6 ms·

The amount of ignorance in these ipv6 posts is astounding (seems to be one every two months). It isn't hard at all, I'm just a homelabber and I have a dual-stac

by sekh60 9mo ago

The amount of ignorance in these ipv6 posts is astounding (seems to be one every two months). It isn't hard at all, I'm just a homelabber and I have a dual-stack setup for WAN access (HE Tunnel is set up on the router since Bell [my isp] still doesn't give ipv6 address/prefixes to non-mobile users), but my OpenStack and ceph clusters are all ipv6 only, it's easy peasy. Plus subnetting is a heck of a lot less annoying that with ipv4, not that that was difficult either.

transcriptase 9mo ago
“it’s easy peasy” says guy who demonstrably already knows and has time to learn a bunch of shit 99.9% of people don’t have the background or inclination to. People like you talking about IPv6 have the same vibe as someone bewildered by the fact that 99.9% of people can’t explain even the most basic equation of differential or integral calculus. That bewilderment is ignorance.
- Dylan16807 9mo ago
  These people apparently had the time and inclination to learn a bunch of shit about IPv4, though. "Easy" is meant in that context. The people acting like the IPv4 version is easy. So your second paragraph doesn't fit the situation at all.
  - izacus 9mo ago
    "The shit about IPv4" was easy to learn and well documented and supported. "The shit about IPv6" is a mess of approaches that even the biggest fanboys can't agree on and are even less available on equipment used by people in prod. IPv6 has failed wide adoption in 30 decades, calling it "easy" is outright denying the reality and shows the utter dumb obliviousness of people trying to push it and failing to realize where the issues are.
    - nine_k 9mo ago
      Could you share a list of IPv6 issues that IPv4 does not exhibit? Something that becomes materially harder with IPv6? E.g., "IPv6 addresses are long and unwieldy, hard to write down or remember". What else?
      - toast0 9mo ago
        Traffic shapping in v6 is harder than v4. At least it was for me, because NDP messages were going into the shaping queue, but then getting lost since the queue only had a 128 bit address field, and 128 bits isn't actually enough for local addresses. When the traffic shaping allowed traffic immediately, the NDP traffic would be sent, but if it needed to be queued, the adapter index would get lost (or something) and the packets disappeared. So I'd get little bursts of v6 until NDP entries timed out and small queues meant a long time before it would work again. Not an issue in ipv4 because ARP isn't IPv4 so IP traffic shaping ignores it automatically.
      - magicalhippo 9mo ago
        Software support is a big one. I ran pfSense. It did not support changing IPv6 prefixes. It still barely does. So something as simple has having reliable IPv6 connectivity and firewall rules with pfSense was impossible just a few years ago for me. Android doesn't support DHCPv6 so I can't tell it my preferred NTP server, and Android silently ignores your local DNS server if it is advertised with a IPv4 address and the Android device got a IPv6 address. Without DHCPv6 then dynamic DNS is required for all servers. Even a 56 bit prefix is too much to remember, especially when it changes every week. So then you need to install and configure a dynamic DNS client on all servers in your network.
- nine_k 9mo ago
  "I already know enough to be productive, can the rest of the world please freeze and stop changing?" This is not even that unreasonable. Sadly, the number of IP devices in the world by now far exceeds the IPv4 address space, and other folks want to do something about that. They hope the world won't freeze but would sort of progress.
- iov6throwaway 9mo ago
  Network engineering is a profession requiring specific education. At a high level it’s not different from calculus. You learn certain things and then you learn how to apply them in the real life situations. It’s not hard for people who get an appropriate education and put some effort into it. Your lack of education is not my ignorance.
sedawkgrep 9mo ago
Dude. The difficulty of setting IPv6 up at your house vs. the needs of a multi-homed, geographically diverse enterprise couldn't be more dissimilar. I'd lay off the judgment a bit.
- nine_k 9mo ago
  I'd gladly listen about the difficulties of setting up enterprise networks! No irony; listening to experts is always enlightening. BTW a homelab often tries to imitate more complex setups, in order to be a learning experience. Can these difficulties be modelled there?
  - tguvot 9mo ago
    company where i work has deployments across the world with few hundreds of thousands of hardware hosts (in datacenters), vms and containers + deployments in a few clouds. also a bunch of random hardware from multitude of vendors. multiple lines for linking datacenters and clouds. also some lines to more specific service providers that we are using. all of it ipv4 based. ipv6 maybe in distant future somewhere on the edge in case our clients will demand in. inside our network - probably not going to happen
    - nine_k 9mo ago
      I find this completely fine. I don't see much (if any) upside in migrating a large existing network to anything new at all, as long as the currently deployed IPv4 is an adequate solution inside it (and it obviously is). Public-interfacing parts can (and should) support IPv6, but I don't see much trouble exposing your public HTTP servers (and maybe mail servers) using IPv6, because most likely your hosting / cloud providers do 99.9% of it already, out of the box (unless it's AWS, haha), and the rare remaining cases, like, I don't know, a custom VPN gateway, are not such a big deal to handle.
      - tguvot 9mo ago
        vast majority of our stuff is self hosted. http servers in a way are the least important way for our clients to work with us. amount of work to support ipv6 on the edge will be very big and none of our clients asked for it as far as i know. the only time we discussed it, it's when we were getting fedramp certification. because of this https://www.gsa.gov/directives-library/internet-protocol-version-6-ipv6-policy-1 https://www.gsa.gov/directives-library/internet-protocol-ver...

by sekh60 9mo ago

transcriptase 9mo ago

“it’s easy peasy” says guy who demonstrably already knows and has time to learn a bunch of shit 99.9% of people don’t have the background or inclination to. People like you talking about IPv6 have the same vibe as someone bewildered by the fact that 99.9% of people can’t explain even the most basic equation of differential or integral calculus. That bewilderment is ignorance.

Dylan16807 9mo ago
These people apparently had the time and inclination to learn a bunch of shit about IPv4, though. "Easy" is meant in that context. The people acting like the IPv4 version is easy. So your second paragraph doesn't fit the situation at all.
- izacus 9mo ago
  "The shit about IPv4" was easy to learn and well documented and supported. "The shit about IPv6" is a mess of approaches that even the biggest fanboys can't agree on and are even less available on equipment used by people in prod. IPv6 has failed wide adoption in 30 decades, calling it "easy" is outright denying the reality and shows the utter dumb obliviousness of people trying to push it and failing to realize where the issues are.
  - nine_k 9mo ago
    Could you share a list of IPv6 issues that IPv4 does not exhibit? Something that becomes materially harder with IPv6? E.g., "IPv6 addresses are long and unwieldy, hard to write down or remember". What else?
    - toast0 9mo ago
      Traffic shapping in v6 is harder than v4. At least it was for me, because NDP messages were going into the shaping queue, but then getting lost since the queue only had a 128 bit address field, and 128 bits isn't actually enough for local addresses. When the traffic shaping allowed traffic immediately, the NDP traffic would be sent, but if it needed to be queued, the adapter index would get lost (or something) and the packets disappeared. So I'd get little bursts of v6 until NDP entries timed out and small queues meant a long time before it would work again. Not an issue in ipv4 because ARP isn't IPv4 so IP traffic shaping ignores it automatically.
    - magicalhippo 9mo ago
      Software support is a big one. I ran pfSense. It did not support changing IPv6 prefixes. It still barely does. So something as simple has having reliable IPv6 connectivity and firewall rules with pfSense was impossible just a few years ago for me. Android doesn't support DHCPv6 so I can't tell it my preferred NTP server, and Android silently ignores your local DNS server if it is advertised with a IPv4 address and the Android device got a IPv6 address. Without DHCPv6 then dynamic DNS is required for all servers. Even a 56 bit prefix is too much to remember, especially when it changes every week. So then you need to install and configure a dynamic DNS client on all servers in your network.
nine_k 9mo ago
"I already know enough to be productive, can the rest of the world please freeze and stop changing?" This is not even that unreasonable. Sadly, the number of IP devices in the world by now far exceeds the IPv4 address space, and other folks want to do something about that. They hope the world won't freeze but would sort of progress.
iov6throwaway 9mo ago
Network engineering is a profession requiring specific education. At a high level it’s not different from calculus. You learn certain things and then you learn how to apply them in the real life situations. It’s not hard for people who get an appropriate education and put some effort into it. Your lack of education is not my ignorance.

sedawkgrep 9mo ago

Dude. The difficulty of setting IPv6 up at your house vs. the needs of a multi-homed, geographically diverse enterprise couldn't be more dissimilar. I'd lay off the judgment a bit.

nine_k 9mo ago
I'd gladly listen about the difficulties of setting up enterprise networks! No irony; listening to experts is always enlightening. BTW a homelab often tries to imitate more complex setups, in order to be a learning experience. Can these difficulties be modelled there?
- tguvot 9mo ago
  company where i work has deployments across the world with few hundreds of thousands of hardware hosts (in datacenters), vms and containers + deployments in a few clouds. also a bunch of random hardware from multitude of vendors. multiple lines for linking datacenters and clouds. also some lines to more specific service providers that we are using. all of it ipv4 based. ipv6 maybe in distant future somewhere on the edge in case our clients will demand in. inside our network - probably not going to happen
  - nine_k 9mo ago
    I find this completely fine. I don't see much (if any) upside in migrating a large existing network to anything new at all, as long as the currently deployed IPv4 is an adequate solution inside it (and it obviously is). Public-interfacing parts can (and should) support IPv6, but I don't see much trouble exposing your public HTTP servers (and maybe mail servers) using IPv6, because most likely your hosting / cloud providers do 99.9% of it already, out of the box (unless it's AWS, haha), and the rare remaining cases, like, I don't know, a custom VPN gateway, are not such a big deal to handle.
    - tguvot 9mo ago
      vast majority of our stuff is self hosted. http servers in a way are the least important way for our clients to work with us. amount of work to support ipv6 on the edge will be very big and none of our clients asked for it as far as i know. the only time we discussed it, it's when we were getting fedramp certification. because of this https://www.gsa.gov/directives-library/internet-protocol-version-6-ipv6-policy-1 https://www.gsa.gov/directives-library/internet-protocol-ver...