• Norgur@fedia.io
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    84
    arrow-down
    1
    ·
    3 months ago

    I also know that I cannot tell the difference between two IPv6 addresses because they all merge into an indiscernible blur inside my head

  • Kerb@discuss.tchncs.de
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    44
    ·
    edit-2
    3 months ago

    ::1 is the new 127.0.0.1
    :: abbreviates empty fields
    ipv6 has more addresses
    there is something going on with mac addresses (asside from arp)

    thats all i remember

      • twei@discuss.tchncs.de
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        11
        ·
        edit-2
        3 months ago

        fc00::/7 are ULA (basically what RFC1918 was for IPv4) not entirely true, fc00::/8 is part of ULA, but it is not yet defined. Use fd00::/8 instead.
        2001:db8::/32 is for documentation purposes

        • eclipse@lemmy.world
          link
          fedilink
          arrow-up
          3
          ·
          3 months ago

          IMO they shouldn’t have allowed ULA as part of the standard. There’s no good reason for it.

          • nonentity@sh.itjust.works
            link
            fedilink
            arrow-up
            7
            ·
            3 months ago

            I use ULA prefixes to ensure the management interfaces of my devices don’t leak via public routes.

            It’s one of the unique parts of the standard IPv6 stack not back ported to IPv4, that an interface on any host can be configured with multiple addresses. It permits functional isolation with the default routing logic.

            IPv6 is far from perfect, but the majority of the arguments I’ve seen against deploying it are a mixture of laziness, wilful ignorance, and terminal incuriosity.

            • eclipse@lemmy.world
              link
              fedilink
              arrow-up
              2
              ·
              3 months ago

              I might be misunderstanding. It’s definitely possible to have as many IPv4 aliases on an interface as you want with whatever routing preferences you want. Can you clarify?

              I agree with your stance on deployment.

              • nonentity@sh.itjust.works
                link
                fedilink
                arrow-up
                3
                ·
                3 months ago

                Configuring multiple v4 addresses on an interface is a kludge, typically only used on hosts which apply inter-network routing logic. It’s an explicit, primary function of the standard v6 specifications.

                With v4, you would use either RFC1918 and NAT, or plumb a public address to the host.

                With v6 you should use a ULA and an address with a public prefix, and selectively open ports/services to on appropriate address.

                An example is the file sharing and administration daemons on my NAS are only bound to its ULA. I don’t need to worry whether it will accidentally be exposed publicly through fat fingering my firewall config, because it will never route beyond my gateway.

          • zurohki@aussie.zone
            link
            fedilink
            English
            arrow-up
            3
            ·
            3 months ago

            Yeah there is: not breaking all your internal traffic when the wan link goes down and you lose your prefix.

            • eclipse@lemmy.world
              link
              fedilink
              arrow-up
              1
              ·
              edit-2
              3 months ago

              I can potentially see that scenario if your transit provider is giving you a dynamic prefix but I’ve never seen that in practice. The address space is so enormous there is no reason to.

              Otherwise with either of RADVD or DHCPv6 the local routers should still be able to handle the traffic.

              My home internal network (v6, SLAAC) with all publicly routeable addresses doesn’t break if I unplug my modem.

              • frezik@midwest.social
                link
                fedilink
                arrow-up
                5
                ·
                3 months ago

                IIRC, there are some sloppy ISPs who are needlessly handing out prefixes dynamically. ISPs seem to be doing everything they can to fuck this up, and it seems more incompetence than malice. They are hurting themselves with this more than anybody else.

        • zurohki@aussie.zone
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          2
          ·
          3 months ago

          You’re not supposed to use fc00::/8, so it’s just the fd00::/8 half that’s the new ULA.

  • feoh@lemmy.ml
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    27
    ·
    3 months ago

    I keep hearing this, and I KNOW it’s true at the enterprise level, but I’ve been running my home LAN IPv6 native for the last - 6+ years? Ever since I learned Comcat would vend it to you from their stock router.

    Works great. No problems. Didn’t used to be that way, but these days most (more?) of the stack bugs have been shaken out.

    • PowerCrazy@lemmy.ml
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      8
      ·
      3 months ago

      I’m a network engineer and I run ipv6 natively in all of our datacenters. There are even a handful of end systems that have ipv6 native networking stacks with ipv4 sockets for our non-ipv6 compatible applications. IPv6 issues are basically self-inflicted at this point by companies that see their IT systems as cost centers, or by basilisk directors who’s knowledge stopped in the 90’s.

      • feoh@lemmy.ml
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        1
        ·
        3 months ago

        Yeah, I feel like this is one of those memes that just travevls like lightning because it’s attractive to people.

        IPv6 WAS crazy bad for a very long time, so I can kind of understand it at least, but wake up and smell the 128 bit addressing people, ipv6 is a SUPER useful tool when you need it :)

  • EtzBetz@feddit.de
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    22
    ·
    3 months ago

    I am hosting a few services on my LAN over IPv6, except for Plex, which I am tunneling through IPv4, since Plex itself used to have issues with IPv6.

    It’s always funny when friends complain that one of my services is down, it was 100% IPv6 not working/enabled/willingly disabled on their site yet.

  • sgibson5150@slrpnk.net
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    18
    ·
    3 months ago

    I made an effort to learn it. In 2000. Again in 2012 or whenever the last big push was. If past is prologue, I may need to learn it again soon. 😆

      • Fonzie!@ttrpg.network
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        7
        ·
        edit-2
        3 months ago

        It is in the style of the original, where during Covid the page on “Migrating to the Netherlands” simply just started with “Do not migrate to the Netherlands”, before expanding on the Covid restrictions on place and what foreign nationals currently in the Netherlands are to do.

        On one hand: Now that’s loud & clear communication. On the other hand, “Just don’t” really ties in to the stereotype of Dutch directness/rudeness.

        • Boomkop3@reddthat.com
          link
          fedilink
          arrow-up
          3
          ·
          3 months ago

          Being direct is not rude, in my opinion. I don’t know why people need things so sugarcoated. Being direct, to me, is a sign of respect

  • smb@lemmy.ml
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    4
    arrow-down
    1
    ·
    3 months ago

    maybe start with an adjustable setup:

    • rent a cheap vm, i got one for 1€/month (for the first year,cancel monthly) from ovh currently
    • setup 3 openvpn instances to redirect all routes through the tunnel, one with ipv4 only, one with ipv6 only and one with both
    • setup the client on your mobile phone and your laptop both with all three vpns to choose from
    • have the option to choose now and try out ipv6, standalone or dualstack depending on what vpn you switch on
    • use this setup to blame services that don’t support ipv6 yet or maybe are broken with dualstack 🤣
    • rise from under-the-stone (disabling ipv6 only) to in-sunlight (to a well-above-industry-standart-level !!! “quick” new network technologies adopting “genious”) 🤣
    • improve your openvpn setup from above to be reachable “by” ipv6 too if you haven’t done it from the beginning, done: reach the pro-level of the-late-adopter-noob-group

    (if you want, ask for config snippets)

    btw i prefer to wait for ipv8😁 before “demanding” ipv6 from services i use 🤣

  • smileyhead@discuss.tchncs.de
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    1
    ·
    edit-2
    3 months ago

    I pay yearly more for IPv4 address space for virtual machines on my dedicated server than for that dedicated server itself _(ツ)_/.

    Let that thing die.

    Monthly summary:

    54.40€ - 30 IPv4 addresses
    0.00€ - 18 quintillion IPv6 addresses
    38.39€ - whole server for dozens of services

    • AlwaysTheir@lemmy.one
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      1
      ·
      3 months ago

      Someone is using Hetzner. :) Yes let IPv4 fade away. Still what services are you running that require so many unique IPs?

    • frezik@midwest.social
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      9
      ·
      3 months ago

      For individuals. There are tons of benefits for everyone collectively, but as is often the case, there’s not enough incentive for any one person to bother until everybody else does.

      • electricprism@lemmy.ml
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        1
        ·
        3 months ago

        I’d be open to considering those but I never had a website break it down in a material way. At best 6 to me is shiny and side grade – if it results in major labor and time spent without reasonable benefit within a LAN then it’s not going to be a humdinger. Of course like I said if there are arguments to be made I’m happy to contemplate them.

        YMMV, for me the juice hasn’t been worth the squeeze yet and I’m not sure it ever will.

    • orangeboats@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      5
      ·
      3 months ago

      I use IPv6 exclusively for my homelab. The pros:

      • No more holepunching kludge with solutions like ZeroTier or Tailscale, just open a port and you are pretty much good to go.

      • The CGNAT gateway of my ISP tends to be overloaded during the holiday seasons, so using IPv6 eliminates an unstability factor for my lab.

      • You have a metric sh*t ton of addressing space. I have assigned my SSH server its own IPv6 address, my web server another, my Plex server yet another, … You get the idea. The nice thing here is that even if someone knows about the address to my SSH server, they can’t discover my other servers through port scanning, as was typical in IPv4 days.

      • Also, because of the sheer size of the addressing space, people simply can’t scan your network.

    • qpsLCV5@lemmy.ml
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      5
      ·
      3 months ago

      personally, i’d have pretty big benefits for my homelab if i could use my own ipv6 range for everything. having only a singe public IP is just very limiting.

      sadly, my ISP does give out ipv6 for home networks, but i cannot connect to any of them from my mobile phone with the same carrier. so that’s fun. they talked about rolling out ipv6 on mobile networks years ago, but i guess it’ll take a few more…

      • electricprism@lemmy.ml
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        1
        ·
        edit-2
        3 months ago

        YMMV. Time, energy, compat*ability problems, unforseen issues which cost time debugging.

        Again, I’m speaking for me – there has to be a tangible real benefit and within networks even with 100 devices IPv4 does the job better than fine and better than IPv6 for some folks.

        Not to mention its just plain easier to remember 4 octet sets of numbers running from machine to machine in an office than 6 or 8 or whatever.