Hacker News
points by cyberax 10 hours ago | 0 comments
IPv6 is dead. Nobody cares about it.

I will believe otherwise once even one US hotel chain supports it. I have _never_ seen a hotel in the US with IPv6 WiFi. Not once.

And I once stayed in a hotel (in Mountain View, CA) that gave out public IPv4 addresses.

[–] throw0101a 3 hours ago
> IPv6 is dead. Nobody cares about it.

Except for everyone on T-Mobile US:

* https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=d6oBCYHzrTA

Or all of FaceMeta's internal infrastructure:

* https://engineering.fb.com/2017/01/17/production-engineering...

Or 86% of France:

* https://www.google.com/intl/en/ipv6/statistics.html#tab=per-...

[–] Sesse__ 5 hours ago
Last time I was in a California hotel, it had IPv6 just fine. That was 2012. Perhaps you choose the wrong hotels :-)
[–] andix 9 hours ago
Okay, if you say so. Hotel Wifis are known for being on the bleeding edge of technology, and as the main innovator pushing new internet technology. Everything starts with hotel Wifis. /s
[–] cyberax 8 hours ago
Exactly my point. IPv6 failed to reach the "boring, just works" level after 30 years of deployment. So much so that we are now deploying solutions with 10+ years of expected service lifetime that do not support IPv6.

Meanwhile, CGNAT really solved most issues with IPv4. Yes, even the voice/video chat issues.

Want another fun example? Try to find a SIP telephony provider in the US that supports IPv6. Go on. I do this exercise about once a year.

[–] simoncion 7 hours ago
> IPv6 failed to reach the "boring, just works" level after 30 years of deployment.

/me glances over at my phone, which only has an IPv6 address when connected via cellular modem.

/me thinks back to the decade+ of incredibly boring IPv6 service from the residential ISPs I've used.

Sure.

If an ISP wants to provide only IPv6 addresses to CPE, they can set things up so that happens. But if you won't be satisfied until IPv4 no longer passes over the Internet, then you're going to die unhappy about that. The goal for our lifetime is one where every residential site has a global /56 and is behind IPv4 CGN, and servers hosted by commercial entities get to choose whether they assign IPv4 addresses, IPv6 addresses, or both to their servers.

[–] TobTobXX 7 hours ago
/me searching through all the mobile network providers in Switzerland (a technologically advanced country) and not finding any.

Seriously, this drives me mad. There is NO WAY to get IPv6 on mobile networks in Switzerland. Neither Swisscom, nor Sunrise, nor Salt, and of course no reseller.

And Android handles this particularly poorly. I have some servers set up in my tailscale network on private IPv6 addresses, but android doesn't query AAAA addresses if it has no ::/0 route, so I HAVE to route all my traffic through my VPN which often creates other complications (with corporate wifi etc.)

[–] andix 7 hours ago
I get your frustration. But not having access to IPv6 personally does not mean IPv6 is dead. It's very much alive and handles considerable amounts of traffic.
[–] TobTobXX 6 hours ago
Well ok, not dead. Dead sounds final and I still think that we will get more IPv6 deployed in the future. And I set up all my servers as IPv6-first. So no, I don't think IPv6 is dead.

But I'd claim it failed completely. Many very public services (eg. github.com, sentry.io, office365.com, archive.org) outright don't support it. And the fact that infrastructure providers (like mobile network carriers) don't support it either, proves that it is far from "alive". In fact, I'd say it is deader than MMS, Fax and landline. For these I can still get service. For IPv6 (on the phone) I can't.

[–] andix 6 hours ago
It only failed to fully replace IPv4. But it runs perfectly fine along IPv4 and is very much alive. It replaced IPv4 where it was needed and didn't where it doesn't matter yet.

Email didn't replace letters on paper. But I wouldn't say email failed completely.

[–] simoncion 6 hours ago
To be clear, 'TobTobXX' isn't 'cyberax'. 'cyberax' is claiming that IPv6 is dead, whereas 'TobTobXX' is -quite justifiably- complaining that both his local cellular ISPs and Android suck.
[–] cyberax 7 hours ago
You're welcome to try to solve the challenges from my sibling post. Both of them are solved in IPv4 by a $100 router from a nearby store and with zero configuration.
[–] simoncion 6 hours ago
> You're welcome to try to solve the challenges from my sibling post.

Check my reply to your post. [0] I wrote it up before I noticed your message here. ;)

[0] <https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=50295293>

[–] andix 8 hours ago
I don't get your point. IPv6 is at "boring, just works". The majority of the worlds devices run on it dual-stack and it handles a considerable amount of traffic. A lot of 5G networks run on IPv6 single stack with IPv4 compatibility on top.

IPv6 is very much alive. And it's so boring and working so well, that you don't even notice it.

[–] cyberax 8 hours ago
> I don't get your point. IPv6 is at "boring, just works". The majority of the worlds devices run on it dual-stack and it handles a considerable amount of traffic.

Most of the world runs on IPv4. If we shut down IPv6 on the core routers tomorrow, pretty much nobody is going to blink an eye. And now I believe that we should do it and start again.

The 50% stat is really mostly mobile phones on cellular networks, which remain the _only_ major success story for IPv6. Mostly because there's not enough private or even squattable IPv4 space available for many large mobile phone operators.

> IPv6 is very much alive. And it's so boring and working so well, that you don't even notice it.

Sigh. No, it's not. In a thread a couple of weeks ago, I gave several examples:

1. You're a SOHO-type business. How can you do multiple WAN uplinks with IPv6 without NAT?

2. How do you prevent your printer on IPv6 from breaking when your Internet connection goes down?

For context: I deployed IPv6 in my networks in 2006. I have war stories.

[–] simoncion 6 hours ago
> How can you do multiple WAN uplinks with IPv6 without NAT?

Advertise the addresses offered by the primary uplink, then retire those addresses [0] and advertise the secondary when the primary fails. Or are you talking about load balancing, which is its own thing? Either way, this situation is inherently not boring, so the way you solve it is going to be quite a bit more complex -regardless of IP protocol version- than the very boring single-upstream situation.

> How do you prevent your printer on IPv6 from breaking when your Internet connection goes down?

I'll flip this around on you:

How do you prevent your printer from "breaking" when its ISP-provided DHCP lease on its globally-routable IPv4 address expires? How about when the ISP refuses to renew the lease on the printer's current globally-routable IPv4 address and forces it to get a new one?

Obviously, you use the ISP-assigned globally-routable IPv4 address and also assign an RFC 1918 address to the printer.

How to solve this with IPv6? Use ULAs! They're the equivalent of 1918 space in the IPv6 world. Just like in IPv4, IPv6 globally-routable addresses are for global communication and can be used for LAN-local communication. And -just like 1918 addresses- ULAs are for LAN-local communication. Just like with IPv4, if you can't control the addresses that you get from your upstream provider, and/or if your router is set up to retire your upstream provider's delegated address space when your upstream link goes down, then you use ULAs. [1]

I know that OpenWRT has a setting in LuCi to enable advertisement of a ULA prefix, and fifteen seconds of searching revealed that at least some Linksys combination router/APs seem to just generate and advertise a ULA prefix by default. [2]

So, if you're not configuring your LAN this way and upstream provider renumbering is getting in your way, then you really should bother to.

[0] ...by advertising their valid lifetime as zero seconds...

[1] ...or if you happen to like to be able to assign fixed IP addresses to certain pieces of hardware...

[2] <https://support.linksys.com/kb/article/3744-en/>

[–] andix 6 hours ago
> Use ULAs

Isn't that the default for modern routers? They just generate a random ULA during setup and assign it.

Random ULAs are also great for LAN-to-LAN VPNs, because there aren't any private IP overlaps. Everyone setting up their LAN on 192.168.0.x makes it quite a mess on IPv4.

[–] simoncion 6 hours ago
> Isn't that the default for modern routers?

I assumed so because it's the obviously correct thing to do, but I haven't used a SoHo router in so many years, so I don't know.

> Random ULAs are also great for LAN-to-LAN VPNs, because there aren't any private IP overlaps.

Yep! Extremely low chance of prefix collision is their most important purpose. I've been part of several corporate acquisitions, and it inevitably took 6->18+ months to do enough of the IPv4 renumbering and server-discommissioning [0] process to begin to merge the LANs of the merging companies. Had they used ULA addressing, the odds of having to do that massive amount of work would be effectively zero.

And if collisions aren't something you give any shits about, nothing stops you [1] from setting your ULA to fd00::/48 and advertising fd00::/64 on your LAN for static IP addresses that are notably shorter than you can get with IPv4!

[0] ...because there's so little space in the 1918 range...

[1] ...well, unless your router's configuration system doesn't let you specify your ULA prefix...

[–] cyberax 6 hours ago
ULA are useless for most practical purposes because of the source address selection rules.
[–] cyberax 6 hours ago
OK, do you _think_ my questions were that easy?

> Advertise the addresses offered by the primary uplink, then retire those addresses

Prefix withdrawal doesn't work reliably on Android. And neither is it required to work, btw. Neither does this solution allow for load balancing, as all traffic will just go through one connection.

Bonus points: triangular routing to your local NAS through the router.

> How do you prevent your printer from "breaking" when its ISP-provided DHCP lease on its globally-routable IPv4 address expires? How about when the ISP refuses to renew the lease on the printer's current globally-routable IPv4 address and forces it to get a new one?

Printers get an RFC1918 address and don't care about global connectivity.

> How to solve this with IPv6? Use ULAs! They're the equivalent of 1918 space in the IPv6 world.

They're not. IPv6 is nothing like IPv4 operationally. Back to my challenge, ULA will NOT work.

The scenario is very simple: the printer gets a ULA prefix and a GUA prefix. Your computer also gets a GUA and a ULA from the same router.

So far so good.

Now the uplink goes down, and the router withdraws the prefix. The printer sees the withdrawal and removes its GUA address. Your computer misses it, and still has the GUA and the ULA addresses.

Whoops. The printing is now broken somehow. Why?

[–] simoncion 5 hours ago
> Prefix withdrawal doesn't work reliably on Android.

Works fine on the Android hardware I have. Are you attempting to retire prefixes that have an infinite lifetime? That doesn't work, and I don't think it's supposed to work.

> Neither does this solution allow for load balancing...

As I said

  Or are you talking about load balancing, which is its own thing? Either way, this situation is inherently *not* boring, so the way you solve it is going to be quite a bit more complex -regardless of IP protocol version- than the very boring single-upstream situation.
> Printers get an RFC1918 address and don't care about global connectivity.

Okay, so why are you complaining about your printer being broken by GUAs that you're not permitting it to have? ;)

> IPv6 is nothing like IPv4 operationally.

For anyone who's not an IP stack developer, network hardware developer, or Enterprise sysadmin it absolutely is. And other than the fact that every endpoint is able to get a global address in v6, the sysadmin-visible differences between v4 and v6 are minor. RAs instead of... well, nothing, and DHCP for both.

> Whoops. The printing is now broken somehow. Why?

Exactly.

Why isn't your DHCPv6 server putting either both the GUA and ULA, or -better- only the ULA addresses in your LAN's DNS server? This Just Works™ on dnsmasq, which is one of the most widely-deployed DNS+DHCP servers on SoHo gear. [0] dnsmasq's default TTL for hosts added to the DHCP lease file appears to be 0, so -worst case- your sleepy computer tries to continue its conversation with the printer a couple of times, does ND and discovers that the IP it was using is gone, then looks up the hostname again and gets the new address of the printer. I think the trendy term for this back in the 2000s was "self-healing".

If you're going to retort "But we don't use dnsmasq in the companies I'm sometimes talking about!"... well, if you can't figure out how to not register upstream-controlled GUA addresses for your LAN hosts in your DNS, then do what dnsmasq does and serve them up with a TTL of 0.

[0] To head off the "Android doesn't really do DHCPv6" retort: Even though Android refuses to use anything other than DHCPv6-PD for managed address assignment, -AFAIK- Android still sends DHCPv6 ADDR_REG_INFORM messages for addresses it autogenerates on networks with either the "OtherConfig" or "Managed" flags set. I haven't bothered to set up my Linux systems to do this, but I'd be surprised if Windows and Darwin systems didn't do this.

[–] kstrauser 4 hours ago
> The 50% stat is really mostly mobile phones on cellular networks, which remain the _only_ major success story for IPv6.

The largest ISPs in the US are Comcast, AT&T, Charter, Verizon, T-Mobile, Starlink, and Google Fiber. They all support IPv6. The only top-10 US provide that didn't support it is Frontier Communications, who is rolling it out.

In other words, the biggest companies who actually do this for a living all demonstrate that you're wrong.

As to your questions, read up on IPv6 ULA which solves all of them. None of the hosts on my LAN depend on having an outbound connection.

[–] andix 6 hours ago
> For context: I deployed IPv6 in my networks in 2006. I have war stories.

Early IPv6 was a mess. It took a surprising amount of time for IPv6 to become mature and usable.

[–] cyberax 4 hours ago
I'd argue that it's still not mature. ULA/GUA mess is one example, I recommend reading this delightful thread with beer and popcorn: https://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/msg/v6ops/7-SuigPyP0R-C6ZC...

Having to waste 64 bits for the local part of the address is another one. There's an RFC in progress to allow neighbor discovery with shorter prefixes, so we might be able to use it by 2045.

And Android _still_ doesn't support DHCPv6.