181–190 of 237 posts
It took decades to reach 5% in 2015, but now we're moving. 50% looks to be 2 years away. It's surprising that China doesn't show as dark green on the world map. China was into IPv6 early; the address space was needed.
The graph is interesting when you zoom in, much more IPv6 use over the holiday period and also recently during the period of lockdown measures. I would guess the majority of IPv6 traffic comes from devices on 4G networks. More devices are on 4G when visiting family and friends over the Christmas period and when working remotely.
A large part of the problem with IPv6 is that most developers and SA's don't have a lot of knowledge about it. This is why everything new is still built with IPv4 in mind, instead of thinking forward to IPv6. I think we could easily blame lack of IPv6 support at cloud providers to lack of knowledge with the developers and SA's they attract. If more developers and SA's would have access to IPv6 at home, the practical…
You probably know about this already, but there are free IPv6 tunnel brokers you can use to experiment. I previously used Hurricane Electric's tunnel, back before Comcast had native IPv6 support: https://www.tunnelbroker.net/
Earlier quoted context omitted.
It's not just 4G. It's consumer networking in general, which isn't held back by legacy enterprise networking equipment. When your residential ISP turns on IPv6 for their network, they also tend to turn on IPv6 for the modem+router combo devices they lease to run your LAN. Or if you're the kind of power user that buys your own router, it's almost certainly new enough to support IPv6.
Does IPv6 on an internal network offer any benefit to enterprises (not talking about ISPs here), who may view NAT as a form of defence in depth?
Nearly all security intrusions today are "pulled" in anyway via the web, e-mail, update channels, etc., or are injected by human beings via large scale or targeted phishing.
I did netsec for a while and during my tenure all the incidents we had were caused by phishing of one form or another.
Once you are inside the network, any tiny bit of defense in depth supplied by NAT becomes irrelevant.
Security is so full of mindless cargo cultism...
Earlier quoted context omitted.
Azure's IPv6 "support" saddens me. It's just painful how minimal their support is. For one, they NAT all IPv6 traffic. Let that sink in. Let it percolate. Mull over the fact that the entire purpose of IPv6 is to eliminate NAT, and that it's practically impossible to get an IPv6 NAT-ing network device. Microsoft must have had to write their own, custom network load balancers to NAT IPv6. It's madness . Oh, if that's n…
We've been experimenting with Azure's IPv6 support at work recently. The fact it uses NAT is insane - though we could tolerate that. Even worse is that the NAT is broken - it doesn't update the ICMPv6 checksum when it rewrites the source/destination address, so the machines on both ends drop all ICMPv6 traffic that passes through Azure. This is rather bad considering the importance of ICMPv6 in IPv6 (for Path MTU Dis…
Azure sucks anyway. Their prices are not good and their management console is horrible.
And yet, when I beg my google cloud rep for IPv6 addresses on instances (or on anything that isn’t the load balancer) I get told that it is not on the immediate roadmap. The cloud providers have pushed back ipv6 adoption so hard imo. At least native ipv6 access. I know they’ve thrown in some token support and you /can/ make something work; but compared to VPS providers which consistently deliver machines with IPv6 ad…
Earlier quoted context omitted.
It's natural because AWS/GCP/etc are against internet style system architectures (=natural IP addressing of your components), they are all about RFC1918 subnets, NAT gateways and L7 proxying. AWS even tells you it's bad architecture (or at least not "Well Architected") to build internet-style systems.
They've internalised their constraints. RFC1918 was forced upon the cloud providers only because there weren't enough IPv4 addresses to go around. If Amazon had started in 1980, they would have simply allocated a /8 for each region and be done with it. No NAT, no gateways, no address translation of any sort. Everything routing to everything else natively.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
It's not just 4G. It's consumer networking in general, which isn't held back by legacy enterprise networking equipment. When your residential ISP turns on IPv6 for their network, they also tend to turn on IPv6 for the modem+router combo devices they lease to run your LAN. Or if you're the kind of power user that buys your own router, it's almost certainly new enough to support IPv6.
Does IPv6 on an internal network offer any benefit to enterprises (not talking about ISPs here), who may view NAT as a form of defence in depth?
Earlier quoted context omitted.
It's fine for IPv6 engineers to want to make everything directly routable, but in IPv4 the difference still matters, and therefore that's the scenario we need to compare against. The IPv6 enterprise argument is 'You might one day have to renumber some devices because some other enterprise might have set up overlapping addresses, therefore you definitely have to renumber everything now, and oh, every time the ISP deci…
I’m confused why would this happen? > The IPv6 enterprise argument is 'You might one day have to renumber some devices because some other enterprise might have set up overlapping addresses, therefore you definitely have to renumber everything now, and oh, every time the ISP decides they don't like you, because private addresses are icky'. Obviously that's a hard sell. If you’re an enterprise you would just get your o…
For context, apparently a block of 79,228,162,514,264,337,593,543,950,336 addresses (/48) is about 100$ a year.
And yet, when I beg my google cloud rep for IPv6 addresses on instances (or on anything that isn’t the load balancer) I get told that it is not on the immediate roadmap. The cloud providers have pushed back ipv6 adoption so hard imo. At least native ipv6 access. I know they’ve thrown in some token support and you /can/ make something work; but compared to VPS providers which consistently deliver machines with IPv6 ad…
> I beg my google cloud rep for IPv6 addresses on instances Why? What problem does this solve?