• ryannathansEnglish
    arrow-up
    21
    arrow-down
    0
    ·
    9 months ago
    link
    fedilink

    Ipv6 is the replacement for ipv4. There now exist networks without ipv4

    • KairuByteEnglish
      arrow-up
      14
      arrow-down
      0
      ·
      9 months ago
      link
      fedilink

      To expand on this, we have functionally ran out of IPv4 addresses. Meaning IPv6 addresses are required.

      • ryannathansEnglish
        arrow-up
        12
        arrow-down
        0
        ·
        9 months ago
        link
        fedilink

        Not only that, but ipv6 makes networking easier and less complicated. No longer, needing port forwarding or NAT, amongst other improvements

        • BlackmistEnglish
          arrow-up
          4
          arrow-down
          3
          ·
          9 months ago
          link
          fedilink

          It’s that necessarily a good thing?

          I remember suddenly needing a firewall on my PC back in the days of the Blaster worm.

          Do we really want all those crappy IoT devices open on all ports to the general internet?

          • ryannathansEnglish
            arrow-up
            9
            arrow-down
            0
            ·
            9 months ago
            link
            fedilink

            NAT is not security. We aren’t talking about replacing friewalls.

        • PloppEnglish
          arrow-up
          2
          arrow-down
          12
          ·
          9 months ago
          link
          fedilink

          I’d be fucked if I had to deal with IPv6 at home. Give me NAT, port forwarding and a dynamic public address that changes.

          • ryannathansEnglish
            arrow-up
            4
            arrow-down
            0
            ·
            9 months ago
            link
            fedilink

            Slaac does everything for you. You get dynamic public addresses that change (you can disable if you please). Nothing to deal with, just open a firewall port if you want to receive traffic

            • PloppEnglish
              arrow-up
              1
              arrow-down
              2
              ·
              9 months ago
              link
              fedilink

              I want static addresses on my LAN, and addresses I can remember and easily recognize in a list. And I don’t want my devices to have unique addresses outside my LAN, especially not static ones. NAT is great.

              • p1mrxEnglish
                arrow-up
                2
                arrow-down
                0
                ·
                9 months ago
                link
                fedilink

                You can statically number a LAN with fd00::/8 and NAT66 to the internet, if you really want to.

                • ryannathansEnglish
                  arrow-up
                  1
                  arrow-down
                  0
                  ·
                  9 months ago
                  link
                  fedilink

                  Heck you could set up a ULA or just use a range from your assigned prefix

                  • PloppEnglish
                    arrow-up
                    1
                    arrow-down
                    0
                    ·
                    9 months ago
                    link
                    fedilink

                    See, what both of you wrote is completely alien and confusing to me. The look of IPv6 gives me an aneurysm. Let me keep my IPv4. You can run IPv6 on your own LAN. I’m not stopping you.

              • ryannathansEnglish
                arrow-up
                1
                arrow-down
                0
                ·
                9 months ago
                link
                fedilink

                Nothing stops you doing that with ipv6. NAT is complicated and unnecessary.

                • PloppEnglish
                  arrow-up
                  1
                  arrow-down
                  0
                  ·
                  9 months ago
                  link
                  fedilink

                  My brain stops me from remembering and recognizing IPv6 addresses. I can’t deal with long strings of hex. And why are people so against me running IPv4 on my own LAN? Do I make you sad? Do I ruin your day? I love IPv4, and NAT works perfectly fine for me. I’m not doing the translation, my router is.

                  • ryannathansEnglish
                    arrow-up
                    1
                    arrow-down
                    0
                    ·
                    9 months ago
                    link
                    fedilink

                    You don’t need to have long addresses, you should be using hostnames and domains anyway. Ipv6 addresses are often simpler than ipv4 ones. E.g. prefix::1 for your router. Prefix::2 for the next device, and so on to Prefix::FFFF for the first 65k machines if you wish to set it up that way. Ipv4 exclusively on your lan ruins my day because I have to maintain servers and software to support users that only use ipv4 and flat out refuse ipv6 connectivity - it’s expensive and takes a lot of effort to maintain dual stack support.

      • BearOfaTimeEnglish
        arrow-up
        3
        arrow-down
        9
        ·
        9 months ago
        link
        fedilink

        Only for the internet, not private space

    • BearOfaTimeEnglish
      arrow-up
      4
      arrow-down
      15
      ·
      9 months ago
      edit-2
      9 months ago
      link
      fedilink

      No shit.

      But a private Lan will never need it.

      There are 4 billion+ possible IP v4 addresses, nearly 600 million in the current private range.

      Show me a private network with 600 million devices.

      There’s no reason a device that doesn’t have a direct internet connection needs IP6.

      • NighedEnglish
        arrow-up
        8
        arrow-down
        0
        ·
        9 months ago
        edit-2
        9 months ago
        link
        fedilink

        Ideally, using just IP6 would be simpler, as every device gets a global address. Then you don’t need to mess with NAT, port forwarding and all that bullshit. Every device having multiple addresses just complicates things.

      • p1mrxEnglish
        arrow-up
        1
        arrow-down
        0
        ·
        9 months ago
        link
        fedilink

        A device on your private IPv4 network can send packets directly to 104.21.36.127 via NAT. How will it send packets to 2606:4700:3033::6815:247f? There’s not enough space in the IPv4 header.