301–310 of 372 posts
Since when does IPv4-addresses cost money? I'm pretty sure IPs are allocated for free if available and you have a use case for them? I know RIPE now want members to charge customers for IPs, but..
Your ISP doesn’t want real IPv6. It’s bad for business.
I don't see why. Major consumer-grade French ISPs give IPv6 by default on FTTH installations and the router is configured accordingly (Orange, Free, SFR, Bouygues Telecom). Generally, you get a /64. Of course, when using IPv6 there is no NATting, each of your device has its own IPv6 address of the /64 range allocated to you.
Right now blocking a bunch of home servers is easy - just don’t give people addresses. With IPv6 you’ll need to thread that needle some other way or give people access to something that will actually test your advertised bandwidth commitments.
Edit: instead of downvoting how about having a conversation? That’s the great thing about this place, lots of diverse perspectives.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
Nothing compared to the US federal government. I count 13 /8 blocks for the DoD, and one for the USPS, so 14 in total. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_assigned_/8_IPv4_addre...
The original list of assigned blocks [1] is a fascinating glimpse of history. Some of the Class A networks are still recognizable (MIT, University College London, Stanford) while others have faded in prominence (BBN, CISL, DEC, MITRE, Tymnet). The same 1981 document also contains a list of assigned ports which of course does not include DNS, HTTP(S), IMAP, POP, or SSH. [1]: https://tools.ietf.org/html/rfc790 "RFC 790…
So do they actually use these addresses for something or are they simply stockpiling them? Some jurisdictions have laws regarding real estate that, if it not be used for about a decade, it becomes legal to squat. This is primarily in densely populated jurisdictions where real estate is a scarcity and the government doesn't want it to go unused. A similar structure could actually be made for IPv4 addresses.
Stockpiling IP addresses is already forbidden (although not really enforced). AWS is using these addresses for EC2 VMs.
I.P. addresses, unlike real estate, are a matter that's hard to bind to any specific jurisdiction.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
I don't know about NL or elsewhere, but I'm pretty sure this can get you in trouble in Spain for several reasons: 1. Check your ISP contract. If it is a residential connection, it probably says you are not allowed to share your connection with people outside your home (and it could be argued that you are doing so by running this). 2. Check your laws. In Spain, if your connection is used to conduct illegal activities…
yeah I would think long and hard about 2). if I understand correctly, this would be the same as running a tor exit node. not technically illegal in most cases, but could be very stressful/expensive to defend against anyway. not worth it to save a few dollars a month.
In other countries, “not technically illegal” may apply. In Spain, it does not.
Or to give another analogy, it’s not technically illegal to sit in a car. It’s a different matter if you’re sitting in the car as a lookout while a crime is occurring. While there’s “intent” that matters in that particular example, when it comes to internet crime in Spain, intent doesn’t matter, facilitation is all that does.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
Just out of curiosity how does one go about purchasing and maintaining ownership of IPv4’s. Do you need to do it through your own company or is it possible as an individual. I’ve heard you have to demonstrate you can use them but that was in relation to IPv6’s.
Depending on which Regional Internet Registry you belong to (based on country of residence/incorporation), the process is roughly: A) justify an AS and pay the fee B) find someone to buy IPv4 addresses and pay them (probably a deposit) C) justify IPv4 address space to the RIR and pay the fee to transfer from your seller D) pay annual dues If your RIR actually has space available, you might be able to skip step B. And…
Earlier quoted context omitted.
>I'm on a cellular network in the UK >My phone get an IPv6 address only, no IPv4 Please tell me which network so I can immediately switch. Three unfortunately still don't use IPv6, and I'd prefer if my phone were IPv6-only than IPv4-only since everything else in my life is IPv6 capable -- all my servers, my home Internet, my email provider, etc... EDIT: So it seems some people have gotten IPv6 addresses from Three la…
I'm using Three. The phone Settings > About > Status shows an IPv6 and no IPv4. However it's not really IPv6-only. It is able to make IPv4 connections, which rather than going over the IPv6 route, are instead tunnelled to the network separately via the modem and the network applies CGNAT and assigned an ephemeral source IPv4. I've described some of the NAT behaviour here: https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=25399780…
No IPv6 support though :(
Earlier quoted context omitted.
The problem with IPv6 is that it's a fundamentally flawed design. Which looks easier to input / dictate over the phone / write down somewhere? 220.12.30.01 or 2001:cdba:0000:0000:0000:0000:3257:9652?
Use DNS, that’s what it’s there for. MAC addresses aren’t referred to as fundamentally flawed and they are approximately the same length as the shorted version of the address you posted.
On the other hand, most devs / technical staff type IPs into the browser and terminal daily.
Let's use IPv6 more and it'll worth far less than $2B.
The problem with IPv6 is that it's a fundamentally flawed design. Which looks easier to input / dictate over the phone / write down somewhere? 220.12.30.01 or 2001:cdba:0000:0000:0000:0000:3257:9652?
But if it was false, an IPv4 address wouldn't cost $20-$30 (vs $0 for IPv6) and Amazon wouldn't be hoarding $2B worth of them, would it?
Ok then.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
The problem with IPv6 is that it's a fundamentally flawed design. Which looks easier to input / dictate over the phone / write down somewhere? 220.12.30.01 or 2001:cdba:0000:0000:0000:0000:3257:9652?
I see how the crowd here is downvoting me heavily for just stating the simple truth that IPv6 is inconvenient, when compared to IPv4. But if it was false, an IPv4 address wouldn't cost $20-$30 (vs $0 for IPv6) and Amazon wouldn't be hoarding $2B worth of them, would it? Ok then.