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

Using the Internet without IPv4 connectivity

jamesmcm.github.io

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

51–60 of 133 posts

Re: Using the Internet without IPv4 connectivity

#51

Post by daneel_w »

xyzzyz wrote: post #48
daneel_w wrote: post #45

Earlier quoted context omitted.

My stance is that common connectivity shouldn't cost an additional $3.70 a month on top of already egregious traffic costs. The price per IP today is about $30. The lifetime of the investment is infinite and upkeep is in the grand scheme of things nothing. The markup profit is insane. It's a new behavior, pure usury, seizing an opportunity to profit on a crisis. To offer some contrast (without getting into the sizes…

We are in crisis precisely because nobody charged for IPv4 addresses in the past, and so overwhelming majority of those are wastefully allocated. What you want would exacerbate the crisis.

We're in this crisis because we failed to anticipate the explosive growth of the Internet. It took a bit into the 2000s until we stopped doling out generously oversized networks to everyone who asked. Vetting the need would've been the right requirement. Shutting the door for organizations with not enough money would've hampered progress.

Re: Using the Internet without IPv4 connectivity

#52

Post by xyzzyz »

daneel_w wrote: post #51
xyzzyz wrote: post #48

Earlier quoted context omitted.

We are in crisis precisely because nobody charged for IPv4 addresses in the past, and so overwhelming majority of those are wastefully allocated. What you want would exacerbate the crisis.

We're in this crisis because we failed to anticipate the explosive growth of the Internet. It took a bit into the 2000s until we stopped doling out generously oversized networks to everyone who asked. Vetting the need would've been the right requirement. Shutting the door for organizations with not enough money would've hampered progress.

Yes, and why did people ask for these oversized networks? That’s right, because addresses were free.

Re: Using the Internet without IPv4 connectivity

#53

Post by TechDebtDevin »

Abekkus wrote: post #50
pQd wrote: post #41

Earlier quoted context omitted.

aspect worth noting: up to my knowledge HE's tunnel will work only if you're assigned public IPv4 by your ISP. if you're behind a carrier grade NAT - too bad, you'll need to use another solution to get IPv6 to your home.

Strange. This sounds like something Hurricane Electric specifically limited. There’s nothing in CGNAT that would naturally break such a tunnel

I use tunnels all day like this with cgnat on multiple devices.

Re: Using the Internet without IPv4 connectivity

#54

Post by Biganon »

thexa4 wrote: post #2

If anyone else runs into this, it's very easy to set up an ssh proxy: ssh -D 8080 user@hostname Once that connection is set up, point your browser to use localhost:8080 as a socks proxy.

I always do this when I'm using a public wifi. Don't need to pay for a VPN / trust one, I just socks forward everything to my infomaniak server.

Re: Using the Internet without IPv4 connectivity

#56

Post by somidscr21 »

jeroenhd wrote: post #39
sylware wrote: post #11

Blockers for switching off IPv4: - I am using alternative search engines, and it seems most do not provide IPv6 connectivity (when they are not wrecked by big tech gigantic network resources, you know "AI"... how to conveniently DDOS alternatives...) - github.com: zero ipv6 last time I did check. This is microsoft, do not expect anything good, actually expect the worst, for instance they broke recently noscript/basic…

I don't think moving off IPv4 is on anyone's radar yet, unless you're buying VPS services that often come with a discount when you run on IPv6 only. In practice, you'll probably always have IPv4 connectivity of some sort, even though it's probably going to become more and more likely that that connectivity is attained through CGNAT. Github is especially infuriating. For a few weeks, they ran a test, everything seemed…

The US government is under a mandate to move to v6 only, so it's very much on some radars. Hopefully some ISPs follow suit.

Re: Using the Internet without IPv4 connectivity

#57

Post by daneel_w »

xyzzyz wrote: post #52
daneel_w wrote: post #51

Earlier quoted context omitted.

We're in this crisis because we failed to anticipate the explosive growth of the Internet. It took a bit into the 2000s until we stopped doling out generously oversized networks to everyone who asked. Vetting the need would've been the right requirement. Shutting the door for organizations with not enough money would've hampered progress.

Yes, and why did people ask for these oversized networks? That’s right, because addresses were free.

That's a depressingly shallow knee-jerk-y way of reasoning around something so fantastically open as the Internet... You're offering the deplorable solution of "let the money vote" instead of reason and restraint. The consequence if we had asked for money from the get-go would've been a corporate-ruled scenario where connectivity and Internet foothold were primarily in the hands of the businesses that had the most money. Smaller businesses, and non-profits in particular, would effectively have been shut out and innovation and growth in the Internet's most sensitive phase would have suffered greatly.

Re: Using the Internet without IPv4 connectivity

#58

Post by somidscr21 »

avhception wrote: post #10

I'm operating a few IPv6-only VPNs at work, for access to internal infrastructure. The biggest problem so far is that Windows and macOS clients need a v6 DNS server. Otherwise, they won't even try to resolve v6onlyhost.vpn.example.com. Because the client may or may not be in a v6-enabled network, I have to run a DNS server inside the VPN and push that to the client, which can lead to all kinds of problems when the VP…

I've found that using my v4 only network from my ISP and macOS can do v6 only without requiring a DNS server like you have been doing. I don't remember the details now, but after some digging a few years ago I realized macOS will happily work like that as long as it has a v6 address. I can put a ULA address on my host, and it's good to go. Granted this relies on users knowing how to do that. or depending on the VPN application to get to the v6 only network, you may be able to script adding a ULA (any kind even made up). You don't want to leave it wIth a made up ULA because that could screw things up if the user moves to a v6 capable network.

Re: Using the Internet without IPv4 connectivity

#59

Post by johnklos »

When you want to use a public address over a tunnel, IPv6 makes things easier. Instead of setting up a tunnel to a specific IPv4, deleting your default route, adding that deleted route as the other endpoint's IPv4 route, then adding the tunnel's other end's IPv4 as a default route, you can just connect to the tunnel endpoint via IPv6, and all the IPv4 is configured just in the tunnel.

I use this often because IPv6 on phone networks is invariably the same as the author's - native IPv6 plus carrier grade NAT IPv4, and most NAT implementations suck (they time out, for instance).

I haven't tried with WireGuard(r) yet, but I will soon (using NetBSD's clean reimplentation). With tinc [1] though, it's a piece of cake.

[1] https://www.tinc-vpn.org

Post reply on HN