Live data from Hacker News

Update: Approaching IPv4 Run-out

ripe.net

31–40 of 140 posts

Re: Update: Approaching IPv4 Run-out

#31
post #24

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Wrong interpretation: the linked chart shows client-side adoption among Google users In practice today IPv6 is a kind of high functionality NAT for consumer devices. A more interesting statistic would be server-side adoption.

"Google users" is approximately everybody, and surely client-side adoption is what drives server-side adoption?

If it’s not measured we don’t know

Re: Update: Approaching IPv4 Run-out

#32
I'm curious if there are people here that have migrated their home network to IPv6 only, and if yes, what are the challenges encountered? I suspect the biggest problem is that there still are many websites that only have IPv4

Re: Update: Approaching IPv4 Run-out

#33

Isn’t this just for free ipv4? If you watch cloud providers ip spaces they are growing very impressively. When people say ipv4 has run out they should qualify this as free IPv4

This is for unallocated IPv4. ISPs and cloud providers will still rent you an address for as long as you have money in the bank.

Re: Update: Approaching IPv4 Run-out

#34
post #15

IPv6 worldwide adoption is at just under 30%: https://www.google.com/intl/en/ipv6/statistics.html If the current growth rate continues, it looks like it will reach 100% by about 2035.

I'd guess adoption will look less like an exponential or straight increasoming function and more like a sigmoid. As more people adopt, those left will be the increasingly resistant. Eventually, IPv4 re-sale markets will get pricey enough that bean-counters will insist.

I doubt it on the bean counters, resale will trail off and stop being interesting. The IPv4 address space isn't big enough for the whole world, but it's easily big enough to indefinitely handle millions of holdouts left on legacy systems.

Eventually they stop being enough traffic to make them uninteresting to the backbone, and the backbone becomes IPv6-only - but the v4 Internet still exists, in a sense, as a bunch of networks connected via IPv6 translation gateways. Perhaps for a century or more.

Right now if you're a large organisation it makes sense to go IPv6 only internally and translate at your border. All your address headaches vanish immediately (remember trying to figure out how to cut up groups of systems so they'd fit in neat binary subnets in IPv4? Not a problem in IPv6, any conceivable number of machines will go in a one-size-fits-all IPv6 /64 Ethernet subnet) and you now have no future IT transition problems, because internally transition is finished. You own some translation gateways to connect your IPv6 clients to anything from the legacy IPv4 Internet and over time the traffic through those decreases so that cost will diminish. Whether the rest of the world takes 50 years or 15 to upgrade it's just a tweak to the budget for the translation gateways, everything else stays the same for you.

Re: Update: Approaching IPv4 Run-out

#35
post #33

Isn’t this just for free ipv4? If you watch cloud providers ip spaces they are growing very impressively. When people say ipv4 has run out they should qualify this as free IPv4

This is for unallocated IPv4. ISPs and cloud providers will still rent you an address for as long as you have money in the bank.

The opportunity to make money off an arbitrarily scarce resource is in my opinion a reason we haven’t seen more network operators pushing users towards IPv6.

Re: Update: Approaching IPv4 Run-out

#37
post #27
post #6

It’ll be very intersting to see if this is enough to push ISPs to adopt IPv6 en masse, or they’ll keep dragging their feet and use nasty hacks like CG-NAT to avoid it.

In Germany i see most ISPs adopting IPv6 by using DS-Lite[0] which is basically handing out only IPv6 addresses and using CGNAT for IPv4 connectivity by mapping IPv4 addresses into IPv6 address space on the CPE. I don't like that at all as it makes you practically unreachable from the IPv4 address space. In order to get IPv4 addresses you often have to convince them on the phone and describe your use case. When you'v…

Because schools don't talk about IPv6 enough to make sysadmins and programmers comfortable with it, I think that's the root cause.

Re: Update: Approaching IPv4 Run-out

#38
post #2

nice of them to admit last times it wasn't serious then ;D they been calling this out since advent of ipv6 >.> are they just trying to sell ipv6 or what? since a lot of companies move to cloud solutions i can imagine this being less of an issue and a lot of blocks to be returned to the pool?

RIPE is one of five regional Internet registries that manage allocations for their respective regions, and all of them have announced the exhaustion of their pools of available address blocks of various sizes at various times over several years, as you would expect. Which of these announcements do you think weren’t serious?

> all of them have announced the exhaustion of their pools of available address blocks of various sizes at various times over several years

AFRINIC has not exhausted IPv4 yet, although they are coming close to the beginning of the end (when they're down to their last /11).

Re: Update: Approaching IPv4 Run-out

#39

They were panicking about IPv4 running out 20 years ago, the amazing inventions of NAT and CIDR meant it never happened. I predict that we’ll be here in 20 years again.

If you look at the mobile telco IPv4 blocks, or lack thereof, you'll see that NAT is here, heavily, almost ubiqitously, as carrier NAT. It's destroyed the network functionality of mobile telecommunications (lacking routable ipv4) and made them essentially dumb terminals lacking any ability to participate in the 'net. They can only consume other's services.

Re: Update: Approaching IPv4 Run-out

#40
post #28

I wonder if they will implement some kind of clawback for orgs that are sitting on large chunks of sparsely used blocks. Old tech companies and colleges come to mind. https://myip.ms/info/ip_ranges_blocks/Major_Biggest_IP_Addre...

As far as I understand from previous discussions, those blocks (1) can't be split among a bunch of providers, since it would bloat routing tables and (2) wouldn't extend the timeline very much, so it's not worthwhile engaging in that fight.
Post reply on HN