2 ms·

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?

by teddyh 4y ago

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.
    - yrro 4y ago
      It's the switches job to drop traffic from rogue routers/DHCP servers. Look up RA Guard and DHCPv6 guard. You also need to worry about rogue DHCP(v4) servers too. DHCP Snooping takes care of that. If you're that paranoid then you also need to worry about IPv4 ARP and IPv6 ND attacks. Again, managed switches are required to drop unauthorized ARP and ND replies.
      - JohnFen 4y ago
        > Look up RA Guard and DHCPv6 guard. Yes, thank you. I'm aware of these features. I never claimed that my nervousness is rational. But it's very real. This is complex stuff, and since I haven't been working with IPv6 for decades, I can't shake the fear that I've made a configuration error and am not aware that I've made a configuration error.
JohnFen 4y ago
> IPv6 is less complex than IPv4. It is? It sure seems more complex to me in most ways. There are a couple of things that are simpler, but not many.
- teddyh 4y ago
  I think many people learned IPv4 at a relatively young age, and have internalized IPv4 as a natural part of the way the world works. But they were introduced to IPv6 late in their lives, and IPv6 therefore seems to be against the natural order of things. Of course, neither is true.

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?

by 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.
  - yrro 4y ago
    It's the switches job to drop traffic from rogue routers/DHCP servers. Look up RA Guard and DHCPv6 guard. You also need to worry about rogue DHCP(v4) servers too. DHCP Snooping takes care of that. If you're that paranoid then you also need to worry about IPv4 ARP and IPv6 ND attacks. Again, managed switches are required to drop unauthorized ARP and ND replies.
    - JohnFen 4y ago
      > Look up RA Guard and DHCPv6 guard. Yes, thank you. I'm aware of these features. I never claimed that my nervousness is rational. But it's very real. This is complex stuff, and since I haven't been working with IPv6 for decades, I can't shake the fear that I've made a configuration error and am not aware that I've made a configuration error.

JohnFen 4y ago

> IPv6 is less complex than IPv4. It is? It sure seems more complex to me in most ways. There are a couple of things that are simpler, but not many.

teddyh 4y ago
I think many people learned IPv4 at a relatively young age, and have internalized IPv4 as a natural part of the way the world works. But they were introduced to IPv6 late in their lives, and IPv6 therefore seems to be against the natural order of things. Of course, neither is true.