41–50 of 511 posts
Great idea. Now a question for the group. What are the non-network team business benefits to IPv6 over v4? That is what drives adoption.
And if you're already moving away from perimeter defense, to more identity based zero-trust, the move to IPv6 makes much sense.
I am quite happy that all those shady IoT devices cannot be reached from the internet directly when I am using IPv4 and NAT - what would be the best way forward to keep it that way in a IPv6-only future? The best idea I can come up with (at least right now) is: put all less trustworthy (read: Closed source) devices into a special legacy IPv4 network and only use IPv6 on my workstation and little Raspis?
The same exact way you do it right now.
Think of NAT as an implicit default-deny firewall rule, that's all it's doing.
Basically any firewall worth using will do exactly the same thing in IPv6, deny unsolicited inbound traffic unless explicitly allowed.
For some reason there's this belief out there that a device having a globally routable IP address inherently means it's globally reachable, and that's just not true. Your firewall still works exactly the same way.
I am quite happy that all those shady IoT devices cannot be reached from the internet directly when I am using IPv4 and NAT - what would be the best way forward to keep it that way in a IPv6-only future? The best idea I can come up with (at least right now) is: put all less trustworthy (read: Closed source) devices into a special legacy IPv4 network and only use IPv6 on my workstation and little Raspis?
I spent a lot of time figuring out how to do all this in the most efficient way (in terms of my time and effort) during covid, and I suggest getting any arbitrary box with 2 ethernet ports and putting freebsd on it.
I'm fully ready to start using IPv6 but my packets won't get past my antiquated ISP. That seems like a pretty big hurdle, no?
I have built a couple of dual stack Kubernetes clusters already and they work much better to be honest. Most of the problems are solved and especially for node-based-ranges it works really well. Even in ipv6 only mode calico will manage amazingly and so do my OpenWRT routers. HOWEVER, My ISP regularly messes up with its ipv6 routing (deutsche Telekom (so as big as it can get for me) and if that's not the problem, the…
Yeah I found the same on Hyperoptic in London. Works fine 99.9% of the time, but occasionally ipv6 drops until I restart the router/restart the WAN connection. Which of course I barely ever notice because most stuff switches back to ipv4. I think unless we start seeing ipv6-only stuff this will be the case, there's really no incentive for a lot of testing/debugging on at least consumer ipv6 connections until stuff ac…
You can kinda already do this by setting search to ipv6.google.com
Images search does not work on that domain, looks like the new Google devs don't know about it.
I still think IPv6 can be safely ignored. This articles section "here are some reasons you should start using IPv6 within your own network" seems to comfirm this. None of the 6 "reasons" speak to me.
Here's an easy one for you: if you have a gigabit connection, most home routers can barely handle the load of NAT. That's why gamers push for IPv6. It's mentioned in the article but few people realize how inefficient NAT can be at gigabit and more. My ISP router could do max 800 mbps, which isn't so bad, but it degraded when we were multiple people using the link. With IPv6 it's much less of a problem, we can easily…
fast.com says 50 "Mbps". Whatever that is.
I am quite happy that all those shady IoT devices cannot be reached from the internet directly when I am using IPv4 and NAT - what would be the best way forward to keep it that way in a IPv6-only future? The best idea I can come up with (at least right now) is: put all less trustworthy (read: Closed source) devices into a special legacy IPv4 network and only use IPv6 on my workstation and little Raspis?
Another option is to use IPv6 Unique Local Addresses (ULA), which are similar to private IPv4 addresses and can only be used within a specific site. This approach enables internal connectivity for devices that do not require direct access to the Internet. I use it for several IoT devices that I do not want reaching out to the mothership.
Everyone always goes with the "You don't need NAT, everything is globally routable!" argument, as if that's something that anybody wants. Everything on my network is going to go through my firewall anyway. I don't want anything on my network to be globally routable. Of course, this is not a good reason to not use IPv6, don't get me wrong. It's a problem that's easy to overcome, I just think it's not a good way to get…
NAT and a Firewall are two different concepts. What's wrong with a firewall that blocks everything by default, yet all your devices have a public IP?
Great idea. Now a question for the group. What are the non-network team business benefits to IPv6 over v4? That is what drives adoption.
Increased number of available IP addresses, improved security features, simplified network management, reduced network complexity, and support for new technologies. IPv6 also provides significant performance benefits for mobile networks, IoT devices, and cloud services. The adoption of IPv6 will lead to cost savings, improved network performance, and increased scalability.