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

121–130 of 133 posts

Re: Using the Internet without IPv4 connectivity

#121

Post by account42 »

msgodel wrote: post #68
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…

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…

Your information is either outdated or very specific to your locale.

Not only do ISPs here support IPv6 by default these days but they have even started only giving IPv4 connectivity via carrier grade NAT for new customers - you can still ask for a real IPv4 address for now but it's not there by default and the ISP reserves the right to take it away.

Re: Using the Internet without IPv4 connectivity

#122

Post by jeroenhd »

elcritch wrote: post #89
jeroenhd wrote: post #31

Earlier quoted context omitted.

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…

The Meta Quest software also sucks at this. You’d expect an essentially new platform struggling with this. Valve is basically all IPv4 afaict too. Pretty annoying and lazy if you ask me.

The Valve stuff is extra infuriating because a lot of their assets seem to be hosted on CDNs that do have IPv6, but their backend servers are stick with IPv4. When IPv4 breaks, you can look and buy games, but actually playing them will fail because of DRM checks.

Re: Using the Internet without IPv4 connectivity

#123

Post by jeroenhd »

immibis wrote: post #108
jeroenhd wrote: post #31

Earlier quoted context omitted.

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?

Some VPS providers already provide free IPv4 solutions.

Setting up a server works fine for server stuff, but it'd get you blocked and banned everywhere for having a data center IP while just browsing or trying to watch Netflix.

For my servers I could do it the other way around and save a dollar per month, but then I'd be sending emails from a residential IPv4 address, which will never ever make it past any spam filter.

Re: Using the Internet without IPv4 connectivity

#124

Post by jeroenhd »

bombcar wrote: post #91
School-Cotton wrote: post #86

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> 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.

Majority mobile and majority ipv6 are basically the same thing.

My mobile carrier here in the Netherlands doesn't do IPv6. Mobile traffic doesn't automatically mean IPv6, unfortunately.

I have my VPN permanently enabled for Pihole reasons anyway, so my IPv6 access works that way, but it's pretty stupid.

Re: Using the Internet without IPv4 connectivity

#125

Post by WorldMaker »

rfv6723 wrote: post #49
pumplekin wrote: post #13

If you ever need a quick hack to get v4 connectivity over a true v6 only setup, you can use a public DNS64+NAT64 Gateway. You can find a list at https://nat64.net/public-providers . So for most regular use, all you are doing is changing DNS servers. This is the combo. ** 1. DNS64 Synthesis of AAAA DNS records for things that don't have them to a NAT64 box. $ dig +short @2a00:1098:2c::1 AAAA github.com 2a01:4f8:c2c:12…

Using Cloudflare WARP would be much faster. And you can connect directly to ipv4 addr via WARP.

WARP is a full VPN tunnel. The above poster was suggesting if someone wanted to avoid a VPN tunnel, DNS64+NAT64 is a nice "hack" that just uses DNS as the tool to reestablish IPv4 connectivity. (It's also how most mobile/cell traffic today reaches IPv4, via DNS64+NAT64 gateways.)

Re: Using the Internet without IPv4 connectivity

#126

Post by ok123456 »

bigstrat2003 wrote: post #103
ok123456 wrote: post #94

Earlier quoted context omitted.

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 no…

Telling people doing things like SCADA, who absolutely don't want their hot forging press to be globally addressable, that they're "doing it wrong!" is not helpful. This attitude is why nothing short of coercion and blackmail is required to get a large chunk of users to switch.

Re: Using the Internet without IPv4 connectivity

#127

Post by WorldMaker »

lostmsu wrote: post #119
neilalexander wrote: post #14

Earlier quoted context omitted.

No, their policy is that you have to use IPv6-capable sockets and APIs, not that the remote endpoints are accessible over IPv6.

That's, effectively, a non-policy.

It does more than you think it does. GitHub may not support IPv6 and Apple can't force them, too, but the GitHub App on iOS is in most cases using DNS64 to get an IPv6 address to a NAT64 gateway to the GitHub IPv4 addresses, and all that just works today, in part because Apple forced apps to support "I'm always going to give you an IPv6 address, even if you know your own service isn't going to naturally return one".

Re: Using the Internet without IPv4 connectivity

#128

Post by WorldMaker »

b0a04gl wrote: post #23

ipv6 only machine still reaches ipv4 sites because dns64 upstream is just faking AAAA records ,makes it look like everything is native ipv6. this part of the trick is happening somewhere else which's not controllable. if dns64 breaks or stops doing the mapping properly then this might break

DNS64 exists upstream in your ISP in the same way that CGNAT, does, in a central gateway someone along your rout path. If your CGNAT breaks, it's possible that was also your DNS64 fallback provider. For many ISPs, if you are using CGNAT still for IPv4, it probably means that they haven't even invested in DNS64+NAT64, because you can force devices to be IPv6-only and especially with most consumer devices entirely replace a CGNAT with DNS654+NAT64 today, and it is probably cheaper to do so.

Re: Using the Internet without IPv4 connectivity

#129

Post by kstrauser »

ok123456 wrote: post #126
bigstrat2003 wrote: post #103

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> 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 no…

Telling people doing things like SCADA, who absolutely don't want their hot forging press to be globally addressable, that they're "doing it wrong!" is not helpful. This attitude is why nothing short of coercion and blackmail is required to get a large chunk of users to switch.

Literally no one is suggesting this. Having globally unique IPs doesn’t even slightly infer that they should be globally reachable. IPv6 still uses firewalls. It does mean that making an internal resource reachable when appropriate for that specific resource is vastly easier: you open the right firewall port and it’s done.

Re: Using the Internet without IPv4 connectivity

#130

Post by lostmsu »

WorldMaker wrote: post #127
lostmsu wrote: post #119

Earlier quoted context omitted.

That's, effectively, a non-policy.

It does more than you think it does. GitHub may not support IPv6 and Apple can't force them, too, but the GitHub App on iOS is in most cases using DNS64 to get an IPv6 address to a NAT64 gateway to the GitHub IPv4 addresses, and all that just works today, in part because Apple forced apps to support "I'm always going to give you an IPv6 address, even if you know your own service isn't going to naturally return one".

I was not proficient enough to understand that on my own. ELI5 is that this requirement forces apps to support running on IPv6-only networks where DNS calls return special IPv6 addresses for IPv4 hosts and ISP (usually mobile) does IPv6 to IPv4 NAT. That does sound useful.
Post reply on HN