6 ms·

Given the history of airlines I'm not quite sure if you're joking or not. Sounds plausible ngl

by Charon77 2y ago

jachee 2y ago
I know explaining a joke always makes it super funny, but… this is a NetEng joke about IPv6 being overbuilt.
- dotancohen 2y ago
  IPv6 is seen and used directly by professionals, not the general public. Overbuilding it in the sense being mocked made sense.
  - CookieCrisp 2y ago
    Which explains why professionals have so eagerly adopted it over the last two decades
    - dbdoskey 2y ago
      Reminds me of the line that network engineers love implementing IPv6 so much they have been doing it for years
      - rvnx 2y ago
        We could also have bumped 255.255.255.255 to 999.999.999.999 = 1 trillion IP addresses, easy-to-remember and backward compatibility with legacy devices. Modern clients and servers get IP addresses in these new whole IP ranges and can communicate together. Relatively easy to adapt the code of modern software also since it's about removing a restriction from a client-perspective. Load-balancers and legacy clients use IP addresses from the old pool. If you have Windows XP you can communicate only to legacy IPv4 (in practice only loadbalancers from Cloudflare, GCP, AWS and co) and your other legacy stuff. Others happily communicate together. But no, we got this wonderful IPv6. Sad because it was really doable, theoretical maximum below 512 GB of memory for routers to store the whole routing table, it's manageable, versus the 2.176×10^22 exabytes (!) of IPv6.
        davrosthedalek 2y ago
        Bad idea, then all the fake IP addresses on Law&order and co would suddenly be valid.
        SonOfLilit 2y ago
        I'm guessing everyone downvotes you for the very strange implication that most software stores IP addresses in ASCII. All networking APIs I'm aware of expect IPv4 addresses as a DWORD.
        rvnx 2y ago
        This is the point, instead of rewriting a full stack, I would rather change the prototype of these APIs. To store 999.999.999.999, then you are totally fine with a 64-bits INT (QWORD), and there is no struggle to backward-compatibility store a 32-bits INT (DWORD) into it. It's more of a matter of doing #ifdef IPV4_EXTENDED #define DWORD QWORD #endif and add an extra IP field inside the IP header packet itself that says, "this is the IPV4_EXTENDED DESTINATION 5-bytes IP", and the previous field is marked a legacy/deprecated. In fact, it's quite convenient, since we are all INT64, sockaddr_in would largely fit in an INT64 for both IP itself and the other elements that are in the struct. https://man7.org/linux/man-pages/man3/sockaddr.3type.html https://man7.org/linux/man-pages/man3/sockaddr.3type.html 5 bytes for the sin_addr field is enough to store until 999.999.999.999. Gives you 3 bytes to store the port etc. The networking APIs guys could be drinking cocktails at the bar by now, if they would change these types. There is backward compatibility and smaller effort for a great impact, and this is beautiful. It's actually beneficial for the majority of developers. From the developer of Windows, to the developer of Age of Empires, to the developer of a CRUD app on the web (who stores IP addresses as a string or as an int), they wouldn't see too much struggle to port to int64. Less than having to build a full new IPv6 experience. In practice, client apps, at the time you open a new socket, if your lib says it wants an INT32 or an INT64 it doesn't matter for the developer of that app, since type is automatically casted. time() had a similar situation. We migrated by adding new bytes, we didn't redefine the concept of time. From a developer-experience, "link to the latest version of the network library, oh btw, connect() accepts an int64" and remove the UI restriction of 255. It could even be possible to give compatibility to very old software that we lost source-code from by overriding the network layer with LD_LIBRARY_PRELOAD or equivalent, and patch these softwares by manually NOP the right JGE instruction (the asm code for " >= " ) that checks if we are over 255.
    - chippiewill 2y ago
      IPv6 hasn't failed to be adopted due to being over engineered. Its failed to be adopted because breaking changes are hard.
  - nottorp 2y ago
    > IPv6 is seen and used directly by professionals, not the general public Yes, that's the problem. It's unusable on your fucking home network. Please, don't post again the 10 "concise" 50+ page documents that you "just" need to read to set up ipv6...
    - FeepingCreature 2y ago
      I don't really understand. My router gives me an IPv6 address...
      - nottorp 2y ago
        Do you understand on what basis? Do you know enough to assign addresses in a way that you, not your router, wants? Can you ssh/other forms of remote into any machine that accepts ssh on your local network using only ipv6? Can you redirect ports to specific local machines using only ipv6 (that implies they keep constant addresses)? Can you easily switch between two internet connections going through different routers that are plugged into the same switch for any machine on your local network using only ipv6? Speaking of which, since the ISP decides on the addresses behind your NAT, can two separate ipv6 internet connections even exist on a local network? This is all easily doable with ipv4 in like two afternoons without setting up anything beyond perhaps a dhcp server and some firewall rules. How many additional services do you need to do that with ipv6? And how enterprisey are they?
        vel0city 2y ago
        > Do you know enough to assign addresses in a way that you, not your router, wants? If I want to manually assign addresses it's still pretty simple, but in the end I normally just don't care. I don't want to know what IP my printer is, I just want to reach it. Which isn't a challenge at all. Even for things at my home that are IPv4 only they're practically all DHCP. Because there's little reason to ever really care about something's address. > Can you ssh/other forms of remote into any machine that accepts ssh on your local network using only ipv6? I have no problems reaching any host on any of my networks even if they're running only IPv6. It's nice too because I can trivially reach any port I want globally as well with a basic firewall change. Even better I can have one host have many IP addresses with different services bound to each address if I want. > Can you redirect ports to specific local machines using only ipv6 (that implies they keep constant addresses)? Why do any port redirection at all? Just set the firewall rule and things can hit it. And yeah, they can keep constant addresses. They can have dozens, hundreds of static host addresses if I want. > Can you easily switch between two internet connections going through different routers that are plugged into the same switch for any machine on your local network using only ipv6? If that's something you're really wanting, Network Prefix Translation can be done pretty easily. But the vast majority of home users aren't using dual WAN anyways. > This is all easily doable with ipv4 in like two afternoons Sounds like your setup with IPv4 took more work than mine with IPv6, as mine only took me an hour or so while yours took multiple days.
  - ianburrell 2y ago
    The funny thing is that IPv6 is used more by general public more than professionals. Public doesn't notice that their mobile network is IPv6, or that there home internet also supports it. It is the professionals that are dragging feet upgrading the business networks. More people access Google with IPv6 on weekends, currently 46%, than on weekdays, 43%. Presumably because mobile and home networks are more likely to be IPv6 than offices.
    - dotancohen 2y ago
      No, IPv6 is the underlying technology behind the general consumers' internet connections, but the general public is not using IPv6. The general public has no idea what IPv6 is. I.e. IPv6 is used by the general public, but the general public is not using IPv6.
      - ArchOversight 2y ago
        By that same token the general public is also not using IPv4. The general public doesn't care, so long as TikTok and Facebook appear on their mobile devices.
        dotancohen 2y ago
        When you are driving are you using a throttle body?
        Thedarkb 2y ago
        When I drive my work van I use a throttle body, when I drive my car I use a carburettor. From my point of view as a user, I'm just driving a vehicle. The point is that users see a holistic system and neither know nor care about the underlying implementation details.
        dotancohen 2y ago
        > The point is that users see a holistic system and neither know nor care about the underlying implementation details. Yes, this is my point too. End users are not "using IPv6" even if that protocol is in use to transfer their data.
- pixl97 2y ago
  Router: Do you want to hear an IPv6 joke IPv4_Device: Yea Router: I'm sorry, you wouldn't get it.
nottorp 2y ago
It's ipv6 :)

Given the history of airlines I'm not quite sure if you're joking or not. Sounds plausible ngl

jachee 2y ago

I know explaining a joke always makes it super funny, but… this is a NetEng joke about IPv6 being overbuilt.

dotancohen 2y ago
IPv6 is seen and used directly by professionals, not the general public. Overbuilding it in the sense being mocked made sense.
- CookieCrisp 2y ago
  Which explains why professionals have so eagerly adopted it over the last two decades
  - dbdoskey 2y ago
    Reminds me of the line that network engineers love implementing IPv6 so much they have been doing it for years
    - rvnx 2y ago
      We could also have bumped 255.255.255.255 to 999.999.999.999 = 1 trillion IP addresses, easy-to-remember and backward compatibility with legacy devices. Modern clients and servers get IP addresses in these new whole IP ranges and can communicate together. Relatively easy to adapt the code of modern software also since it's about removing a restriction from a client-perspective. Load-balancers and legacy clients use IP addresses from the old pool. If you have Windows XP you can communicate only to legacy IPv4 (in practice only loadbalancers from Cloudflare, GCP, AWS and co) and your other legacy stuff. Others happily communicate together. But no, we got this wonderful IPv6. Sad because it was really doable, theoretical maximum below 512 GB of memory for routers to store the whole routing table, it's manageable, versus the 2.176×10^22 exabytes (!) of IPv6.
      - davrosthedalek 2y ago
        Bad idea, then all the fake IP addresses on Law&order and co would suddenly be valid.
      - SonOfLilit 2y ago
        I'm guessing everyone downvotes you for the very strange implication that most software stores IP addresses in ASCII. All networking APIs I'm aware of expect IPv4 addresses as a DWORD.
        rvnx 2y ago
        This is the point, instead of rewriting a full stack, I would rather change the prototype of these APIs. To store 999.999.999.999, then you are totally fine with a 64-bits INT (QWORD), and there is no struggle to backward-compatibility store a 32-bits INT (DWORD) into it. It's more of a matter of doing #ifdef IPV4_EXTENDED #define DWORD QWORD #endif and add an extra IP field inside the IP header packet itself that says, "this is the IPV4_EXTENDED DESTINATION 5-bytes IP", and the previous field is marked a legacy/deprecated. In fact, it's quite convenient, since we are all INT64, sockaddr_in would largely fit in an INT64 for both IP itself and the other elements that are in the struct. https://man7.org/linux/man-pages/man3/sockaddr.3type.html https://man7.org/linux/man-pages/man3/sockaddr.3type.html 5 bytes for the sin_addr field is enough to store until 999.999.999.999. Gives you 3 bytes to store the port etc. The networking APIs guys could be drinking cocktails at the bar by now, if they would change these types. There is backward compatibility and smaller effort for a great impact, and this is beautiful. It's actually beneficial for the majority of developers. From the developer of Windows, to the developer of Age of Empires, to the developer of a CRUD app on the web (who stores IP addresses as a string or as an int), they wouldn't see too much struggle to port to int64. Less than having to build a full new IPv6 experience. In practice, client apps, at the time you open a new socket, if your lib says it wants an INT32 or an INT64 it doesn't matter for the developer of that app, since type is automatically casted. time() had a similar situation. We migrated by adding new bytes, we didn't redefine the concept of time. From a developer-experience, "link to the latest version of the network library, oh btw, connect() accepts an int64" and remove the UI restriction of 255. It could even be possible to give compatibility to very old software that we lost source-code from by overriding the network layer with LD_LIBRARY_PRELOAD or equivalent, and patch these softwares by manually NOP the right JGE instruction (the asm code for " >= " ) that checks if we are over 255.
  - chippiewill 2y ago
    IPv6 hasn't failed to be adopted due to being over engineered. Its failed to be adopted because breaking changes are hard.
- nottorp 2y ago
  > IPv6 is seen and used directly by professionals, not the general public Yes, that's the problem. It's unusable on your fucking home network. Please, don't post again the 10 "concise" 50+ page documents that you "just" need to read to set up ipv6...
  - FeepingCreature 2y ago
    I don't really understand. My router gives me an IPv6 address...
    - nottorp 2y ago
      Do you understand on what basis? Do you know enough to assign addresses in a way that you, not your router, wants? Can you ssh/other forms of remote into any machine that accepts ssh on your local network using only ipv6? Can you redirect ports to specific local machines using only ipv6 (that implies they keep constant addresses)? Can you easily switch between two internet connections going through different routers that are plugged into the same switch for any machine on your local network using only ipv6? Speaking of which, since the ISP decides on the addresses behind your NAT, can two separate ipv6 internet connections even exist on a local network? This is all easily doable with ipv4 in like two afternoons without setting up anything beyond perhaps a dhcp server and some firewall rules. How many additional services do you need to do that with ipv6? And how enterprisey are they?
      - vel0city 2y ago
        > Do you know enough to assign addresses in a way that you, not your router, wants? If I want to manually assign addresses it's still pretty simple, but in the end I normally just don't care. I don't want to know what IP my printer is, I just want to reach it. Which isn't a challenge at all. Even for things at my home that are IPv4 only they're practically all DHCP. Because there's little reason to ever really care about something's address. > Can you ssh/other forms of remote into any machine that accepts ssh on your local network using only ipv6? I have no problems reaching any host on any of my networks even if they're running only IPv6. It's nice too because I can trivially reach any port I want globally as well with a basic firewall change. Even better I can have one host have many IP addresses with different services bound to each address if I want. > Can you redirect ports to specific local machines using only ipv6 (that implies they keep constant addresses)? Why do any port redirection at all? Just set the firewall rule and things can hit it. And yeah, they can keep constant addresses. They can have dozens, hundreds of static host addresses if I want. > Can you easily switch between two internet connections going through different routers that are plugged into the same switch for any machine on your local network using only ipv6? If that's something you're really wanting, Network Prefix Translation can be done pretty easily. But the vast majority of home users aren't using dual WAN anyways. > This is all easily doable with ipv4 in like two afternoons Sounds like your setup with IPv4 took more work than mine with IPv6, as mine only took me an hour or so while yours took multiple days.
- ianburrell 2y ago
  The funny thing is that IPv6 is used more by general public more than professionals. Public doesn't notice that their mobile network is IPv6, or that there home internet also supports it. It is the professionals that are dragging feet upgrading the business networks. More people access Google with IPv6 on weekends, currently 46%, than on weekdays, 43%. Presumably because mobile and home networks are more likely to be IPv6 than offices.
  - dotancohen 2y ago
    No, IPv6 is the underlying technology behind the general consumers' internet connections, but the general public is not using IPv6. The general public has no idea what IPv6 is. I.e. IPv6 is used by the general public, but the general public is not using IPv6.
    - ArchOversight 2y ago
      By that same token the general public is also not using IPv4. The general public doesn't care, so long as TikTok and Facebook appear on their mobile devices.
      - dotancohen 2y ago
        When you are driving are you using a throttle body?
        Thedarkb 2y ago
        When I drive my work van I use a throttle body, when I drive my car I use a carburettor. From my point of view as a user, I'm just driving a vehicle. The point is that users see a holistic system and neither know nor care about the underlying implementation details.
        dotancohen 2y ago
        > The point is that users see a holistic system and neither know nor care about the underlying implementation details. Yes, this is my point too. End users are not "using IPv6" even if that protocol is in use to transfer their data.
pixl97 2y ago
Router: Do you want to hear an IPv6 joke IPv4_Device: Yea Router: I'm sorry, you wouldn't get it.

nottorp 2y ago

It's ipv6 :)