3 ms·

Sure, I don't have to, but everything in the stack assumes I would run it in the recommended way. I gave up trying to setup my LAN to support IPv6 after I wast

Sure, I don't have to, but everything in the stack assumes I would run it in the recommended way. I gave up trying to setup my LAN to support IPv6 after I wasted more than 2 hours on convincing my router, and devices behind it, to somehow work with the /128 address I got from my ISP. Should it be technically possible? Yes, definitely. Is there any value for me in spending a lot of time on it? No, there is not, everything is reachable on IPv4 anyway. This would not be a problem if it would be just bigger IPv4 and there still was NAT, DHCP and everything. But that is not the way you are expected to be doing IPv6...

oarsinsync 3y ago
> Sure, I don't have to, but everything in the stack assumes I would run it in the recommended way. > This would not be a problem if it would be just bigger IPv4 and there still was NAT, DHCP and everything. Irony, I remember life before DHCP/NAT44 defaults, and having to struggle so much to do it myself. Mind, this was 1997, and IPv6 was already a defined standard, which then never got any traction because NAT44 ended up being “good enough” for most people who didn’t think about what they lost in the process. > Should it be technically possible? Yes, definitely. Is there any value for me in spending a lot of time on it? There was a lot of value in me spending a lot of time and effort on setting up DHCP and NAT in my home environment in the 90s. Nobody else I knew thought it was worthwhile though, and thought I was insane. There was a lot of value in me spending a lot of time and effort on dual stacking my LAN too. I see a parallel here that’s amusing to me :-)
Dagger2 3y ago
That's because there are good reasons for running it in the recommended way. If you're going to go out of your way to run it in bad, unpopular ways instead then it's on you to get devices that support what you're trying to do. (For example, squid on Linux would do it just fine, whereas some random consumer WiFi/switch/router combo thing is probably not going to go far outside of its basic functionality.) Instead of giving up, I'd suggest doing it the normal way -- do DHCPv6-PD to get a routed prefix, use that on the LAN and route to the Internet. On most v6-capable routers that's the default and will happen automatically, and it would be hard to make it easier to roll out than that.

oarsinsync 3y ago

> Sure, I don't have to, but everything in the stack assumes I would run it in the recommended way. > This would not be a problem if it would be just bigger IPv4 and there still was NAT, DHCP and everything. Irony, I remember life before DHCP/NAT44 defaults, and having to struggle so much to do it myself. Mind, this was 1997, and IPv6 was already a defined standard, which then never got any traction because NAT44 ended up being “good enough” for most people who didn’t think about what they lost in the process. > Should it be technically possible? Yes, definitely. Is there any value for me in spending a lot of time on it? There was a lot of value in me spending a lot of time and effort on setting up DHCP and NAT in my home environment in the 90s. Nobody else I knew thought it was worthwhile though, and thought I was insane. There was a lot of value in me spending a lot of time and effort on dual stacking my LAN too. I see a parallel here that’s amusing to me :-)

Dagger2 3y ago

That's because there are good reasons for running it in the recommended way. If you're going to go out of your way to run it in bad, unpopular ways instead then it's on you to get devices that support what you're trying to do. (For example, squid on Linux would do it just fine, whereas some random consumer WiFi/switch/router combo thing is probably not going to go far outside of its basic functionality.) Instead of giving up, I'd suggest doing it the normal way -- do DHCPv6-PD to get a routed prefix, use that on the LAN and route to the Internet. On most v6-capable routers that's the default and will happen automatically, and it would be hard to make it easier to roll out than that.