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

IPv6 traffic crosses the 50% mark

google.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

391–400 of 643 posts

Re: IPv6 traffic crosses the 50% mark

#391

Post by embedding-shape »

tialaramex wrote: post #270
josh3736 wrote: post #77

Earlier quoted context omitted.

For observers, this draft was posted to HN earlier but quickly flagged and removed because the linked "IPv8" draft is absolute bunk. See the removed thread for details: https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=47788857

Having read that thread, I guess one of the small upsides of the world I live in is that "FIFA Peace Prize" is now available as a joke award reference. FIFA really hit it out of the park there in a way that even their normal legendary levels of corruption couldn't imagine. Edited: In hindsight I notice that "hit it out of the park" is the wrong sport metaphor for FIFA, but I stand by it anyway.

> Edited: In hindsight I notice that "hit it out of the park" is the wrong sport metaphor for FIFA, but I stand by it anyway.

For future reference, you can use: "knocked it into the top corner", "put it in the back of the net" or "smashed it past the keeper". Not a native football-talker, but hang out too much with a few.

Re: IPv6 traffic crosses the 50% mark

#392

Post by Dagger2 »

emj wrote: post #97
davidkuennen wrote: post #21

Setting up my own server (migrating off GCP LB) taught me so much about networking. I was especially surprised that providing IPv6 is such a performance boost for low bandwidth phones since they mostly only operate on IPv6 by now and IPv4 needs some sort of special roundtrip.

Cool! Could you give some concrete examples of apps or traffic patterns where you think IPv6 may noticeably improve performance on phones? Are you mainly referring to NAT traversal during connection setup, or to something that also affects traffic after the connection is established?

Many mobile ISPs handle v4 via NAT64 or CGNAT. Routers capable of doing those are far more expensive than regular routers, so there tends to be fewer of them. v4 traffic has to travel out of its way to reach one of those routers, whereas v6 traffic can be handed off sooner with a more direct physical path.

It affects anything where latency matters, e.g. from Facebook: "We’ve observed that accessing Facebook can be 10-15 percent faster over IPv6." (https://engineering.fb.com/2015/09/14/networking-traffic/ipv...).

Re: IPv6 traffic crosses the 50% mark

#393

Post by throw0101d »

imoverclocked wrote: post #11
usui wrote: post #5

It has barely hit 50% and it's already plateauing. This adoption rate is ridiculous despite basically all network interfaces supporting it. I thought I would see IPv6 take over in my lifetime as the default for platforms to build on but I can see I was wrong. Enterprise and commercial companies are literally going to hold back internet progress around 60 to 75 years because it's in their best interest to ensure users…

ISPs often fail to do this because there is always someone in the hierarchy who says, "nobody is demanding it."

> ISPs often fail to do this because there is always someone in the hierarchy who says, "nobody is demanding it."

I'm with an ISP whose landline/fibre division does not have IPv6, but whose mobile division gives IPv6 to handsets.

Re: IPv6 traffic crosses the 50% mark

#394

Post by NewJazz »

CupricTea wrote: post #362
colechristensen wrote: post #356

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Your work is probably all exiting through the same IP, you competing with others on the same IP is causing the rate limit.

I've considered this, but the company is small enough that the number of people who would be on GitHub at any moment (instead of our internal git forge) can be counted on one hand, and when I'm the first one there in the morning it still rate limits me.

Do you have any on-prem cicd jobs that access github? Our's kept failing, had to move over to the ECR release of some stuff.

Re: IPv6 traffic crosses the 50% mark

#396

Post by School-Cotton »

cowsandmilk wrote: post #74
drpixie wrote: post #59

Earlier quoted context omitted.

>> It has barely hit 50% and it's already plateauing. Well, the curve has got to level-out at 100%.

No, it can level out below that and is (as the parent was saying).

That’s indeed what they’re saying, but they’re simply wrong which is obvious from looking at the graph and accounting for seasonal variation.

Re: IPv6 traffic crosses the 50% mark

#397

Post by throw0101d »

cyberax wrote: post #127
stackghost wrote: post #35

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Is there a reason why adoption has been so abysmally slow? Like surely all the big players have updated their networking equipment by now, and surely every piece of enterprise-grade kit sold in the last 20 years has supported v6. The only arguments I've ever heard against ipv6 that made any sense are that: 1: it's hard to remember addresses, which is mayyyyybe valid for homelab enthusiast types, but for medium scale…

IPv6 is a recursive WTF. It might _look_ like a conservative expansion of IPv4, but it's really not. A lot of operational experience and practices from IPv4 don't apply to IPv6. For example, in IPv4 each host has one local net address, and the gateway uses NAT to let it speak with the Internet. Simple and clean. In IPv6 each host has multiple global addresses. But if your global connection goes down, these addresses…

> For example, in IPv4 each host has one local net address, and the gateway uses NAT to let it speak with the Internet. Simple and clean.

If you think NAT is "simple and clean", you may wish to investigate STUN/TURN/ICE. An entire stack of protocols (and accompanying infrastructure) had to be invented to deal with NAT.

Heaven help you if your ISP uses CG-NAT.

Re: IPv6 traffic crosses the 50% mark

#398

Post by jermaustin1 »

tbrownaw wrote: post #343
jermaustin1 wrote: post #323

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Same with Twilio. We have an internal server that does system alerts. We recently moved it to an IPv6 only host, and a few weeks went by and noticed there were no longer receiving alerts. Turns out we could not connect to Twilio's API which is IPv4 only.

So zero validation after that change?

Couldn't tell you. I'm not part of the infrastructure team. I wasn't even aware the alerting service was moving.

QA found it a couple weeks later when they were testing alerting, and SMSes weren't coming through.

Re: IPv6 traffic crosses the 50% mark

#399

Post by jermaustin1 »

vlovich123 wrote: post #374
tbrownaw wrote: post #343

Earlier quoted context omitted.

So zero validation after that change?

Zero observability and alerting too. Seems like they’re planning to be a productive future member of that team.

Who? The infrastructure team that did the move didn't even tell anyone. They were decommissioning old servers, and moving the VMs to new hardware. I'm just a lowly developer that had to troubleshoot why SMSes stopped going out.

Re: IPv6 traffic crosses the 50% mark

#400

Post by School-Cotton »

loevborg wrote: post #31

Sometimes TCP/IP is a leaky abstraction, and recently ipv6 peeked through in two separate instances: - In a cafe wifi, I had partial connectivity. For some reason my wifi interface had an ipv6 address but no ipv4 address. As a result, some sites worked just fine but github.com (which is, incredibly, ipv4-only) didn't - I created a ipv6-only hetzner server (because it's 2026) but ended up giving up and bought a ipv6 a…

The cafe WiFi thing (getting IPv6 only, no ipv4, on a public network) used to happen quite often to me on macOS. I never figured out why, and I haven’t noticed in a while.
Post reply on HN