Live data from Hacker News

Going IPv6 Only [pdf]

pc.nanog.org

111–112 of 112 posts

Re: Going IPv6 Only [pdf]

#111
post #38
post #33

Earlier quoted context omitted.

It's the part in the lower 64 bits that does not change as one moves around changing prefixes that worries people. And of course ways to pseudo-randomize that already exist, as mentioned already in this very discussion.

for the last 10 years or so, every single OS out there randomises the lower bits by default and even rotates it every few connections. The thing that remains static is the prefix you got from your ISP but that works in exactly the same way as your v4 address you get when you connect.

Not in the scenario actually under discussion by okket here.

Re: Going IPv6 Only [pdf]

#112
post #9

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Despite his conclusion, he likely answers it here: • The Client / Server CDN-centric Internet does not require each endpoint to have a globally unique permanent address • Addresses are increasingly being used in the role of ephemeral session tokens, not as persistent endpoint identifiers If you have to support ipv4 anyway and the benefit of ipv6 for your services is not high enough, why bother?

That only applies if you have a very myopic view on what the internet does. Sure, CDN traffic may dominate by volume but it is far from the only traffic on the internet. P2P traffic is still significant. web ⊂ internet

P2P works through NATs as long as you are willing to signal through a central servers, e.g. discussed here: https://arxiv.org/pdf/1605.05606
Post reply on HN