3 ms·

And certainly on local networks. It's way more convenient to work with. The only thing I can see replacing it is if something I'll call "easyip" came around -

And certainly on local networks. It's way more convenient to work with. The only thing I can see replacing it is if something I'll call "easyip" came around - something even more convenient than ipv4 for networks of under, say a few hundred devices

dilyevsky 3y ago
> It's way more convenient to work with. Only if you’re not the one who’s responsible for designing and managing cidr allocations
- kristopolous 3y ago
  We're talking local here. Once you get to the gateway, you can go ipv6 but the iot camera, cups printer and smart plug is perfectly happy in the world of 192.168 Again, the only replacement I can foresee is for an address schema that either doesn't pretend to even attempt global space or has a UUID scheme where network addresses are immutable, globally unique and inviolable. This would potentially simplify an iot world if the addresses are known, globally unique and static.
  - dilyevsky 3y ago
    > Again, the only replacement I can foresee is for an address schema that either doesn't pretend to even attempt global space or has a UUID scheme where network addresses are immutable, globally unique and inviolable. You mean like IPv6 ULA? =)
    - kristopolous 3y ago
      I just read the Wikipedia on that. No. Currently when you get an iot device you usually connect to it through the smartphone, tell it your Wi-Fi hotspot, give it the password and have it go online. Instead there could be a flow of going to the routers interface, select "scan new qr code" and you add the device that way - more realistically this would be done through the "myspectrum" or equivalent app as the isp usually issues the modem/hotspot for the majority of consumers. A number of things would have to change to make that possible but it's a much easier setup flow and it likely requires less complex software on the device itself.
      - dilyevsky 3y ago
        It sounds like you're trying to re-implement IPv6 Neighbor Discovery using qr codes. I really don't see the point of this or how it relates to private networking. If you want really simple solution on device itself, just let it NDP for router info and drop any incoming SYN that's not already in the conntrack table or part of the ULA space. Boom - done.
darby_eight 3y ago
Genuine question—how are ip4 local networks any easier to administrate with ip4 than ip6? Ip6 seems like it has the same capabilities but without the misery of a constrictive address space and its solution, NAT. Hell, if I could DISABLE ip4 locally on my router it'd only make my life easier. (The only answer that makes sense here is supporting legacy devices, which will probably be a problem we'll have to deal with for the rest of our lives. Thankfully I don't appear to have any such devices on my network!)
- apitman 3y ago
  Can't speak for GP but I regularly type IPv4 addresses manually. That probably makes me a heathen but it just feels easier a lot of the time.
  - labcomputer 3y ago
    "fc12:3456::1", "fc12:3456::2", "fc12:3456::3", etc, seem pretty easy to type, no? It's literally one extra character compared to "192.168.0.1" Not that I'm advocating anyone use that particular subnet of fc00::/7 for their local network.
    - apitman 3y ago
      Some IPv6 addresses are easy to type but all IPv4 are.
    - cchance 3y ago
      #1 issue ... you've gotta hold shift for : it's a minor annoyance but it's an annoyance lol that you have to do 3 times even in those nice short addresses
- JohnFen 3y ago
  Can't speak for the commenter, but I'm not personally planning on shifting my LAN to IPv6 because doing that is a heavy lift (made worse by having many IPv4-only devices), and IPv6 doesn't bring anything to my LAN that I want or need. It's as simple as that. I dual-stack for my internet gateway.
derkades 3y ago
My main problem with IPv6-only on local networks is static IP assignment. With NAT (IPv4 or IPv6) I could assign my own addresses to devices, which could remain the same forever even when changing ISPs. This is not possible when using IPv6 GUAs via PD.
- Volundr 3y ago
  Can't you use ULA addresses for this?
  - derkades 3y ago
    Yes, I could assign every device a ULA with NAT. That would defeat a major selling point of IPv6. An alternative would be to assign both a GUA and ULA to every device, via DHCPv6 and SLAAC. However, not all devices support this. For example Android doesn't support DHCPv6 and NetworkManager doesn't seem to support multiple auto configuration methods

dilyevsky 3y ago

> It's way more convenient to work with. Only if you’re not the one who’s responsible for designing and managing cidr allocations

kristopolous 3y ago
We're talking local here. Once you get to the gateway, you can go ipv6 but the iot camera, cups printer and smart plug is perfectly happy in the world of 192.168 Again, the only replacement I can foresee is for an address schema that either doesn't pretend to even attempt global space or has a UUID scheme where network addresses are immutable, globally unique and inviolable. This would potentially simplify an iot world if the addresses are known, globally unique and static.
- dilyevsky 3y ago
  > Again, the only replacement I can foresee is for an address schema that either doesn't pretend to even attempt global space or has a UUID scheme where network addresses are immutable, globally unique and inviolable. You mean like IPv6 ULA? =)
  - kristopolous 3y ago
    I just read the Wikipedia on that. No. Currently when you get an iot device you usually connect to it through the smartphone, tell it your Wi-Fi hotspot, give it the password and have it go online. Instead there could be a flow of going to the routers interface, select "scan new qr code" and you add the device that way - more realistically this would be done through the "myspectrum" or equivalent app as the isp usually issues the modem/hotspot for the majority of consumers. A number of things would have to change to make that possible but it's a much easier setup flow and it likely requires less complex software on the device itself.
    - dilyevsky 3y ago
      It sounds like you're trying to re-implement IPv6 Neighbor Discovery using qr codes. I really don't see the point of this or how it relates to private networking. If you want really simple solution on device itself, just let it NDP for router info and drop any incoming SYN that's not already in the conntrack table or part of the ULA space. Boom - done.

darby_eight 3y ago

Genuine question—how are ip4 local networks any easier to administrate with ip4 than ip6? Ip6 seems like it has the same capabilities but without the misery of a constrictive address space and its solution, NAT. Hell, if I could DISABLE ip4 locally on my router it'd only make my life easier. (The only answer that makes sense here is supporting legacy devices, which will probably be a problem we'll have to deal with for the rest of our lives. Thankfully I don't appear to have any such devices on my network!)

apitman 3y ago
Can't speak for GP but I regularly type IPv4 addresses manually. That probably makes me a heathen but it just feels easier a lot of the time.
- labcomputer 3y ago
  "fc12:3456::1", "fc12:3456::2", "fc12:3456::3", etc, seem pretty easy to type, no? It's literally one extra character compared to "192.168.0.1" Not that I'm advocating anyone use that particular subnet of fc00::/7 for their local network.
  - apitman 3y ago
    Some IPv6 addresses are easy to type but all IPv4 are.
  - cchance 3y ago
    #1 issue ... you've gotta hold shift for : it's a minor annoyance but it's an annoyance lol that you have to do 3 times even in those nice short addresses
JohnFen 3y ago
Can't speak for the commenter, but I'm not personally planning on shifting my LAN to IPv6 because doing that is a heavy lift (made worse by having many IPv4-only devices), and IPv6 doesn't bring anything to my LAN that I want or need. It's as simple as that. I dual-stack for my internet gateway.

derkades 3y ago

My main problem with IPv6-only on local networks is static IP assignment. With NAT (IPv4 or IPv6) I could assign my own addresses to devices, which could remain the same forever even when changing ISPs. This is not possible when using IPv6 GUAs via PD.

Volundr 3y ago
Can't you use ULA addresses for this?
- derkades 3y ago
  Yes, I could assign every device a ULA with NAT. That would defeat a major selling point of IPv6. An alternative would be to assign both a GUA and ULA to every device, via DHCPv6 and SLAAC. However, not all devices support this. For example Android doesn't support DHCPv6 and NetworkManager doesn't seem to support multiple auto configuration methods