981
It was (lemmy.world)
submitted 1 year ago by to c/programmer_humor@programming.dev
25 comments fedilink hide all child comments
 
you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
[–] 12 points 1 year ago (12 children)

IPv4 is definitely a large part of the blame for this and we need to start resting the blame there in hopes we force these companies (and their users) to actually use it. We need ISPs to support it, of course for end users, but at the enterprise level everything should be IPv6. It should have been IPv6 a decade ago, or more.

  • permalink
  • fedilink
  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 12 child comments
    •
  • [–] 17 points 1 year ago* (5 children)

    I was learning IPv6 in second year Network & Télécom, in 1997. We were running out of IPs back then.
    Then we invented proxies and NAT and things got better and nature took its course (it ain't broke? Don't fucking touch it).

  • permalink
  • fedilink
  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 5 child comments
    •
  • [–] 13 points 1 year ago (4 children)

    Sure, nature took its course, but did NATs make things better? I’m a game dev and getting two computers to talk to each other is so so much harder due to NAT traversal, requiring punchthrough servers. Voice chat and stuff need STUN/TURN servers. A game has to account for “what if my host wants to connect two clients, one of which within the NAT and one without?”

    Makes far more sense to give every device an address and just talk to it and leave security and port openness up to firewalls.

  • permalink
  • fedilink
  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 4 child comments
    •
  • [–] 2 points 1 year ago (2 children)

    getting two computers to talk to each other is so so much harder due to NAT traversal

    ... which is why you will take IPv4 on my home network from my cold, dead hands, and why all IPv6 traffic is blocked in the network that hosts my PC/laptop

  • permalink
  • fedilink
  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 2 child comments
    •
  • [–] 12 points 1 year ago (5 children)

    The good news is that the amount of traffic hitting Google that's connecting over IPv6 is just about at the 50% mark:

    https://www.google.com/intl/en/ipv6/statistics.html

    We need to start talking about IPv6 as something that is here and now, not some far off future.

    IMHO, the biggest issue is setup for SOHO users. Routers for that market have gotten the IPv4 setup wizard process down pretty good. With IPv6, there's like three different ways your ISP might have set it up, and you need to tell your router which way to go. It's complicated enough that even people with a solid understanding of IPv4 can be confused trying to figure out what works.

  • permalink
  • fedilink
  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 5 child comments
    •
  • [–] 8 points 1 year ago (1 child)

    Further, there's often not clear documentation from your ISP which of the ways they have it set up!

  • permalink
  • fedilink
  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 1 child comment
    •
  • [–] 9 points 1 year ago

    Definitely.

    The first time I tried to setup IPv6 on OPNsense, Android phones thought they couldn't connect to the Internet after getting on WiFi. Something about the endpoint they check for Internet access wasn't going through. I backed out some settings, and something fixed it, but I'm still not sure what.

  • permalink
  • fedilink
  • source
  • parent
  • [–] 3 points 1 year ago (2 children)

    I mean, if there's only three ways, couldn't routers be set up to just try all three to see which works? Or if they each need specific parameters that aren't discoverable, have a form that takes all of them but says "just enter what your ISP gives you, the others are optional". Or set it up such that the client can just get whatever information it needs from the server to communicate with other nodes beyond the server. IPv4 has DHCP. Is there something in the way of applying a similar solution to IPv6?

  • permalink
  • fedilink
  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 2 child comments
    •
  • [–] 3 points 1 year ago* (1 child)

    IPv4 has DHCP. Is there something in the way of applying a similar solution to IPv6?

    That in itself is implemented a few different ways, and each one is more useful dependent on your use-case, but these also have very little to do with how your ISP hands out the IP to your modem. When you get an IP handed out to your modem by your ISP, it's often not being handed out by DHCP but an entirely different technology purpose built for whatever medium (cable/DSL/fiber) is actually going into your modem, so knowing their implementation is still important. Things work a little differently at enterprise-level. Although you're not wrong that eventually there could be routers with auto-configuration based on which type of IPv6 network the router detects, there just currently aren't any that I know of.

    But if you're interested in the modern equivalents of DHCP you should look into SLAAC vs. DHCPv6 which are similar but oh so very different.

  • permalink
  • fedilink
  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 1 child comment
    •
  • [–] 2 points 1 year ago

    That's disappointing that they have different methods for each physical layer. That should be handled on the link layer using common methods once the physical layer is able to send bits back and forth.

    Getting an IP address shouldn't be affected by whether it will be transmitted using fibre, dsl, cable, a 56k line, a quantum teleporter, signal fires, or carrier pigeons.

  • permalink
  • fedilink
  • source
  • parent