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

AWS Customers Cannot Escape IPv4

tty.neveragain.de

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

131–140 of 316 posts

Re: AWS Customers Cannot Escape IPv4

#131

Post by [deleted] »

tinix wrote: post #108
mabbo wrote: post #104

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…

this doesn't forgo v6 phase-in though, can't kick that can down the road forever. surely they started the process... right? i cannot imagine AWS just sticking head in the ground and ignoring this...

[deleted]

Re: AWS Customers Cannot Escape IPv4

#132

Post by Spivak »

jeroenhd wrote: post #70
donor20 wrote: post #8

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.

This is one example where it's clear IPv6 isn't the problem, actually. A lot of problems with AWS would disappear if they would just support IPv6 like your average budget ISP does. IPv6 just works. Amazon, Github, and Azure don't. That's not really a problem in most cases (very few people go IPv6 only because it's just not necessary with CGNAT, and even then network translation tricks can put up IPv6 IPv4 bridges eas…

> IPv6 just works

Only via the herculean efforts of a bunch of people having to literally reinvent the world to deal with it. Everything needs IPv6 support specifically. It's such a mess, if IPv6 has just been identical to IPv4 but with larger addresses we would be on it by now. But no they had to make it their religious crusade to eliminate NAT (and now we have NAT66 so clearly a winner) put IPSec in there which is hilarious in the era of Wireguard and eliminate DHCP which is actually insane and makes a stupid number of assumptions about hosts being able to communicate with one another and actually complicates DNS registration.

Can you imagine how trivial it would have been if you could support both v4 and v6 by just supporting v6 and having 0::v4addr be literally equivalent to ipv4? It would be more difficult to not support v6.

Re: AWS Customers Cannot Escape IPv4

#133

Post by aranchelk »

mabbo wrote: post #104

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…

Can you remember what year it was?

I’ve got a slight suspicion you were given some bullshit or at least a creative treatment of facts e.g. everything had IPv6 support but FUD-filled network engineers didn’t want to turn it on.

Most network devices I’ve encountered were dual-stack way before anyone I knew seemed to care about actually using IPv6 — I always assumed it was added for US government/military requirements.

Re: AWS Customers Cannot Escape IPv4

#134

Post by grogenaut »

mabbo wrote: post #104

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…

I believe the PM was Laura Grit, who was actually a TPM I believe. Laura is a Distinguished Engineer now. She seems to constantly do massive scale projects. IPv4 being a smaller one now. Sadly I can't share some of the big projects she's doing now. I've gotten some sage advice from her on a few occasions that she had time and appreciate it.

Re: AWS Customers Cannot Escape IPv4

#136

Post by jjoonathan »

aranchelk wrote: post #133
mabbo wrote: post #104

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…

Can you remember what year it was? I’ve got a slight suspicion you were given some bullshit or at least a creative treatment of facts e.g. everything had IPv6 support but FUD-filled network engineers didn’t want to turn it on. Most network devices I’ve encountered were dual-stack way before anyone I knew seemed to care about actually using IPv6 — I always assumed it was added for US government/military requirements.

Sure, everything supports IPv6 -- until you turn it on and rediscover the tickets that have been sitting at the bottom of the JIRA for the last decade.

Re: AWS Customers Cannot Escape IPv4

#137

Post by discodave »

aranchelk wrote: post #133
mabbo wrote: post #104

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…

Can you remember what year it was? I’ve got a slight suspicion you were given some bullshit or at least a creative treatment of facts e.g. everything had IPv6 support but FUD-filled network engineers didn’t want to turn it on. Most network devices I’ve encountered were dual-stack way before anyone I knew seemed to care about actually using IPv6 — I always assumed it was added for US government/military requirements.

From memory, the regionalization project ran from approx 2014 to 2015 or 2016.

There were also other reasons given, like the amount of internal software that used e.g. IPv4 addresses. Also, AWS likes to have 'lots of small things' instead of one big thing (regions, AZs, cells, two pizza teams, no (official) monorepo) so regionalization was part of that.

Another big reason for regionalization, other than IPv4 exhaustion was that AWS promises customers that AWS regions are completely seperate, but with one big giant network, it turns out there were all sorts of services making calls between regions that nobody had realized. I have a couple of funny examples, but that might make me too identifiable :)

Re: AWS Customers Cannot Escape IPv4

#138

Post by fulafel »

vasachi wrote: post #121
fulafel wrote: post #93

Earlier quoted context omitted.

This phrasing is really problematic. Using internet addressing (vs ambiguous addresses) does not make your network "public". Just like using unique MAC addresses doesn't. Confusing global addressing with public reachabiliy is exactly the rhetoric used by AWS, Azure etc to scare people into building mazes of ambiguously addressed 10.x networks.

What? Private networks are defined as networks, that use private address ranges[0]. They are most certainly not AWS "rhetoric". And why are unique MAC addresses a problem? [0] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Private_network

I was referring to "public network".

(Though that WP page seems also to have self-coined the "private network" phrase and I don't think it's an estabilished term in this meaning. The first and second references off the leading paragraph talk about "private internets" and "unique local addresses" respectively).

Re: AWS Customers Cannot Escape IPv4

#139

Post by biohax2015 »

apparentorder wrote: post #44
solatic wrote: post #12

Half the reason AWS has leading IPv6 support in the first place is due to mandates from the US government to start migrating. Author is correct that, from a cost perspective, the new costs are immaterial to large customers, but I wouldn't discount the power of policy mandates from the largest customers, where the threat of building an in-house alternative to comply with policy might be sufficient to force AWS to fina…

Indeed. I really don't like the thought, but I more and more believe that there is no other way to incentivize IPv6 at the "server side". The client (end user) side seems to do well, considering that Google reports IPv6 end user traffic of almost 50% these days.

> The client (end user) side seems to do well, considering that Google reports IPv6 end user traffic of almost 50% these days.

That's because all mobile data connections are on IPv6

Re: AWS Customers Cannot Escape IPv4

#140

Post by apparentorder »

Bluecobra wrote: post #85

> There is no concept of private addresses in IPv6, which means farewell to the Managed NAT Gateway and its magnificent pricing. Maybe not in AWS, but there are Unique Local IPv6 addresses in fc00::/7 and NAT66 if you really love NAT!

Yeah, I was referring to AWS; I should have made that clear. ULA is frequently discouraged though, and NAT66, well ... just no.

I just recently heard that MS apparently has built everything IPv6 on Azure around NAT. This is so weird.

Post reply on HN