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

Google Hits 50% IPv6

blog.apnic.net

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

431–440 of 496 posts

Re: Google Hits 50% IPv6

#431

Post by vitorgrs »

JdeBP wrote: post #130

Just to add to the 'but the ISPs do not' anecdotes, it has been six months since someone last commented so it is probably time to mention this again on Hacker News: * https://havevirginmediaenabledipv6yet.co.uk/ A major ISP in the U.K., that said in a public statement on World IPv6 Day in 2011 that > As well as our core and access networks being capable of supporting IPv6, we're rigorously testing our entire network…

Here in Brazil most ISPs provide IPv6 by now... But what happens a lot, when field technician are installing your broadband, they just... don't configure IPv6. As if IPv4 (CGNAT!) wasn't enough. With bigger ISPs this is less common.

With mobile carriers this is even worse. For some reason, some default config are IPv4 by default, while literally all of them supports IPv6.

Re: Google Hits 50% IPv6

#432

Post by vitorgrs »

IgorPartola wrote: post #329
JdeBP wrote: post #130

Just to add to the 'but the ISPs do not' anecdotes, it has been six months since someone last commented so it is probably time to mention this again on Hacker News: * https://havevirginmediaenabledipv6yet.co.uk/ A major ISP in the U.K., that said in a public statement on World IPv6 Day in 2011 that > As well as our core and access networks being capable of supporting IPv6, we're rigorously testing our entire network…

The way to pressure ISPs to support IPv6 is stupid but effective: 1. Sites that help shoppers choose can add a big visual red flag to any ISP that doesn’t support IPv6. Consumers don’t know what IPv6 is by and large but they do understand seeing a big red flag. 2. Same thing for websites. Add a banner that says “hey your ISP doesn’t support proper internet connectivity which this site utilizes. Contact them to let th…

I noticed when using some Chinese services, a lot of them have "IPv4" and "IPv6" flags when opening their apps for some reason.

Re: Google Hits 50% IPv6

#433

Post by vitorgrs »

jck86 wrote: post #60
mritzmann wrote: post #7

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> a better web experience than IPv4 That's already the case. IPv6 is often faster because most ISPs these days use cgnat for IPv4.

In my experience not true in practice cause I have experienced way more issues with the IPv6 endpoints of sites than their IPv4 counterparts. This becomes noticeable when pipelines on IPv6 connected servers suddenly have random request/post failures to public services. Then either the whole service is temporarily having issues or there are a few bad IPv6 endpoints while all the IPv4 endpoints are fine. Seemingly this…

Yeah, I tried to switch ISP. Was thinking everything was fine, then tried to watch on ClaroTV+ here (similar to Youtube TV, Hulu Live, etc), and it was... awful. Then I figured out, the IPv6 route was going from Brazil > US > Argentina, or some other crazy crazy route. While IPv4 was just inside Brazil.

So I tried to complain to the ISP, and they just said they couldn't do anything, and if I wanted, they could disable IPv6 for me...

Of course, I canceled the ISP.

Sadly it's pretty common for several ISPs have smaller peerings with IPv6, so this is not uncommon.

My other other ISP worked super fine, but even then, they had two ASN. One for IPv4 and the other for IPv6, just to show how different they were...

Re: Google Hits 50% IPv6

#434

Post by tolien »

mahboi wrote: post #413
tolien wrote: post #334

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> 5. make addresses randomly assigned and > 7. give every device its own public IP by default. Both of these are optional. Don’t want them? Don’t use them - if you don’t configure them, it won’t happen. > 6. make routers accept inbound connections by default That’s not a new feature with v6. > Like I own 8.8.8.8. You want to add more bits, fine, I'm 8.8.8.8.0.0.0.0 now. If anyone switches to the new thing, they know…

No I know it's point 4, that was the point. You can do forwards compatibility that way.

> We didn't have requirements 4. change all the pre-existing addresses

So your alternative does something you said you didn’t want, while being worse than the original?

Re: Google Hits 50% IPv6

#435

Post by Animats »

IPv6 adoption has been increasing linearly for about 15 years now. Growth rate is about 3% - 4% a year, not compounded.

Some long infrastructure transitions:

- Railroad freight car bearings. First roller bearing freight cars, 1948 ("Roller Freight!"). Roller bearings mandatory for car interchange between railoads, 1994.

- 100 VDC power distribution. Started in the 19th century, still widespread in the 1950s in older cities. Grand Central Station finally got rid of the last DC circuits, other than subway traction power, in the 1990s. (Grand Central had everything - 120 VDC, 60Hz AC, 40Hz AC, 25Hz AC, 600VDC, and a basement full of rotary converters.)

Transitions that should have happened by now:

- Europe is still using those crappy buffer and chain freight car couplers. Everybody knows they're crap, but the Eurocoupler initiative of the 1970s failed and the Digital Automatic Coupler is still slogging towards implementation.

Re: Google Hits 50% IPv6

#436

Post by buggeryorkshire »

JdeBP wrote: post #130

Just to add to the 'but the ISPs do not' anecdotes, it has been six months since someone last commented so it is probably time to mention this again on Hacker News: * https://havevirginmediaenabledipv6yet.co.uk/ A major ISP in the U.K., that said in a public statement on World IPv6 Day in 2011 that > As well as our core and access networks being capable of supporting IPv6, we're rigorously testing our entire network…

Having interviewed with them for a SRE role I can definitely see how they are awful. The amount of technical debt is hilarious.

Re: Google Hits 50% IPv6

#437

Post by Hendrikto »

HDBaseT wrote: post #429
commandersaki wrote: post #170

Earlier quoted context omitted.

We are still talking a fraction of a millisecond, a few hundred microseconds at most. People are blowing out of proportion latency saved with v6, it's negligible at best, or at worst let's not forget IPv6 is two separate island because two tier-1 carriers refuse to peer (Cogent & HE).

Latency wise, I am not noticing any difference (at least in ICMP). ycombinator@Mainframe:~$ ping 8.8.8.8 PING 8.8.8.8 (8.8.8.8) 56(84) bytes of data. 64 bytes from 8.8.8.8: icmp_seq=1 ttl=119 time=24.3 ms 64 bytes from 8.8.8.8: icmp_seq=2 ttl=119 time=24.1 ms 64 bytes from 8.8.8.8: icmp_seq=3 ttl=119 time=23.9 ms 64 bytes from 8.8.8.8: icmp_seq=4 ttl=119 time=23.9 ms ^C --------------- 8.8.8.8 ping statistics -------…

There is no inherent added latency. That only applies for the translation layer, when there is no native support.

Re: Google Hits 50% IPv6

#438

Post by dijit »

crote wrote: post #383
dijit wrote: post #206

Earlier quoted context omitted.

The sheer amount of times Airdrop has been the "best" way to share files takes away from your point a bit. It's almost always faster than anything else available, and ipv6 would make that method of sending files closer to the default for most people. Having VOIP in games or 1v1 lobbies is, in the strictest sense, "hosting" something in the same way. FD: I work in video games so I speak from this bias.

IPv6 doesn't solve the Airdrop problem. It'll only work at reasonably-fast speeds in the rare case that both people are connected to the same wifi network - but there's already tools like LocalSend[0] for that. Having a file go via cellular provider A, halfway across the country, through some IX, halfway across the country back , and via cellular provider B tends to make things a bit slow. Similarly, using P2P for ga…

> Really Bad Idea

Brother, if I can do something to you based on your IP address you are already totally fucked.

This whole "the thing that I use to be addressed on the internet is dangerous" myth needs to die. It's a telephone number, not a home address. You can block numbers.

Re: Google Hits 50% IPv6

#440

Post by N_Lens »

crote wrote: post #381
xp84 wrote: post #342

Earlier quoted context omitted.

From a US perspective, for your #1, the idea of people “shopping” for broadband, is astonishing. Most people here have available to them one single DOCSIS provider and that’s it. A few lucky ones have a FTTP option too, but that definitely not available to more than 25% of addresses. (It’s true that you can use cellular for your home internet, but I consider that extremely compromised.)

You have to decouple the physical infrastructure from the service provider - how else are you supposed to have competition in a market with a natural monopoly? It's just about the only thing the EU did right during the mandated privatization of infrastructure.

I understand your point and generally agree. But I do see some exceptions like the Railway networks (usually a natural monopoly) in Japan being successfully privatized between so many different companies with their own parallel train lines.
Post reply on HN