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

IPv4 Declared Historic – Draft

datatracker.ietf.org

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

21–30 of 40 posts

Re: IPv4 Declared Historic – Draft

#21

Post by [deleted] »

dang wrote: post #19
chatmasta wrote: post #6

I know it pains neckbeards to hear this, but IPv4 is not going anywhere, as long as it remains in the business interests of major cloud providers, and as long as people continue to deploy NAT based firewalls as a security feature. Re: business interests: Cloud businesses can acquire IP addresses at price points far higher than the average developer can. Now that the ARIN address space is exhausted, cloud providers wi…

> I know it pains neckbeards to hear this Please edit acerbic swipes out of your comments to HN. It's distracting, provoking and detracts from your otherwise substantive comment.

[deleted]

Re: IPv4 Declared Historic – Draft

#23

Post by simoncion »

chatmasta wrote: post #6

I know it pains neckbeards to hear this, but IPv4 is not going anywhere, as long as it remains in the business interests of major cloud providers, and as long as people continue to deploy NAT based firewalls as a security feature. Re: business interests: Cloud businesses can acquire IP addresses at price points far higher than the average developer can. Now that the ARIN address space is exhausted, cloud providers wi…

> In fact, IPv6 seems to be a step backward in terms of security. Every device does not need to be openly addressable from anywhere on the Internet...

Today I blow your mind: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Unique_local_address https://www.sixxs.net/tools/grh/ula/

Re: IPv4 Declared Historic – Draft

#24

Post by Aloha »

betaby wrote: post #17

IPv4 reminds me non-Unicode applications from 90s Or ATM, or frame-relay or IPX, or SNA, or 16bit DOS apps. All above were gone eventually. SAme going to happen with IPv4, but I guess at slower rate.

Frame Relay and ATM are still very much living, so are non-Unicode applications, SNA and 16-bit DOS applications a little less so, IPX I think is all but dead however.

Re: IPv4 Declared Historic – Draft

#25

Post by nandhp »

__david__ wrote: post #22

It's interesting to see this looks like it was drafted by a Time Warner Cable employee, and yet my twc internet still doesn't support IPv6. Though it gives me hope that maybe it's coming soon?

If your equipment is all IPv6-capable, you may just need to have swap out your modem. Time Warner Cable has achieved 100% IPv6 availability (possibly excluding certain phone customers):

http://www.timewarnercable.com/en/support/faqs/faqs-internet...

Re: IPv4 Declared Historic – Draft

#26

Post by lisivka »

rmetzler wrote: post #4
sparky_ wrote: post #3

This feels optimistically premature. Sure, it's been superseded, and it's great to move the ball forward. But somehow I think this legacy technology will be in use for a long, long time.

I think the same, IPv4 isn't going anywhere soon.

Sorry, but containerization and SDN needs addresses. I can spawn dozen of networks on my computer using docker/flannel/kubernetes, but I have only 1 white IPv4 address for all of them, so I need to use NAT and step-stone server. I have no such limitation with IPv6: each host has it own white IPv6 address and addressing becomes flat. Sorry, but I have no choice, so I use IPv6 today.

Re: IPv4 Declared Historic – Draft

#27

Post by lisivka »

solidangle wrote: post #10
chatmasta wrote: post #6

I know it pains neckbeards to hear this, but IPv4 is not going anywhere, as long as it remains in the business interests of major cloud providers, and as long as people continue to deploy NAT based firewalls as a security feature. Re: business interests: Cloud businesses can acquire IP addresses at price points far higher than the average developer can. Now that the ARIN address space is exhausted, cloud providers wi…

NAT is not a security feature, it never was and it will never be. Stateful connection tracking however is a security feature. NAT uses it to route the right packets to the right computers, but firewalls can also use the same feature to drop unsolicited packets. It's nearly trivial to do this with iptables, OpenWRT does it by default, and I'm sure most other IPv6-capable routers do it too. I'm just as secure on IPv6 a…

I use IPv4 (NAT) and IPv6 at home. I can access my desktop behind NAT using IPv6, which is good, but I see attempts to bruteforce root password via SSH, which is bad.

Re: IPv4 Declared Historic – Draft

#28

Post by simoncion »

lisivka wrote: post #27
solidangle wrote: post #10

Earlier quoted context omitted.

NAT is not a security feature, it never was and it will never be. Stateful connection tracking however is a security feature. NAT uses it to route the right packets to the right computers, but firewalls can also use the same feature to drop unsolicited packets. It's nearly trivial to do this with iptables, OpenWRT does it by default, and I'm sure most other IPv6-capable routers do it too. I'm just as secure on IPv6 a…

I use IPv4 (NAT) and IPv6 at home. I can access my desktop behind NAT using IPv6, which is good, but I see attempts to bruteforce root password via SSH, which is bad.

Definitely don't permit root to log in with a password. It's strongly recommended that you don't allow anyone to log in with a password, only with (password protected) keys stored on their machines.

Re: IPv4 Declared Historic – Draft

#29

Post by ra1n85 »

sparky_ wrote: post #3

This feels optimistically premature. Sure, it's been superseded, and it's great to move the ball forward. But somehow I think this legacy technology will be in use for a long, long time.

Agreed.

The few use cases I see that have a hard requirement for IPv6 typically involve arbitrary drivers like government regulations for unique addressing. I have yet to see much demand for IPv6 driven by functionality.

Re: IPv4 Declared Historic – Draft

#30

Post by mindcrime »

chatmasta wrote: post #6

I know it pains neckbeards to hear this, but IPv4 is not going anywhere, as long as it remains in the business interests of major cloud providers, and as long as people continue to deploy NAT based firewalls as a security feature. Re: business interests: Cloud businesses can acquire IP addresses at price points far higher than the average developer can. Now that the ARIN address space is exhausted, cloud providers wi…

Now that the ARIN address space is exhausted, cloud providers will begin to buy more and more IPv4 space until they have a complete monopoly and large portions of IPv4 are controlled by just a few companies. This will price other companies out of offering cloud services that are IPv4 compatible.

I don't see that being effective. IPv6 is here, and you can't put the genie back in the bottle. See above where somebody linked to the TWC page where they point out that they have reach 100% IPv6 coverage. And they are one of the largest ISP's around. (And from my subjective perception, one of the laggards on implementing IPv6). Common home routers have been shipping with IPv6 support for years, and probably a huge swathe of the 'net population (in America anyway) have dual-stack and just don't know it.

And IPv6 adoption is only going to keep growing. Pretty soon there won't be any consumers who are stuck on v4, so there will be no reason to try and establish a monopoly on v4 addresses.

Post reply on HN