5 ms·
> A few people mentioned that it’s much easier to use IPv6 with home servers – instead of having to do port forwarding through your router, you can just give ev
by ugjka 5y ago
> A few people mentioned that it’s much easier to use IPv6 with home servers – instead of having to do port forwarding through your router, you can just give every server a unique IPv6 address and then access it directly.
My ISP firewalls IPV6 addresses on their end, so no ssh to my IPV6 Machines from the outside, not even ping works. I don't know why they do this
- dspillett 5y agoA lot of residential ISPs block certain incoming traffic (any that doesn't seem to be part of a stream originated at the user side in some cases) by default because many home users who have something open did not open it intentionally themselves so it could be an insured attack vector.
- davidmurdoch 5y agoThey likely still sell static ipv4 addresses, which made sense back in the day, but ipv6 doesn't work with the existing monetization model. I had the same sort of issue and when I called about it they tried to upsell me to a business account.
- kijin 5y agoUnless you have a gazillion servers at home, port forwarding through a router is fairly simple and has the additional benefit of a rudimentary firewall. So there isn't a clearly visible benefit for most people. Most people can't even tell whether they're behind carrier-grade NAT. It makes no tangible difference in their lives. Techies like you and I can appreciate the technical arguments, but if we want to convince anybody else who can actually make decisions for large numbers of ordinary people, we're going to need better arguments.
- zekica 5y agoBut this is only because everything mainstream that is P2P uses some kind of a centralized relay server. P2P would be much much cheaper for everyone if everyone used IPv6, so it makes a difference.
- kijin 5y agoTell that to management. As soon as they hear "P2P" they will decide to perpetuate the status quo that makes P2P hard, because P2P is evil and illegal in their books. And we sit here wondering why the powers that be are not interested in faster IPv6 adoption. Few if any of the reasons we exchange on HN have any bearing outside of this bubble. A typical business in 2022 still has no incentive to embrace IPv6, facilitate P2P, or make the internet more decentralized.
- tsimionescu 5y agoHow would you facilitate P2P in an IPv6 world? Do you stop using a firewall and just let anyone open connections to your machine on any port from the internet? If not, how do you allow connections from peers but not random botnets? Not to mention, would you really use IPv6 addresses that your ISP assigns for your internal network as a business? Do you really want to re-IP everything if you find a way to switch ISPs?
- spookthesunset 5y ago> P2P would be much much cheaper for everyone if everyone used IPv6, so it makes a difference. I dunno how true that is gonna be. P2P clients will still have to traverse a firewall that may do deep packet inspection. A lot of the problems faced by P2P will still exist even in a pure IPv6 world.
- tsimionescu 5y ago> P2P would be much much cheaper for everyone if everyone used IPv6, so it makes a difference. How would P2P work any different in an IPv6 world? You still need to open a port for each incoming connection, which still isn't secure unless the target machine is explicitly requesting this.
- nrabulinski 5y agoI don’t get the “firewall” argument. You can use the firewall the same way with v6 as you do with v4, only allow incoming traffic on specific ports, just minus the NAT which makes everything simpler and better for everyone
- iso1631 5y agoWith nat you have to configure the firewall part and the nat part. That's two separate parts of your config you have to cock up in the same way to let a packet through.