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

IPv6 is the only way forward

ankshilp.in

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

331–340 of 350 posts

Re: IPv6 is the only way forward

#331

Post by general1465 »

Dagger2 wrote: post #325
general1465 wrote: post #320

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Or use NAT, which is actually better solution, because misconfigured NAT won't expose your whole network, while misconfigured firewall will.

Well, actually it will. In fact, even correctly configured NAT won't stop connections into your network. On top of that, it lulls you into a false sense of security, so you confidently think it's protecting you even when it isn't. At least not having NAT makes the actual state of your network clearer.

> even correctly configured NAT won't stop connections into your network.

Yeah that's called port forwarding. It is like complaining that light is coming into your house through windows. Fully intentional.

Re: IPv6 is the only way forward

#332

Post by direwolf20 »

illiac786 wrote: post #238
direwolf20 wrote: post #191

Earlier quoted context omitted.

It's a legal requirement in Europe for privacy. A long term static address is a personal identifier.

How could this be a legal requirement and at the same time you can purchase static IPs as a paid option from ISPs, like I did?

You're allowed to consensually waive your own privacy rights.

Re: IPv6 is the only way forward

#333

Post by illiac786 »

direwolf20 wrote: post #332
illiac786 wrote: post #238

Earlier quoted context omitted.

How could this be a legal requirement and at the same time you can purchase static IPs as a paid option from ISPs, like I did?

You're allowed to consensually waive your own privacy rights.

[dead]

Re: IPv6 is the only way forward

#334

Post by tsoukase »

Dagger2 wrote: post #322
tsoukase wrote: post #311

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Something like 1:2:3:4:a:b:c:d where the most significant 32bits are a valid IPv4. The kernel figures out and keep all others the same (NAT etc). We extend the address space, not invent a new stack. The IPv6 critics shout out that this would be a viable solution.

Okay, so you've figured out how to make v4 addressable from v8. Good job. That lets v8 hosts address a v4 host via a v8 address. How are you going to make v8 addressable from v4? Because you need to do this too for communication to work. Also, you've made v4 addressable from v8, and you're about to explain how you make v8 addressable from v4... but that's just addressing, i.e. identifying the right host. How are you…

> How are you going to make v8 addressable from v4?

I expected this question and have thought about it. Here is an idea: all nodes (PCs, routers etc) run an updated stack, which sends/receives 64bit addresses. If it receives 1:2:3:4:0:0:0:0, that's v4 and continues as such. It's on the ISP when the switch happens because they deliver the addresses. The user notices nothing. Edge cases can arise and be handled accordingly.

The update from 32-to-64 will be massively pushed to all kernels and userspaces in a short time so to shorten outages.

Re: IPv6 is the only way forward

#336

Post by kjs3 »

camgunz wrote: post #329
kjs3 wrote: post #316

Earlier quoted context omitted.

My experience, indeed reality, says different for all values of "work" that matter to me.

My point is it's your vote against billions of others. My guess is "but what about kjs3's ISP" isn't a bullet point on the rollout list.

I'm not "voting against" anything. I genuinely done care and don't need to. I don't need IPv6, never had a single thing I needed[1] not work being IPv4 only, and moving just so I can prove "I have satisfied camgunz edict that nothing other than IPv6 can possibly work" isn't grounded in reality.

Those billions can move right along doing what they're doing. They don't bother me; I don't bother them (other than you, it seems). Considering how "IPv6 exclusive" has worked for the last 25 years, I'm quite confident I'll be dead before I reach the point of caring about it (and even if I make it, I'm equally confident I'll be able to manage both stacks).

This sort of tiresome sophistry really gets old. "But what about camgunz nearly religious need to pretend IPv6 is the One True Way and all others are heretical" is not more relevant to the wider world than "but what about kjs3's ISP".

[1] Emphasis on "that I need". I'm a network engineer and architect. Passed tests even. I've done IPv6 in prod, and I can contrive all sorts of "that only works if you're IPv6 only" scenarios and have had to work around some of them. They aren't relevant to my ISP or me.

Re: IPv6 is the only way forward

#337

Post by lolc »

tsoukase wrote: post #334
Dagger2 wrote: post #322

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Okay, so you've figured out how to make v4 addressable from v8. Good job. That lets v8 hosts address a v4 host via a v8 address. How are you going to make v8 addressable from v4? Because you need to do this too for communication to work. Also, you've made v4 addressable from v8, and you're about to explain how you make v8 addressable from v4... but that's just addressing, i.e. identifying the right host. How are you…

> How are you going to make v8 addressable from v4? I expected this question and have thought about it. Here is an idea: all nodes (PCs, routers etc) run an updated stack, which sends/receives 64bit addresses. If it receives 1:2:3:4:0:0:0:0, that's v4 and continues as such. It's on the ISP when the switch happens because they deliver the addresses. The user notices nothing. Edge cases can arise and be handled accordi…

At what point could I confidently publish the addresses 1:2:3:4:0:0:0:1 and 1:2:3:4:0:0:0:2 in DNS records for people to reach those two servers? After my ISP has switched, or after everybody's ISP has switched?

The idea that any ISP would do a Dagen H is very alien to how an ISP thinks. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Dagen_H

Re: IPv6 is the only way forward

#338

Post by Dagger2 »

general1465 wrote: post #331
Dagger2 wrote: post #325

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Well, actually it will. In fact, even correctly configured NAT won't stop connections into your network. On top of that, it lulls you into a false sense of security, so you confidently think it's protecting you even when it isn't. At least not having NAT makes the actual state of your network clearer.

> even correctly configured NAT won't stop connections into your network. Yeah that's called port forwarding. It is like complaining that light is coming into your house through windows. Fully intentional.

Port forwarding requires a port forward rule that matches the inbound connection. If there's no such rule... NAT won't stop the connection, it will just ignore it.

If no other aspect of your setup blocks the connection, it'll be successful. If you were deploying NAT because you thought it would function as a firewall then this part is probably not intentional.

Re: IPv6 is the only way forward

#339

Post by Dagger2 »

tsoukase wrote: post #334
Dagger2 wrote: post #322

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Okay, so you've figured out how to make v4 addressable from v8. Good job. That lets v8 hosts address a v4 host via a v8 address. How are you going to make v8 addressable from v4? Because you need to do this too for communication to work. Also, you've made v4 addressable from v8, and you're about to explain how you make v8 addressable from v4... but that's just addressing, i.e. identifying the right host. How are you…

> How are you going to make v8 addressable from v4? I expected this question and have thought about it. Here is an idea: all nodes (PCs, routers etc) run an updated stack, which sends/receives 64bit addresses. If it receives 1:2:3:4:0:0:0:0, that's v4 and continues as such. It's on the ISP when the switch happens because they deliver the addresses. The user notices nothing. Edge cases can arise and be handled accordi…

So basically, instead of extending the v4 address space you're going to make a new stack and everybody needs to switch to it to be able to communicate with v8. That's the exact thing you said you weren't doing.

> If it receives 1:2:3:4:0:0:0:0, that's v4 and continues as such

1:2:3:4:0:0:0:0 isn't v4, so it can't "continue as v4"... perhaps you meant that a router somewhere converts the packet to a v4 packet, but this is still only the v8->v4 direction. How do you map v8 into v4 so that the destination can reply?

> The update from 32-to-64 will be massively pushed to all kernels and userspaces in a short time so to shorten outages.

Right, add support for the new stack everywhere like we did with v6's 32-to-128 update. But just saying that it'll be done in a short time doesn't mean it will be.

Re: IPv6 is the only way forward

#340

Post by tsoukase »

lolc wrote: post #337
tsoukase wrote: post #334

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> How are you going to make v8 addressable from v4? I expected this question and have thought about it. Here is an idea: all nodes (PCs, routers etc) run an updated stack, which sends/receives 64bit addresses. If it receives 1:2:3:4:0:0:0:0, that's v4 and continues as such. It's on the ISP when the switch happens because they deliver the addresses. The user notices nothing. Edge cases can arise and be handled accordi…

At what point could I confidently publish the addresses 1:2:3:4:0:0:0:1 and 1:2:3:4:0:0:0:2 in DNS records for people to reach those two servers? After my ISP has switched, or after everybody's ISP has switched? The idea that any ISP would do a Dagen H is very alien to how an ISP thinks. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Dagen_H

[The answer goes to both commenters]

There are two groups that should update to v8 in order to be fully functional: users' OS net stack and ISPs' infra.

The incompatibility of IPvs between two endpoints can be solved by a couple of mechanisms. One is to make a preflight check if all nodes support v8, another is to start with a flag isv8=1 and change it along the path. If a single node is still at v4, all the communication continues v4-like (the v8 nodes send 0 at the ls32b).

It will be a gradual migration, in some regions faster or slower, but it will be SEAMLESS for the user, without the awful v6 UX that we have now.

Post reply on HN