2 ms·

I would definitely shorten IPv6. If IPv6 had been 64-bit it would already have replaced IPv4. The loooooooong addresses are a huge usability problem, and usabil

by api 6y ago

I would definitely shorten IPv6. If IPv6 had been 64-bit it would already have replaced IPv4. The loooooooong addresses are a huge usability problem, and usability is the largest influencing component for adoption. Advocates seem to respond by saying "use DNS," which shows me that they've never really done any IT work or are forgetting their experience. Every IT person knows "its always DNS." When DNS is down, the first thing you have to do is type IPs. You also have to type IPs a lot when setting things up, often on keyboards hanging off things in data centers and other inconvenient spots. Don't get me started on embedded stuff. If IPv6 continues to stall, I think it might be worth introducing an RFC to retroactively shorten it. You'd leave the addresses the same really but you'd re-interpret the first 64 bits as the IP and the last 64 bits as a kind of extended port field. Specifying those bits is optional and they default to zero. Then change assignment recommendations so every ISP endpoint gets at least a /48 (/40 preferred, /32 for business and larger links) and deprecate SLAAC in favor of DHCP6. Lastly change the representation to something like: feed.d00d.dead.beef[.deadbeefcafebabe] (that's valid hex for anyone who doesn't know that's valid hex) Anything whose least significant bits are all zero like feed.d00d.0.0 would of course be an IPv4 address.

zrm 6y ago
There are various ways to make this less painful. To start with, use anycast DNS so you don't have to type the address of your DNS server(s) into anything, and have a local DNS server with your local names in it so they all still work even if upstream is down. Then give important machines simple addresses. Assigning your DHCP server [network prefix]::3 and your file server [network prefix]::4 instead of [network prefix]:[64-bit random number] simplifies things a lot. You can also do this with link-local addresses, so then your local file server can be accessed as fe80::4, or something not too far away from that with ULAs if it's not on the same network segment, e.g. fc00:abcd::4.
- api 6y ago
  That sounds complex. That's fine for large operations or operations with deep technical talent, but what about the vast majority of people who have less expertise and less time/resources to deploy complex configurations? Also what about the vast, vast number of cases where you want to address private backplane networks and do things like "ping 10.0.0.2"? People still largely use V4 there even if they have V6 because V6 is too inconvenient. DNS fixes this problem on connected, configured systems when everything is working property. It does not fix the problem when there are issues or when things are being set up, developed with, debugged, etc.
  - zrm 6y ago
    Private backplane networks would presumably be using static ULAs. What's so hard about "ping fc00:abcd::2"? > what about the vast majority of people who have less expertise and less time/resources to deploy complex configurations? "Simple things should be simple and complex things should be possible." There exist IPv6 ISPs that give you a modem/router that you plug your stuff into and there is nothing else to configure. They could all do that. That covers the large majority of people who just want to internet as quickly as possible. If you want to have complex internal subnets and backplane networks and things like that, this is a thing that requires technical knowledge to begin with. I suspect the reason people continue to use IPv4 for such things is simply that they're more familiar with it and it still works. And so what's wrong with that? The primary advantage of IPv6 is that it gives every device a globally routed address. It still does that if people carry on using dual stack with IPv4 until the end of time. Or however many decades until IPv6 has enough penetration that people have gotten used to it and start to turn IPv4 off. You can use IPv6 long before IPv4 ceases to exist.
GoblinSlayer 6y ago
If data center doesn't have remote access that's bad, yeah.

by api 6y ago

zrm 6y ago

There are various ways to make this less painful. To start with, use anycast DNS so you don't have to type the address of your DNS server(s) into anything, and have a local DNS server with your local names in it so they all still work even if upstream is down. Then give important machines simple addresses. Assigning your DHCP server [network prefix]::3 and your file server [network prefix]::4 instead of [network prefix]:[64-bit random number] simplifies things a lot. You can also do this with link-local addresses, so then your local file server can be accessed as fe80::4, or something not too far away from that with ULAs if it's not on the same network segment, e.g. fc00:abcd::4.

api 6y ago
That sounds complex. That's fine for large operations or operations with deep technical talent, but what about the vast majority of people who have less expertise and less time/resources to deploy complex configurations? Also what about the vast, vast number of cases where you want to address private backplane networks and do things like "ping 10.0.0.2"? People still largely use V4 there even if they have V6 because V6 is too inconvenient. DNS fixes this problem on connected, configured systems when everything is working property. It does not fix the problem when there are issues or when things are being set up, developed with, debugged, etc.
- zrm 6y ago
  Private backplane networks would presumably be using static ULAs. What's so hard about "ping fc00:abcd::2"? > what about the vast majority of people who have less expertise and less time/resources to deploy complex configurations? "Simple things should be simple and complex things should be possible." There exist IPv6 ISPs that give you a modem/router that you plug your stuff into and there is nothing else to configure. They could all do that. That covers the large majority of people who just want to internet as quickly as possible. If you want to have complex internal subnets and backplane networks and things like that, this is a thing that requires technical knowledge to begin with. I suspect the reason people continue to use IPv4 for such things is simply that they're more familiar with it and it still works. And so what's wrong with that? The primary advantage of IPv6 is that it gives every device a globally routed address. It still does that if people carry on using dual stack with IPv4 until the end of time. Or however many decades until IPv6 has enough penetration that people have gotten used to it and start to turn IPv4 off. You can use IPv6 long before IPv4 ceases to exist.

GoblinSlayer 6y ago

If data center doesn't have remote access that's bad, yeah.