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

Tell HN: Hacker News now supports IPv6

news.ycombinator.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

331–340 of 396 posts

Re: Tell HN: Hacker News now supports IPv6

#331

Post by Dagger2 »

uuddlrlrbaba wrote: post #326
Dagger2 wrote: post #324

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Nobody is in a position to EOL v4. We'd need a planetary government for that, and we don't have one. It would be nice, but we have to work with what we've got and not what we wish we had. I run my desktop with no v4, so it's clearly possible to push handling for v4 out of your network. You could outsource it to somebody else even, for example by using one of the DNS servers listed on https://nat64.net/ .

We can EOL things insecure ciphers and old operating systems without much issue without a planetary government. The migration strategy for ipv4->ipv6 was just so horribly conceived that we'll be running both in parallel for decades. TBH I think it would have been better if ipv6 was named something else entirely. Running TCP and UDP in parallel doesn't raise any flags, but running two versions of the same protocol in…

Can we? People continue to use both even after newer versions are released.

I don't think it was horribly conceived. I think it's close to the best we can do given the constraints we're working under. These constraints include the fact that there are millions of networks being run by millions of people and nobody is in a position to force all of these people to stop using v4.

Re: Tell HN: Hacker News now supports IPv6

#332

Post by soneil »

diggan wrote: post #245
throw0101d wrote: post #234

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> So that vast address space might not last as long as it would seem... Have you done the math? * math property: x^y = x^(a+b) = (x^a )x(x^b ) * IPv4 addresses are 32 bits (2^32 ) * 2^32 ~ 4.3 billion * So the IPv4 Internet has ~4.3B devices on it * IPv6 subnets are 64 bits, /64 (2^64 ) So, a IPv6 2^64 subnet is the same as (2^32 )x(2^32 ), which means (4.3B)x(IPv4 Internet). I.e., a single IPv6 subnet can hold the e…

Since you seem to know what you're talking about: Imagine a scenario where we have nano-bots to perform "repairs" in our bodies or whatever, and obviously each individual nano-bot use TCP over IPv6 because future software developers are also as lazy as us. Instead of taking paracetamol, people take nano-bot-shots which include (presumably) millions (or even billions?) of nano-bots that we inject into our bodies. Howe…

I think this turns out to be a pretty good example of how stupidly big the ipv6 space is. Because it sounds like a big ask until it meets the numbers.

So you want "even billions(!!1!)" of nanobots per allocation. Well I'm lazy, and dynamically allocating a /64 is built right into the protocol. So lets let my medication dynamically allocate out of a /64. How many billions? Billions of billions. So lazy, so sorted.

But of course, I don't want my medication talking to my wife's medication. So lets de-conflict that. In fact, let's de-conflict everyone's medication.

We all know that 32bits is a bit over 4 billion. So 33 bits is going to be a bit over 8 billion. That's enough for now, but it's iffy, so let's go for 34bits, a bit over 16 billion. But in ipv6 world, it's polite to land on a nibble-boundary, so we'll go for 36 to be polite.

I'm going to steal the old allocation for ULA as an example. It was /7, but I'm going to call it /8 because I like round numbers.

So lets have an 8-bit prefix ala ULA. Then an 8bit planet number. Then an 8bit country/healthservice/issuingbody number. Then a 40bit human number, because I ran out of reasons to waste 8's There's our 64bit network number. With 64 bits left for billions of billions of nanobots to dynamically allocate.

The best bit about ipv6 isn't billions, it's that we get to actually structure our networks instead of cramming them into every nook and cranny we can buy.

Re: Tell HN: Hacker News now supports IPv6

#333

Post by Dagger2 »

tristan957 wrote: post #330
sitzkrieg wrote: post #318

Earlier quoted context omitted.

i stand corrected, this is good news thank you

I'm curious why we need the square brackets.

URLs use : to separate the IP and port. There needs to be some way to disambiguate that from the colons in the address.

Re: Tell HN: Hacker News now supports IPv6

#334

Post by xyst »

supertrope wrote: post #11
xyst wrote: post #8

Next is TLS 1.3 support, hopefully :) # openssl s_client -connect news.ycombinator .com:443 -tls1_3 CONNECTED(00000003) 4160736388:error:1409442E:SSL routines:ssl3_read_bytes:tlsv1 alert protocol version:ssl/record/rec_layer_s3.c:1562:SSL alert number 70 --- no peer certificate available --- No client certificate CA names sent --- SSL handshake has read 7 bytes and written 244 bytes Verification: OK --- New, (NONE),…

It was briefly turned on years ago and then turned off. I guess it broke the website for those behind corporate MITM boxes.

Should be able to support both. Client can negotiate between either TLS v1.2 and TLS v1.3. Server has to support 1.3 though.

Re: Tell HN: Hacker News now supports IPv6

#335

Post by Dagger2 »

senkora wrote: post #33
mise_en_place wrote: post #26

Earlier quoted context omitted.

You’ll get a lot of hate for it, but I think you’re speaking the truth. IPv6 is probably one of the worst modern standards (tied C++ templates). Nobody has ever made a convincing argument about the advantages of it over IPv4. Just another case of fools admiring complexity. PHB types love it even more, it’s filled with buzzwords like the “future” of networking.

I think this post convincingly argues that there exists a world (but not ours, due to path dependence) where IPv6 is a better design: https://apenwarr.ca/log/20170810

Not really, it just spends a lot of time waffling on about bus networks and mobile IPs and then makes some weird claims about the IETF that don't seem to match reality.

v6 is designed the way it is precisely because it needs to run on the same networks that v4 does, and v6 is a better design than v4 in our world because our world has completely outgrown v4.

Re: Tell HN: Hacker News now supports IPv6

#336

Post by iknowstuff »

rini17 wrote: post #329
tambre wrote: post #303

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Sounds like a good use for Multicast DNS?

Sounds like adding yet another potentially exploitable service listening on every host? Swell! Seriously, I have yet to see a good tutorial how to herd IPv6 LAN with reliable local DNS, as is usual with IPv4. Everything is just handwaved away "nah, zero configuration". The reluctance to adopt it could stem from that.

Dude, it actually is zero configuration lol. My devices assign themselves an IPv6 via SLAAC, and they are reachable from other devices via devicename.local.

Macs and iPhones have relied on mDNS for years. Windows supports it. Android supports it since 2022. Linux has avahi.

If people could look a little further than the tip of their nose, they’d realize how much easier it’ll be to explain to people to just type in alices-iphone.local instead of trying to find the IPv4 address first.

Re: Tell HN: Hacker News now supports IPv6

#337

Post by ipaddr »

acdha wrote: post #37
ipaddr wrote: post #20

Earlier quoted context omitted.

2024 is shaping up as the year people drop AWS

Given that this was AWS doing what their top two competitors were already doing, and that for most people it’s smaller than the price hikes GCP customers have had last year and coming February 1st, I’m skeptical that anyone significant is going to make this the issue they leave over.

Moving away from the cloud is the trend. Moving between AWS and GCP will probably stay stable.

Re: Tell HN: Hacker News now supports IPv6

#338

Post by Dagger2 »

ijhuygft776 wrote: post #281
kuon wrote: post #182

I am so surprised by the hate for IPv6 in this thread. I have been deploying IPv6 for more than ten years and it really improve many situations (beside larger addresses). I have to admit, there is a learning curve. But I want to encourage everybody involved in configuring computers to learn. Also I want to rent about Cisco not using /64 for link local by default, thus being incompatible with BSD systems. Link local m…

> I have been deploying IPv6 for more than ten years and it really improve many situations (beside larger addresses). for most people, it is transparent and doesn't improve anything... ipv6 could be disabled on their router and everything would be the same (I actually used to disable ipv6 at router level to avoid inadvertently leaking data on ipv6)

We spent a significant amount of effort designing v6's deployment strategy to make sure this would be the case -- that it could be deployed without disrupting existing network setups. It's supposed to work like this.

Don't twist that effort into a reason to not deploy v6.

Re: Tell HN: Hacker News now supports IPv6

#339

Post by Dagger2 »

JohnFen wrote: post #297
ianburrell wrote: post #293

Earlier quoted context omitted.

You don’t have to switch your network to it, you just have to enable it. The system to decide between IPv4 and IPv6 works pretty well. I can’t tell if accessing HN over IPv6 cause doesn’t matter.

I've been looking into keeping my network IPv4 in an IPv6 world, and it looks like there are a lot of sharp corners and kinks that make that problematic. In any case, considerations like that are part of why I'm putting off any serious effort or decisions until it's required.

The reason it's problematic is the same reason we need a new protocol in the first place: because the old one isn't enough.

You've spent longer talking about not deploying v6 than you would have done deploying it. I said this before, but I suggest you sit down and turn v6 on for your network -- and *just* that, don't start gaming out how to disable v4 or deal with devices that don't support v6 or anything else, *just* do the basic enabling v6 on the network part. That way you'll see that you're seriously overthinking it.

But you won't listen to me, because http://habitatchronicles.com/2004/04/you-cant-tell-people-an...

Post reply on HN