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

More than 1/3 of all access to Google is now over IPv6

google.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

231–237 of 237 posts

Re: More than 1/3 of all access to Google is now over IPv6

#231

Post by jlokier »

Bnshsysjab wrote: post #229
jlokier wrote: post #227

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I had the opposite problem. A mailserver was blocked by Gmail until I disabled IPv6 on it.

Interesting. I imagine it may be ips sitting in a pool which are known bad in your case, and in mine known good slightly tipping the black box scales. I just wish gmail had tech support so I could resolve this directly instead of flailing about trying random obscure solutions.

In my case, the messages from Gmail's MX suggest the problem was reverse DNS for the EHLO name returning the IPv4, for a connection from the IPv6.

I decided I'd need to configure Exim4 to issue a different EHLO name depending on whether it's connecting over IPv4 or IPv6, and then triple check (with tests) that reverse DNS unambiguously matched in each case.

But as deliverability was the priority, disabling IPv6 seemed lower risk than fiddling with config, seeing it work, then finding out a few weeks later that it introduced another "Google mystery factor". Reviewing that is on the todo list somewhere, very low priority.

Re: More than 1/3 of all access to Google is now over IPv6

#232

Post by ghshephard »

richardwhiuk wrote: post #165
ghshephard wrote: post #161

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Well - you may have overlapping RFC 4193, but if your network engineers have done their job well, you are randomly choosing from a big honking FD/8 address space, and the odds of a collision are statistically very unlikely.

FD/8 space? You mean 10.0.0.0/8? No the odds of a collision on 10.0.0.0/8 are high because: - Both corporations probably started allocating from the top - Both corporations probably allocated huge subnets.

Exactly - the engineers who authored RFC 4193 were super familiar with the problems of RFC 1918 space - and so they were super, super clear on exactly how you needed to allocate space from the FD/8 network. The details are very clear, and the RFC is an awesome read - but the net-net is you can generate a /48 - which means you have 2^16 sub-networks to work with (each subnetwork having effectively unlimited number of hosts allowed on it) - and you can connect with 1,000 other companies that have done the same thing, and there is only a 4.54*10^-07 chance of collision.

I know IPv6 network engineers despise RFC 4193 - but, it offers extraordinary flexibility around addressing - particularly if you have large networks that you want full control over. At my last gig, we deployed over 25 million nodes in RFC 4193 space, and it worked like a charm.

Re: More than 1/3 of all access to Google is now over IPv6

#233

Post by iknowstuff »

mehrdadn wrote: post #86
iknowstuff wrote: post #74

Earlier quoted context omitted.

What complexity? Devices being autoconfigurable without DHCP is less complex. Having no NAT is less complex. Having a public IP is less complex. You just got used to the complexity of IPv4. Why the hell would you block IPv6. You ARE stuck in your ways. OS vendors consider it necessary on LAN for various functionality.

> What complexity? 1. What the hell is DHCP-PD and is it better on or off? 2. What are 6to4, 6in4, 6rd, etc. and should the user care? 3. When should autoconf be stateless vs. stateful? I thought the point of IPv6 was to allow things to be stateless? 4. When should DHCPv6 be enabled vs. disabled? Why the hell is this even a question on some routers if devices are supposed to be "autoconfigurable without DHCP"? 5. Wha…

I think those have super easy to answer! All up-to-date OS-es support stateless autoconfig now, so forget about DHCPv6. Just disable it and everything will work magically.

6to4, 6in4, 6rd are legacy transition technologies, not needed when you have IPv6, so don't worry.

Re: More than 1/3 of all access to Google is now over IPv6

#234

Post by lrem »

jakeogh wrote: post #22
lrem wrote: post #17

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Network-wise this is a feature. Having the address space reflect network layout allows for vastly simpler, thus more efficient, routing tables.

Oh the poor SRAM on those ASIC's.

> Apple tells app devs to use IPv6 as it's 1.4 times faster than IPv4

Do you have better insight than Apple?

Re: More than 1/3 of all access to Google is now over IPv6

#235

Post by Dagger2 »

Arnt wrote: post #230
Dagger2 wrote: post #158

Earlier quoted context omitted.

There's a fair few ISPs changing the prefix every day, but this is the first I've heard of anyone changing it every half an hour. If it was common I would've heard a lot of complaining about it by now.

Would you? You haven't heard any complaint from me, and I'm a unix greybeard with a home network and lots of incoming IPv6 connections — all I needed to do was shrink my DNS TTLs, and everything works well. Software's grown resilient to IP address changes nowadays. Even my incoming rdiff-backup jobs don't raise a noticeable number of errors.

I read most reddit posts that mention IPv6, as well as comments on any blog post, news story etc that makes the rounds. People bitch and moan about every little problem with v6, including blaming it for problems caused by v4 or by completely unrelated causes and with no regard for whether the problem has been fixed 20 years ago or was just imaginary in the first place. They'll even complain about the benefits it gets them.

If 30-minutely prefix changes were common, people would definitely be complaining about it.

...but okay, I won't claim that I catch everything. Can I ask which ISP this is, or at least which country? Perhaps it's common in places that don't have much presence in the English-speaking parts of the internet.

It's nice to hear that it mostly works for you. It should do, but a lot of software is terrible at handling dynamic changes -- it seems to be something that programmers struggle with. The biggest problem should be that long-running connections aren't possible.

Re: More than 1/3 of all access to Google is now over IPv6

#236

Post by jakeogh »

lrem wrote: post #234
jakeogh wrote: post #22

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Oh the poor SRAM on those ASIC's.

> Apple tells app devs to use IPv6 as it's 1.4 times faster than IPv4 Do you have better insight than Apple?

The faster excuse. yawn Bandwidth (aka time waiting) is like a gas, it expands to fill all available human tolerance.

It's also always there to pretend the major corps care about (insert 15s ad here) it.

If you really measure response time, frame by frame, Windows 3.1 is faster than Windows Billion.

Process improvements in hardware obviate any trivial 40% benchmark. 400%, maybe, lets talk about it.

It's utterly irrelevant compared to what being to tag every item every person ever comes into contact with and the interactions of those items with other items; iterated as many times as desired.

Re: More than 1/3 of all access to Google is now over IPv6

#237

Post by MayeulC »

dxld wrote: post #148
MayeulC wrote: post #114

I host some services at home, mainly targeted at friends and family. Some are IPv6-only, because it's much easier to manage from my side. I whish I could add an A record for these that pointed to a reserved IP address that would inform clients the service is IPv6-only. For now, I just don't put any, and browsers just display a generic error. Since some DNS don't answer with IPv6 addresses, the browser couldn't even p…

You might be interested in this service: https://no-ipv4-here.ungleich.ch/

Ah, thank you, that's quite close to what I wanted. Ideally, it would be ran by a CA to work flawlessly with web browsers.

Even better if web browsers could display a message of their own, recognizing this IP address.

Post reply on HN