141–150 of 198 posts
IPv6 vs. 4 is like Python 3 vs. 2, just worse.
And IPv6 vs v4 discussions are just like Python 3 vs. 2 discussions: Often much more annoying than just getting it over with and switching.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
Why don't you want every device to have a public IP? There seems to be a perception that this is somehow insecure, but the default configuration of any router is to firewall everything. And one small bonus of the huge size of a /64 is that port scanning is not feasible, unlike in the old days when you could trivially scan a whole IPv4 /24 of a company that forgot to configure their firewall. NAT may work fine for you…
> Why don't you want every device to have a public IP? Suddenly, your smart lightbulb is accessible by everyone. Not a great idea. > With IPv6, if you want a peer-to-peer connection between firewalled peers, you do a quick UDP hole punch and you're done - since everything has a unique IP, you don't even need to worry about remapping port numbers. There is no guarantee with IPv6 that hole punching works. It _usually_…
A firewall solves that issue, IPv4 or IPv6.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
> Why don't you want every device to have a public IP? Suddenly, your smart lightbulb is accessible by everyone. Not a great idea. > With IPv6, if you want a peer-to-peer connection between firewalled peers, you do a quick UDP hole punch and you're done - since everything has a unique IP, you don't even need to worry about remapping port numbers. There is no guarantee with IPv6 that hole punching works. It _usually_…
> Suddenly, your smart lightbulb is accessible by everyone. A firewall solves that issue, IPv4 or IPv6.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
Your bad attempt at humor makes it quite clear that you've never dealt with network engineering or administrating to any extent. Admitting that ipv6 has some downsides, however minor they may seem to you, won't hurt your quest to render ipv4 obsolete. In fact being less insufferable is how you win people to your causes, not by laughing at their genuine albeit minor issues.
They were making a legitimate point a humorous way. The problem of manually typing in IP addresses has been solved by DNS for over 50 years.
The main thing I don't like is type-ability. Even now I type in 192.168.1.14 to connect to my mates computer to play satisfactory. No way in heck am I trying in an ip6!
Earlier quoted context omitted.
You can't correlate the number of addresses with the number of devices because IPv6 temporary addresses exist. If you enable temporary addresses, your computer will periodically randomly generate a new address and switch to it. https://www.rfc-editor.org/rfc/rfc8981.html
[flagged]
> MUCH MORE IMPORTANT
I haven't done the exhaustive research but props in advance for being the only person shouting in caps on HN. Definitely one way to proclaim one's not AI-ness without forced spelling errors.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
> Suddenly, your smart lightbulb is accessible by everyone. A firewall solves that issue, IPv4 or IPv6.
A lot of people, even on HN, mistake "addressable" for "accessible".
I finally have IPv6 at home but I am being very cautious about enabling it because I don't really know what the implications are, and I do not trust the defaults.
As it should. Date notwithstanding, I would actually enjoy if there was a manually induced latency penalty for "legacy IP" that needs to be manually turned off on Linux. I know some people don't care at all, but the internet was made to be addressable. IPv6 is the only shot we have to go back to that.
As sad as it makes me to admit, I don't think IPv6 is ever going to happen without government intervention. Adoption is flat at under 50% over the past year. IPv6 doesn't benefit big tech. SNI routing and NAT work pretty well for centralized platforms. AWS will gladly rent us IPv4 addresses until the end of time.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
Aren't your home addresses assigned by your local router?
the ISP can see 58 different ipv6 addresses sending packets in the last hour With ipv4 it can see one ipv4 address Now sure that 58 could all be on one device with 58 different IPs and using a different one for each connection In reality that's not the case.
The theoretical vague problem here is being used to defend a status quo which has led to complete centralization of Internet traffic because of the difficulty of P2P connectivity due to NAT.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
You can't correlate the number of addresses with the number of devices because IPv6 temporary addresses exist. If you enable temporary addresses, your computer will periodically randomly generate a new address and switch to it. https://www.rfc-editor.org/rfc/rfc8981.html
I feel like this is a silly narrowing of the problem for normal, retail users. My priority isn't masking "the number of addresses" or devices. My desire is to not have a persistent identifier to correlate all my traffic. The whole idea of temporary addresses fails at this because the network prefix becomes the correlation ID. I'm not an IPv4 apologist though. Clearly the NAT/DHCP assignments from the ISP are essentia…
Reboot your router. Asus (with the vendor firmware) allows you do this in a scheduled manner. You'll get a new IPv4 WAN IP (for your NAT stuff) and (with most ISPs) a new IPV6 prefix.
As it stands, if you think NAT hides an individual device, you may have a false sense of security (PDF):
* https://oasis.library.unlv.edu/cgi/viewcontent.cgi?article=1...