjgreen wrote: post #3

Slightly misleading title, this is more “getting to the IPv4 internet via an IPv6 tunnel through a VPS”. Also just called 4in6. Interesting nonetheless! We find at our ISP that if we break something with IPv4 we experience a very different type of support issue to if we break IPv6. Breaking v4 results in, broadly, a pretty hard “down” state. While folks are unhappy, it is at least simple. Breaking v6 results in weird…

When my IPv4 died last time, I noticed it mostly because Github didn't work anymore. These days, most consumer websites just work on IPv6. That said, people whose routers were only provisioned IPv4 DNS servers did have a full outage. If Microsoft would get off their incompetent assets already, my biggest concern would've been remembering the mDNS hostname I've assigned to my router so I could log in and see if IPv4 i…

It's easy enough to port forward v6 on some server to v4 GitHub - i'm doing it right now but can't remember the address. Think there's any demand for this, considering you can save $0.50-$2 per month per server by not having v4?

Re: Using the Internet without IPv4 connectivity

#109

Post by immibis »

School-Cotton wrote: post #86
msgodel wrote: post #68

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Most ISPs still just block IPv6 altogether because most small businesses seem to try IPv6 once and then forget to eg update their AAAA records so to the user it looks like their favorite niche thing works when they're on but not on the one they're paying for which creates problems. It's kind of a weird issue, I don't know if there are nice solutions other than hoping IPv4 just goes away eventually. Happy eyeballs was…

> Most ISPs still just block IPv6 altogether That’s increasingly not true, at least in developed countries. Traffic to Google in the US has been majority IPv6 since a few months ago.

And developing countries don't have much choice since they have to share about 5 addresses per city.

Re: Using the Internet without IPv4 connectivity

#110

Post by somidscr21 »

avhception wrote: post #93
somidscr21 wrote: post #66

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Yeah I've been using it daily for almost a year as have many other people at work

In an automated fashion using some kind of "PostUp" Script (to use the Wireguard term) or do you add the IPs manually after the VPN has been established?

I was able to write an AppleScript that ran on connection to add a dummy ULA and a disconnect script that undid it and went back to auto v6.
Post reply on HN