18 ms·
I wonder if Amazon could make a significant impact on ipv6 uptake if they offered a very generous ipv6 only tier.
by crummy 5y ago
I wonder if Amazon could make a significant impact on ipv6 uptake if they offered a very generous ipv6 only tier.
- jeroenhd 5y agoIf Amazon will make an impact, I think it'll be because IPv6 addresses follow the standard rates and IPv4 addresses will get more expensive. Cannibalising reserved address space like 127.0.0.0/8 will only get the IPv4 internet so far. Eventually, the scarcity of IP addresses will make IPv6 the more business-conscious choice for many applications (like API endpoints and other services that you call from your own infrastructure where you can ensure IPv6 availability). Maybe the free tier will eventually stop coming with an IPv4 address, that might also push them over the edge.
- ayushnix 5y ago> Cannibalising reserved address space like 127.0.0.0/8 will only get the IPv4 internet so far. Eventually, the scarcity of IP addresses will make IPv6 the more business-conscious choice for many applications The decision to consume loopback address space has made me even more cynical about IPv6 ever becoming mainstream within my lifetime. Using IPv4 is like using fossil fuels — we know that they are going to run out/cause us harm and yet we keep using them. I don't know of a single ISP in my country which offers functional IPv6. All they do is offer CGNAT IPv4 addresses, which offers a crippled experience of the Internet.
- 1ris 5y agoI don't know what you mean by "mainstream", but what I understand by it ipv6 is mainstream since quite a while. It has an adoption rate of around 50% in the western world and signifiant places outside of it (SA,India, Thailand, Vietnam, Japan, Brazil)
- ayushnix 5y agoI don't know of a single ISP in India which offers functional IPv6 in broadband connections. I won't consider 4G because it's almost useless (at least in India) for doing anything serious.
- lanna 5y ago> in the western world and signifiant places outside of it (SA,India, Thailand, Vietnam, Japan, Brazil) Brazil is western
- franga2000 5y agoThis will be controversial, but: I think the EU should set a deadline for IPv6 adoption to ISPs and impose fines afterwards. They seem to be legislating all kinds of crazy things (like type C connectors), so it's quite within the realm of possibility, and unlike some other things, there really isn't a way they can screw this up. Rationale: It's in the custoners' best interest to have unique publically routable addresses and without IPv6 we'll be stuck with CGNAT. The providers don't care, because rollout is expensive. So, for the good of the customer, legislation with fines is needed to better align the financial incentives.
- roenxi 5y agoIf it is good for a customer then the provider will care. The customer will switch ISPs to those that support IPv6. Then the IPv4-only providers will get less money.
- franga2000 5y agoSure, if you ask an economist. But here in the real world, switching ISPs is hard (fees, lack of competition, replacing gear...) and the benefit of IPv6 isn't apparent yet to most people. By the time it becomes, it'll be too late and nobody will have it yet, so there won't be anywhere to switch anyways. There's a reason we have consumer protection regulation and much of it came as a result of situations where evryone thought, as you do, that the market/competition would solve the problem, but of course it didn't. That only happens in ideal markets where switching providers is trivial, the consumer is equally informed about all of them and the providers (and perhaps customers too) have equal economic power.
- roenxi 5y ago> But here in the real world... Your starting point was that any ISP who doesn't implement your preferred technical standard should be fined. With a disregard for whether IPv6 makes sense for them or their customers. You might detect a little pushback here on the idea that your ideas are real world. Laissez faire is a very practical approach. > By the time it becomes, it'll be too late and nobody will have it yet, so there won't be anywhere to switch anyways. A crisis so terrible I can't even imagine it. Nobody outside some fairly obscure tech circles would even notice. Imagine if they'd taken this approach rolling out IPv4 and weren't fast enough to change the legislation. The rollout of IPv6 would look really hard if IPv4 was a legislated requirement. The EU just isn't a competent technical standards body, and it has no business trying to be one because a couple of tech types like IPv6. > That only happens in ideal markets where switching providers is trivial... I switched providers to get IPv6 support. It was pretty trivial.
- koolba 5y ago> The decision to consume loopback address space has made me even more cynical about IPv6 ever becoming mainstream within my lifetime. Wait what? Are you saying that they’re going to allocate the loopback range as v4 addresses?
- zozbot234 5y agoThe proposal is about shrinking the reserved loopback range from 127.0.0.0/8 to 127.0.0.0/16. Everything from 127.1 to 127.255 would then become ordinary IPv4 addresses.
- icedchai 5y agoThis is just a proposal. It will likely never happen. The proposal to open 240/4 (former class-E / reserved IPv4 space) is more feasible.
- ericbarrett 5y agoCan't see this being useful. There are so many devices and so much software with 127.0.0.0/8 baked in that I suspect an address in the proposed range would be less routable (overall) than an IPv6-only endpoint, and remain so for years, even if it became official.
- cesarb 5y ago> Are you saying that they’re going to allocate the loopback range as v4 addresses? Yes, there's a proposal to do so, which was discussed here last week (https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=29246420 https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=29246420 and https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=29245466 https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=29245466).
- School-Cotton 5y agoIPv6 is already mainstream in many countries, including the United States.
- k8sToGo 5y agoDoes it really matter for the adoption if at the end you are using an ELB with an IPv4 anyways?
- X-Istence 5y agoRight now you have a choice in how you configure your network: 1. IPv4 private with NAT gateway and ELB dual stack providing IPv4/IPv6 for clients 2. IPv4 private with 1:1 ephemeral IP (avoids the NAT gateway tax, but now every VM gets a public IPv4 address) and ELB dual stack providing IPv4/IPv6 for clients 3. IPv6 globally unique with no IPv4 and ELB dual stack providing IPv4/IPv6 for clients With option 1 you end up paying money for the NAT gateway for any outbound traffic instantiated from the instance (not return traffic through the ELB), this costs you 2 IPv4 addresses (1 for NAT gateway, one for the ELB, ignore AZ's and HA for now) With option 2 you end up not paying for the NAT gateway, but get a free IPv4 address per VM, so N VM's + 1 ELB IPv4 address is N + 1 IPv4 addresses. (NAT Gateways are expensive, even if you have one sitting mostly idle, and don't forget cross AZ traffic if you have only one NAT gateway but instances in multiple AZ's, or you need to spin up multiple NAT gateways). With option 3 you end up not paying for the NAT gateway, nor do you use a public IPv4 address. This might not work if your instance needs to reach IPv4 parts of the internet, but if its just API servers that communicate internally, they likely don't need to and can use IPv6 for the remaining traffic. Now you have just 1 IPv4 address on the ELB. If AWS were able to incentivize its customers to deploy their systems in an IPv6 only configuration this would put pressure on the publishers of software to make sure their systems are IPv6 enabled so that their customers could download it, and it would reduce the amount of public IPv4 addresses that are required across AWS as a whole. Running an IPv6 only core is entirely possible, and makes sense. No more worrying about overlapping IP space (having worked at two companies where they ran out of RFC1918 space and you had to deal with multiple hops to get into various networks, which is no fun), thus simplifying network management.
- mschuster91 5y ago> having worked at two companies where they ran out of RFC1918 space I get running out of 192.168.0.0/16, that is easy enough if you have a lot of locations and one /24 per location. But how in earth does one run out of 10.0.0.0/8 IPs, outside of a company merger?!
- austincheney 5y agoNot likely. Greater adoption of IPv6 generally comes down to only one thing: replacing physical equipment. The only thing likely to force that is greater demand from consumer applications, which has not yet occurred.
- kazen44 5y agowhat? IPv6 has been supported by major telecomunication equipment manufacturers for nearly 2 and a half decades by now. It is just a matter of getting an inet6 prefix from your RIR/LIR, and configuring it in your network. IPv6 is not hard nor is it difficult to implement, and its nitty gritty details are actually far more logically sound then IPv4. (ARP is a major paint point for instance in large networks, so is IP broadcast traffic). Most large WAN networks have a core which is either label switched (MPLS) and this doesn't care about anything in regards to the protocol which it is transporting, or is doing dual stack already.
- austincheney 5y agoHow many residences are IPv6 first? How many countries prioritize IPv6 in their consumer electronics? My house is IPv6 first only because my ISP mandates such.
- daper 5y agoGenerally agree, for basic configuration it just works. But I was planning to use IPv6 in some network segments in my company. Providing proper VPN (road warrior style) for employees to access such network isn't simple with IPv6 where every address is routable over internet. Morver Fortigate devices we have don't have such functionality.
- nobody9999 5y ago>It is just a matter of getting an inet6 prefix from your RIR/LIR, and configuring it in your network Which is easier said than done. Since my ISP won't provide me with IPv6, requesting a block from my RIR is my only option. However, I don't meet the requirements[0] for getting a block directly from an RIR (in my case, ARIN). In fact, unless you have a fairly large internet-facing presence, RIR's won't even give you the time of day: Have an IPv4 assignment from ARIN or one of its predecessors Intend to immediately be IPv6 multi-homed Have 13 end sites (offices, data centers, etc.) within one year Use 2,000 IPv6 addresses within one year Use 200 /64 subnets within one year [0] https://www.arin.net/resources/guide/ipv6/first_request/#enduser https://www.arin.net/resources/guide/ipv6/first_request/#end... Edit: Note that the requirements listed above are for end users not service providers.
- vbezhenar 5y agoAmazon buys lots of IPv4 addresses. That's like land: they're not produced anymore. They have all the incentives to keep IPv4 alive to protect their investments.
- dodobirdlord 5y agoThey don’t need to do any work to keep IPv4 alive, the rest of the world will happily do that for them. Amazon couldn’t kill IPv4 if they tried.
- theneworc 5y agoIPv4 isn't an "investment" for Amazon. They didn't buy them up with the hope that the price will increase and they'll make a profit. They buy more IPv4 addresses because they need those addresses to continue serving customers. They will likely never, ever sell those IPv4 addresses. And what's more, they will need to continue to buy more IPv4 addresses as they grow and their customers needs for address space grow. Amazon actually has an incentive for IPv4 to become less expensive so that further purchases of addresses are less costly to their business. And the best two ways to do that are: 1) encourage adoption to IPv6 so that IPv4 becomes less expensive and 2) encourage adoption of IPv6 so that Amazon needs to buy less IPv4 addresses.
- fomine3 5y agoIt's like real estates, they rent services build upon IPv4 addresses.
- 2ion 5y agoWhere I work now, not likely, because we have hundreds of AWS accounts, VPC peering and private VPC access only over VPN, which can to my knowledge only route IPv4...
- zozbot234 5y agoYou only need a single public IPv4 address to bridge connections to your VPC, though. Everything else can now be IPv6 only.
- Navarr 5y agoI think for a long time the only thing that will push IPv6 uptake will be legislation. ISPs don't want to implement it because their customers aren't pushing them to, because websites aren't typically IPv6-only, because that's a terrible business model. So unless we force or incentivize ISPs to implement IPv6 access through law, it's going to be a long time before we hit the breaking point where something HAS to be done by ISPs
- count 5y agoLOL. IPv6 usage has been mandated by legislation for years for the Federal Govt. in the US. And yet....mostly no adoption.
- ramshanker 5y agoIndia has mandated IPv6 for all existing or new internet connection by Dec 2022.
- nanis 5y ago> I think for a long time the only thing that will push IPv6 uptake will be legislation. Is it really such a great idea to force every single device on the internet to be globally uniquely identifiable?
- kd913 5y agoYes it is. We have run out of ipv4 addresses, CGNATs cause problems with self-hosting, ipv4 allocations are not fair and are driving up the cost of infrastructure/access. Particularly problematic in developing Countries. Security is not an argument, ipv6 firewalls have existed for a long period now. If we want to make the internet to scale then we need to encourage the use of ipv6.
- acdha 5y agoIs that really what's happening? It gives each device an address which is unique at the time but those devices get new addresses periodically when the network configuration changes, they roam networks, etc. and there's no global registry linking addresses to people or even the same device. From another angle, most people are walking around with a globally-unique identifier (IMEI) in their pocket with all kinds of sensors. Does using IPv6 materially change the situation for any attacker?
- Hamuko 5y agoSo you get a discount on your AWS resources and the only downside is that two out of three people cannot reach your services? https://www.google.com/intl/en/ipv6/statistics.html https://www.google.com/intl/en/ipv6/statistics.html
- Shadonototra 5y agoEC2 ipv6 SHOULD be cheaper, ipv4 cost a lot because they are becoming scarce ipv6 much cheaper if they don't then they should be ashamed