5 ms·

> IPv6 is such a mess. Maybe. > If I could go back in time to 1995 I would kick some people at IETF meetings. Sure. But how is any of that relevant enough t

by teddyh 4y ago

> IPv6 is such a mess. Maybe. > If I could go back in time to 1995 I would kick some people at IETF meetings. Sure. But how is any of that relevant enough to bring up today? Now, IPv6 is what we have, and the standards are what they are, flaws and all. The only reason I can think of is psychological: People don’t want to learn new things, so they find reasons to dislike the new thing to be able to pretend they don’t need to learn it. 1. https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=29594017 https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=29594017 2. https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=11137430 https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=11137430

magicalhippo 4y ago
But that's the thing. I don't want to be a network engineer. I just want my devices connected. Yet IPv6 is very complex with tons of moving parts compared to IPv4, and a lot of it works very differently so I can't rely on my existing IPv4 knowledge. In fact it frequently a hinderance.
- bauruine 4y ago
  >I just want my devices connected. Which IPv6 does pretty well even if you aren't a network engineer. More than 40% of all requests to google are from IPv6 and the vast majority of those connections are from people that never heard of IPv6.
  - magicalhippo 4y ago
    Well I had to do some deep dives to get IPv6 working, and it really didn't work until I got rid of pfSense and switched to OpenWRT. I'm not just talking about connected to Google, I mean to each other. So ULA, DNS, DHCPv6 vs SLAAC etc is in play.
  - JohnFen 4y ago
    > Which IPv6 does pretty well even if you aren't a network engineer. Outside of smartphones (in the US, apparently), moving from IPv4 to IPv6 is genuinely painful and often requires deeper knowledge of networking to accomplish. Yes, if you're using a smartphone or your needs are otherwise trivial (for instance, you don't have a real network at home but just have one or two devices connected to your modem), then none of this is a big deal. But outside of that, things can be very different.
    - bauruine 4y ago
      We have millions of customers of which most don't know what an IP is. They mostly have a standard network, wired PCs, wifi devices, consoles etc. like 99% of all people. They browse facebook and instagram, search on google and watch youtube videos all over IPv6 without even knowing. Yes there where network engineers involved to make this work but without some engineers you wouldn't have IPv4 either.
      - JohnFen 4y ago
        > They mostly have a standard network, wired PCs, wifi devices, consoles etc. like 99% of all people. Right. Those are the "trivial" cases I mentioned.
        bauruine 4y ago
        Setting up a non trivial network requires a deep understanding of networkig whether it is v4 or v6. I don't get your point.
        JohnFen 4y ago
        The IPv4 knowledge already exists. For people who aren't network engineers, the fact that they have to learn an entirely new, complex, networking protocol and associated services is a huge pain point. I think a lot of actual experts really underestimate how much friction that presents. And that level of pain means that those people are very resistant to moving to IPv6. That was the only point I was making.
        bauruine 4y ago
        Valid point but all those "not network engineers" that build networks can either fight it or implement it. Either way they have to learn it because they get exposed to it at least passively as the article calls it.
        4y ago
- teddyh 4y ago
  IPv6 is less complex than IPv4. > I can't rely on my existing IPv4 knowledge. So you are a network engineer, but you just don’t want to move with the times?
  - magicalhippo 4y ago
    > IPv6 is less complex than IPv4. In my experience, that depends highly on what you want to accomplish. For example, tell me how much less complex it is to inform a device on the network of what the address of the NTP server is in IPv6 compared to the IPv4 address. Assume you rely entirely on SLAAC, because that's the preferred way, or so they said. > So you are a network engineer, but you just don’t want to move with the times? I don't call myself a baker just because I can make a loaf of bread, but I then I've never been one to over-inflate my CV... It's not like I don't want to move with the times, but I find IPv6 quite complex and rough around the edges in practice, especially for a homelab network.
    - yrro 4y ago
      > Assume you rely entirely on SLAAC, because that's the preferred way, or so they said. Who's "they"? I think RA for addressing/DNS and stateless DHCPv6 for everything else is the way to go these days.
      - magicalhippo 4y ago
        Right, and how is that less complex than IPv4? Now you got two separate protocols to manage something you do in one place in IPv4.
      - JohnFen 4y ago
        RA makes me extremely nervous. I am never quite confident that I haven't made a simple mistake that opens me up to rogue RA advertisements. But SLAAC makes me equally nervous. If/when I shift my home network to IPv6, I'll probably just go with static routing to avoid both of them.
        4y ago
JohnFen 4y ago
> The only reason I can think of is psychological I am not opposed to IPv6 in any way, but I'm also delaying changing my home network to IPv6 for as long as possible. It's not from fear of change or not wanting to learn new things at all (I know IPv6 as well as I know IPv4). It's just that making that change is a whole lot of work, and IPv6 doesn't bring any benefit to me that I care about. I'll put in that effort when the situation changes and I get some benefit from it.

by teddyh 4y ago

magicalhippo 4y ago

But that's the thing. I don't want to be a network engineer. I just want my devices connected. Yet IPv6 is very complex with tons of moving parts compared to IPv4, and a lot of it works very differently so I can't rely on my existing IPv4 knowledge. In fact it frequently a hinderance.

bauruine 4y ago
>I just want my devices connected. Which IPv6 does pretty well even if you aren't a network engineer. More than 40% of all requests to google are from IPv6 and the vast majority of those connections are from people that never heard of IPv6.
- magicalhippo 4y ago
  Well I had to do some deep dives to get IPv6 working, and it really didn't work until I got rid of pfSense and switched to OpenWRT. I'm not just talking about connected to Google, I mean to each other. So ULA, DNS, DHCPv6 vs SLAAC etc is in play.
- JohnFen 4y ago
  > Which IPv6 does pretty well even if you aren't a network engineer. Outside of smartphones (in the US, apparently), moving from IPv4 to IPv6 is genuinely painful and often requires deeper knowledge of networking to accomplish. Yes, if you're using a smartphone or your needs are otherwise trivial (for instance, you don't have a real network at home but just have one or two devices connected to your modem), then none of this is a big deal. But outside of that, things can be very different.
  - bauruine 4y ago
    We have millions of customers of which most don't know what an IP is. They mostly have a standard network, wired PCs, wifi devices, consoles etc. like 99% of all people. They browse facebook and instagram, search on google and watch youtube videos all over IPv6 without even knowing. Yes there where network engineers involved to make this work but without some engineers you wouldn't have IPv4 either.
    - JohnFen 4y ago
      > They mostly have a standard network, wired PCs, wifi devices, consoles etc. like 99% of all people. Right. Those are the "trivial" cases I mentioned.
      - bauruine 4y ago
        Setting up a non trivial network requires a deep understanding of networkig whether it is v4 or v6. I don't get your point.
        JohnFen 4y ago
        The IPv4 knowledge already exists. For people who aren't network engineers, the fact that they have to learn an entirely new, complex, networking protocol and associated services is a huge pain point. I think a lot of actual experts really underestimate how much friction that presents. And that level of pain means that those people are very resistant to moving to IPv6. That was the only point I was making.
        bauruine 4y ago
        Valid point but all those "not network engineers" that build networks can either fight it or implement it. Either way they have to learn it because they get exposed to it at least passively as the article calls it.
        4y ago
teddyh 4y ago
IPv6 is less complex than IPv4. > I can't rely on my existing IPv4 knowledge. So you are a network engineer, but you just don’t want to move with the times?
- magicalhippo 4y ago
  > IPv6 is less complex than IPv4. In my experience, that depends highly on what you want to accomplish. For example, tell me how much less complex it is to inform a device on the network of what the address of the NTP server is in IPv6 compared to the IPv4 address. Assume you rely entirely on SLAAC, because that's the preferred way, or so they said. > So you are a network engineer, but you just don’t want to move with the times? I don't call myself a baker just because I can make a loaf of bread, but I then I've never been one to over-inflate my CV... It's not like I don't want to move with the times, but I find IPv6 quite complex and rough around the edges in practice, especially for a homelab network.
  - yrro 4y ago
    > Assume you rely entirely on SLAAC, because that's the preferred way, or so they said. Who's "they"? I think RA for addressing/DNS and stateless DHCPv6 for everything else is the way to go these days.
    - magicalhippo 4y ago
      Right, and how is that less complex than IPv4? Now you got two separate protocols to manage something you do in one place in IPv4.
    - JohnFen 4y ago
      RA makes me extremely nervous. I am never quite confident that I haven't made a simple mistake that opens me up to rogue RA advertisements. But SLAAC makes me equally nervous. If/when I shift my home network to IPv6, I'll probably just go with static routing to avoid both of them.
      - 4y ago

JohnFen 4y ago

> The only reason I can think of is psychological I am not opposed to IPv6 in any way, but I'm also delaying changing my home network to IPv6 for as long as possible. It's not from fear of change or not wanting to learn new things at all (I know IPv6 as well as I know IPv4). It's just that making that change is a whole lot of work, and IPv6 doesn't bring any benefit to me that I care about. I'll put in that effort when the situation changes and I get some benefit from it.