61–70 of 107 posts
IPv6 has barely a carrot and no stick. Does anyone give me more money for using IPv6? Sure I might be able to save some money by not using IPv4 but that is rare. Government doesn't incentivize it. Ad networks don't either. There is very little penalty (financial or otherwise) for not going to IPv6. IPv6 will not happen until those sticks and carrots get bigger.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
It does support IPv6, though. $ dig +short ipv6.watch aaaa 2a01:4f8:1c1c:4b9f:: $ curl -6Is https://ipv6.watch/ | head -1 HTTP/1.1 200 OK Unless you mean HN? Feels strange to me to make that comparison.
I was referring to Hacker News' lack of support for IPv6, however it is nice to see that ipv6.watch does support it. To elaborate: I feel that the irony comes from an apparent desire by this website's users towards supporting IPv6, as evidenced by a few articles about the topic on the first page today; Raising awareness of IPv6 support on a site that does not.
Point being, the items on HNs front page are user aggregated content and has naff all to do with HN itself.
Just to check, I can make my website available only through IPv6 and this won't cause any issues?
The lack of IPv6 support this site shows is mainly due to lack of support from CDNs. They won't run out of IPv4s anytime soon, so don't expect this list to change drastically in less than 10 years.
What CDNs don't support IPv6?
IPv6 has barely a carrot and no stick. Does anyone give me more money for using IPv6? Sure I might be able to save some money by not using IPv4 but that is rare. Government doesn't incentivize it. Ad networks don't either. There is very little penalty (financial or otherwise) for not going to IPv6. IPv6 will not happen until those sticks and carrots get bigger.
IPv6 is faster and more reliable because the user can connect to your site natively instead of going through NAT and CGNAT.
IPv6 has barely a carrot and no stick. Does anyone give me more money for using IPv6? Sure I might be able to save some money by not using IPv4 but that is rare. Government doesn't incentivize it. Ad networks don't either. There is very little penalty (financial or otherwise) for not going to IPv6. IPv6 will not happen until those sticks and carrots get bigger.
The stick will grow as IPv4 addresses get more and more expensive.
A basic understanding of what an IPv6 world will look like really didn't click for me until I read the IPv6 Address Planning book by Tom Coffeen. Before that, I really just saw it as IPv4 with longer addresses. Once you dig into the details, you come to the realization that it's a nearly complete reinvention of IPv4. Network planning looks quite different (especially when it comes to subnets) when you plan them with…
How useful would that book (IPv6 Address Planning) be to someone not working specifically in networking/ops? I like developing applications and i manage, of course, my home network. I'd love a book that gives me everything i need to know about IPv6. From justifications, to things to know when working with it, implementing it, using it in my local network, etc. I don't perhaps need or care to learn it at a super low l…
For applications programming you'll want to have a feel for the above, IPv4-mapped IPv6 addresses, and review link local again to in particular note how to encode the interface in a socket call (useful for configurationless cluster communication).
Most every other detail of IPv6 changes should only matter to those that write networking stacks or make routers.
For all of the above info I'd recommend just reading the Wikipedia article on IPv6. Most of these are straightforward wrote memorization of best practices or background reasoning things so it's not "read a book" worthy if you're not trying to do this for a living IMO (coming from someone who does networking for a living).
Can someone explain to me what does IPv6 offer that's IPv4 doesn't? Apart from way more addresses. A good article would suffice.
Random one : "When you go SLAAC, you never go back" (sorry for that ). IPv6 does not need DHCP on L2. If you even experienced a DHCP clusterfuck, you do start to appreciate the stateless auto-configuration that IPv6 provides.
I've used SLAAC in my home LAN when used IPv6 ISP. Now I use IPv4-only ISP (in my area no ISP supports IPv6) and don't miss SLAAC at all.
Over the years I've used DHCP in many smallish LANs (<=100 hosts) and never had any problems with it.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
In what way would using ipv6 enhance your experience using this site?
The site becomes reachable to IPv6-only hosts. Some servers can work reliably with only IPv6, for instance, until you need to contact IPv4-only servers. I would like my mail server to be IPv6-only, but that's not currently possible, for instance. I wonder how many customers can realistically hide behind a single IPv4 (CGNAT), given that there are 65535 TCP/UDP ports.
In theory, one IPv4 address can maintain 65535 connections with every HTTPS server (TCP port 443) on the Internet simultaneously. The main cause of port depletion would be when lots of users connect to the same server.
A reasonable number is 1000 users with 64 ports each, but you could probably squeeze in another 10X.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
IPv6 is faster and more reliable because the user can connect to your site natively instead of going through NAT and CGNAT.
The only NAT between most users and most sites are the users' modem/router combos, and those are pretty fast and reliable.