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

AWS IPv4 Estate Now Worth $4.5B

toonk.io

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

121–130 of 480 posts

Re: AWS IPv4 Estate Now Worth $4.5B

#121

Post by yardstick »

welterde wrote: post #95
bradley13 wrote: post #93

Can we go back in time and hit the designers of IPv6 upside the head? The decision not to make IPv6 backwards compatible, the belief that a beautiful new standard could magically replace something already so widespread... "Naive" is an inadequate word. We are still futzing with the transition 3 decades later, with no end in sight. Grrr, grumble...

You have to go back further in time and hit the designers of IPv4 on the head for not making it forward compatible. IPv6 is as backward compatible as is possible within this constraint. You can embed IPv4 space within IPv6, there is NAT64, tunneling IPv6 over IPv4 and many other transition technologies. It's not possible to design a protocol that is any more backwards-compatible.

NAT64? No what we needed was NAT66, and it took over a decade after IPv4 to deliver this. Because the IPv6 advocates were too opinionated on exactly how IPv6 should work. And since when has the world even agreed to anything even remotely complicated without trying to change things up?

Re: AWS IPv4 Estate Now Worth $4.5B

#122

Post by welterde »

hn_throwaway_99 wrote: post #105
welterde wrote: post #95

Earlier quoted context omitted.

You have to go back further in time and hit the designers of IPv4 on the head for not making it forward compatible. IPv6 is as backward compatible as is possible within this constraint. You can embed IPv4 space within IPv6, there is NAT64, tunneling IPv6 over IPv4 and many other transition technologies. It's not possible to design a protocol that is any more backwards-compatible.

> IPv6 is as backward compatible as is possible within this constraint. Yikes, couldn't disagree with that more. There are a ton of things that ipv6 designers could have done to make the transition much easier. This is a (now quite old) blog post that is my "go to" that explains a lot of the problems with ipv6: https://cr.yp.to/djbdns/ipv6mess.html FWIW I couldn't find the link to that post until finding it on one of…

That document has been going around for ages and is based on the same fundamental misunderstanding that one somehow can extend IPv4 in a way somehow, but remain compatible with IPv4-only clients. This is just not possible.

Most of the other criticism is not relevant anymore, since we now have a lot of transition technologies that allow IPv6 clients to interoperate with IPv4 servers (this way around is possible since IPv6 is a superset of IPv4). Overall we are now much further into the IPv6 migration than djb ever envisioned.

Re: AWS IPv4 Estate Now Worth $4.5B

#123

Post by pcthrowaway »

BHSPitMonkey wrote: post #74
qingcharles wrote: post #41

Earlier quoted context omitted.

The Internet is built on what is called version 4 of Internet Protocol, which when they designed it allotted 4Bn total IP addresses. Each device on the Internet would be able to have one IP and 4Bn would be more than enough for the whole of Planet Earth. Fast forward a couple of decades and everyone needs 10 IPs each. You have your phone, your laptop, your work computer, your TV, your door lock, your door bell camera…

> Fast forward a couple of decades and everyone needs 10 IPs each. You have your phone, your laptop, your work computer, your TV, your door lock, your door bell camera, your thermostat, etc. Your phone perhaps, but the rest of these devices never need a public IP address.

Your phone never needs (nor gets) a public IP either.

Pretty much every cell network gives the phone an IP on the subnet, and then uses NAT, or CG-NAT[1] to share the same public IPs for multiple mobile devices.

[1]: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Carrier-grade_NAT

Re: AWS IPv4 Estate Now Worth $4.5B

#124

Post by tornato7 »

leoh wrote: post #31

fwiw, ATT charges me $15 for ~8 fixed ipv4 addresses on my gigabit plan. Even if we amortize against the total monthly bill of $113, we get ~$15 per IP. EDIT: I guess this is the cost to _rent_ an IP per month and not the cost of _owning_ an IPv4 address.

It's great that AT&T offers static IPs, but I should charge them about $600 for my time because it took me 3.5 hours of playing games with the automated support line and explaining to their tech support what static IP addresses are, and that it doesn't matter "what version of Windows my servers are running."

Re: AWS IPv4 Estate Now Worth $4.5B

#125

Post by sambazi »

cdchn wrote: post #114
speedgoose wrote: post #106

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Not OP nor a recognised network expert but here is my suggestion: IPv10. The next IP version number that is unassigned, that is conveniently 4+6. Basically something that is not breaking compatibility with IPv4 and doesn’t require those dual network stacks nonsense.

How do you not break compatibility with IPv4 while also getting more bytes in the address?

country codes

Re: AWS IPv4 Estate Now Worth $4.5B

#127

Post by _JamesA_ »

kxrm wrote: post #61
yla92 wrote: post #17

Some noob questions here. How does one buy a block of IPv4 as an individual? (If that's allowed) After you purchase it, how does it come into your possession? How do you utilize them?

I actually went through this process with ARIN. So I can give you that perspective. It wasn't a big deal, the only minor concern I had was it felt like you're encouraged to sign up under a business entity. I had an LLC, so it was natural just to use that. I don't know what kind of vetting they do if you decide to use yourself as an organization though instead of a different legal entity. You need to provide justifica…

Is there a way to get a /24 block that I own and has been unused since the mid 90's routed without signing a new contract and paying the new ARIN fees?

Re: AWS IPv4 Estate Now Worth $4.5B

#128

Post by p1mrx »

CMCDragonkai wrote: post #100
otabdeveloper4 wrote: post #85

Earlier quoted context omitted.

The big nations have already wargamed this scenario and have contingency plans in place. IMO we'll see this happen in our lifetimes.

Could starlink be a way to maintain global connectivity in the face of government control? Would they try to jam satellite connections?

It's harder to jam Starlink than GPS because the signals are directional, but if a government doesn't want you using it, they can just make the dishes illegal and throw you in prison for having one.

Re: AWS IPv4 Estate Now Worth $4.5B

#129

Post by sambazi »

irrational wrote: post #67
malikNF wrote: post #65

Question for the networking folk here. How can the rest of us help move things over to ipv6?

I’ve been hearing about ipv4 running out and the need to move to ipv6 for so many years/decades, but it keeps not happening. I’m wondering if anything will change in my lifetime.

ipv6 is _the_ mobile and india internet, mostly.

iphones are v6 only as are indian consumer connections.

Re: AWS IPv4 Estate Now Worth $4.5B

#130

Post by flomo »

bradley13 wrote: post #93

Can we go back in time and hit the designers of IPv6 upside the head? The decision not to make IPv6 backwards compatible, the belief that a beautiful new standard could magically replace something already so widespread... "Naive" is an inadequate word. We are still futzing with the transition 3 decades later, with no end in sight. Grrr, grumble...

> Can we go back in time and hit the designers of IPv6 upside the head?

Okay we are back in 1992 and are wearing a mullet. 'The Internet' is still a relatively small number of mostly university and government sites, and is barely used for anything important, so a flag day seems pretty feasible.

Post reply on HN