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

91–100 of 133 posts

Re: Using the Internet without IPv4 connectivity

#91

Post by bombcar »

School-Cotton wrote: post #86
msgodel wrote: post #68

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Most ISPs still just block IPv6 altogether because most small businesses seem to try IPv6 once and then forget to eg update their AAAA records so to the user it looks like their favorite niche thing works when they're on but not on the one they're paying for which creates problems. It's kind of a weird issue, I don't know if there are nice solutions other than hoping IPv4 just goes away eventually. Happy eyeballs was…

> Most ISPs still just block IPv6 altogether That’s increasingly not true, at least in developed countries. Traffic to Google in the US has been majority IPv6 since a few months ago.

Majority mobile and majority ipv6 are basically the same thing.

Re: Using the Internet without IPv4 connectivity

#92

Post by mikepurvis »

jeroenhd wrote: post #31
simonjgreen wrote: post #3

Slightly misleading title, this is more “getting to the IPv4 internet via an IPv6 tunnel through a VPS”. Also just called 4in6. Interesting nonetheless! We find at our ISP that if we break something with IPv4 we experience a very different type of support issue to if we break IPv6. Breaking v4 results in, broadly, a pretty hard “down” state. While folks are unhappy, it is at least simple. Breaking v6 results in weird…

When my IPv4 died last time, I noticed it mostly because Github didn't work anymore. These days, most consumer websites just work on IPv6. That said, people whose routers were only provisioned IPv4 DNS servers did have a full outage. If Microsoft would get off their incompetent assets already, my biggest concern would've been remembering the mDNS hostname I've assigned to my router so I could log in and see if IPv4 i…

My ISP (TekSavvy) manages to semi regularly screw up ipv4 and what I notice is that "big" sites like Amazon, Google, Facebook, SO, etc all work as before, but it's the in-between sites, someone's blog on a search result, etc— that's the stuff that breaks.

Re: Using the Internet without IPv4 connectivity

#93

Post by avhception »

somidscr21 wrote: post #66
avhception wrote: post #61

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Interesting. Do you actually use that trick in production? I'd have to find a name of an interface that I could safely mess with...

Yeah I've been using it daily for almost a year as have many other people at work

In an automated fashion using some kind of "PostUp" Script (to use the Wireguard term) or do you add the IPs manually after the VPN has been established?

Re: Using the Internet without IPv4 connectivity

#94

Post by ok123456 »

kstrauser wrote: post #71
allyourdatas wrote: post #32

Why would I ever need IPv6 at home or in my office? Explain to me logically why I need it in my house or in my office? I do not care about using up the last internet address because that is akin to the 'think of the children' crap used to justify things on an emotional level in order to manipulate people. There's no way I'll exhaust the private address spaces and I not not see NAT as a negative. I do not want my frid…

If you don’t understand the engineering benefits, fine, not everyone needs to be an expert. I wouldn’t proudly brag about my ignorance of the subject, though.

What exactly are the "engineering benefits" beyond a larger address space? Most companies rely on private address spaces to logically separate them, and will ultimately end up using NAT66, ending up exactly where they started, but with significantly more complexity.

Every time this comes up, people come out of the woodwork to say, "Well, akually we talked about this exact thing in 1995 and decided this was the right way!" Yet, it's never convincing.

If it were a simple address expansion, we would have completed this upgrade around 1998. Yet here we are, 30 years later!

Re: Using the Internet without IPv4 connectivity

#95

Post by homebrewer »

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.

Don't worry, we've learned nothing and will repeat the same mistake with IPv6:

https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=42671847

https://www.theregister.com/2024/12/06/apnic_huawei_ipv6/

Re: Using the Internet without IPv4 connectivity

#96

Post by __turbobrew__ »

xacky wrote: post #35

I have strong opinions about ipv4, especially since I'm forced to use an ipv4 isp. The lack of ipv6 adoption should be considered one of the great failures of tech. Who actually is responsible? Is it router manufacturers writing poor quality firmware, ipv4 advocates in leadership positions at isps, ipv4 address speculators, poor training of network engineers and tech support staff? I think we all need to have a much…

> transitioned off of TLS 1.0 just fine

The difference is only the end client and server need to support TLS, all the middleware and networks between just see TCP packets and do not have to be privy to what TLS version is being used.

IPv6 on the other hand has to be supported by every middleware box between the client and the server and therefore its functionality is limited by the lowest common denominator.

Additionally TLS upgrades were largely drop in, whereas IPv6 changed too many things at once to be easily adopted.

Hindsight is 20/20, but I firmly believe that IPv6 should have only changed source and destination addresses to be 64 bits and that was the entire RFC.

Re: Using the Internet without IPv4 connectivity

#98

Post by tatersolid »

b0a04gl wrote: post #23

ipv6 only machine still reaches ipv4 sites because dns64 upstream is just faking AAAA records ,makes it look like everything is native ipv6. this part of the trick is happening somewhere else which's not controllable. if dns64 breaks or stops doing the mapping properly then this might break

In IPv4 if your NAT or your ISPs CGNAT stops mapping everything breaks.

Having a stateful mapping device inline in the network sucks for reliability in general. Native IPv6 removes the requirement.

Re: Using the Internet without IPv4 connectivity

#99

Post by bigstrat2003 »

murderfs wrote: post #84
bigstrat2003 wrote: post #79

Earlier quoted context omitted.

IPv6 is not actually hard to implement or maintain. A lot of people have repeated that meme, but it isn't true at all.

Okay, then please reimplement the equivalent of the following code to work with both IPv4 and IPv6: int fd = socket(AF_INET, SOCK_STREAM, 0); struct sockaddr_in addr = { .sin_family = AF_INET, .sin_port = htons(1234) }; addr.sin_addr.s_addr = htonl(INADDR_ANY); bind(fd, (struct sockaddr*)&addr, sizeof(addr)); listen(fd, 128); int client; while (client = accept(fd, 0, 0)) { // ... }

I don't think anyone was talking about the difficulty of implementing IPv6 in software. I certainly wasn't. I meant the difficulty of implementing it as a network admin, which is not really hard.

Re: Using the Internet without IPv4 connectivity

#100

Post by [deleted] »

murderfs wrote: post #84
bigstrat2003 wrote: post #79

Earlier quoted context omitted.

IPv6 is not actually hard to implement or maintain. A lot of people have repeated that meme, but it isn't true at all.

Okay, then please reimplement the equivalent of the following code to work with both IPv4 and IPv6: int fd = socket(AF_INET, SOCK_STREAM, 0); struct sockaddr_in addr = { .sin_family = AF_INET, .sin_port = htons(1234) }; addr.sin_addr.s_addr = htonl(INADDR_ANY); bind(fd, (struct sockaddr*)&addr, sizeof(addr)); listen(fd, 128); int client; while (client = accept(fd, 0, 0)) { // ... }

[deleted]
Post reply on HN