4 ms·
Your load balancer has a public IP address. You route requests to the internal LAN on one of the "private" IP blocks (10.0.0.0/8, 192.168.0.0/8)
by _RPM 11y ago
Your load balancer has a public IP address. You route requests to the internal LAN on one of the "private" IP blocks (10.0.0.0/8, 192.168.0.0/8)
- Negitivefrags 11y agoI suppose that it would be that easy if we were hosting a website. We make an online game though so the general solution isn't going to work for us. Sure, in principal it's the same but it's going to require a fair bit more manual implementation in our case, not to mention added latency in a very latency sensitive application.
- blantonl 11y agoTCP load balancing would also be an option in your case.
- asdfaoeu 11y agoI think your exaggerating the latency effects but anyway you can still buy IPv4 addresses for ~$12/ip. This is really just going to initially hurt service providers which is good because those are the ones who can make large inroads with IPv6
- jingo 11y ago"... you can still buy IPv4 addresses for ~$12/ip." About the price of a domainname? (Note I did not use the word "cost". I create dommainnames all the time at the price of $0.) Given the choice between a domainname and an IPv4 adddress, I would take the IPv4 address. Also, given the choice between a single, routable IPv4 addresses and a block of IPv6 addresses, I would still choose the IPv4 address. IPv4 is "simplicity" in comparison to the complexity of IPv6. IPv6 has features I do not need. Whenever I am granted the choice, I always choose simplicity over complexity. Most of the time the additonal complexity is not needed and can only cause problems in the long run. This is only the opinion of one "consumer". Certainly the "market" may have another opinion.
- Implicated 11y ago> I create dommainnames all the time at the price of $0 Care to explain how?
- mappu 11y agoI'm interested too. My guesses: - http://www.freenom.com/ http://www.freenom.com/ - work-for/own a domain registrar - own a pseudo-TLD like .com.me and are really just creating subdomains - have a large account / custom pricing deals with a domain registrar such that despite a high total cost, the marginal per-domain cost is approximately $0 - only internally-routable domains e.g. /etc/hosts or company-internal DNS server - only alternative DNS roots like Namecoin or tor's .onion domains
- Chlorus 11y ago> "Also, given the choice between a single, routable IPv4 addresses and a block of IPv6 addresses, I would still choose the IPv4 address." Ah yes, which would likely entail the 'simplicity' of NAT...
- the8472 11y ago> IPv6 has features I do not need. Are you forced to use them? If not, where's the problem? I for one love ipv6, it restores the end-to-end principle.
- Chlorus 11y agoThey're likely referring to scenarios like this: https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=8278864 https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=8278864 - "IPv6 privacy addresses crashed the MIT CSAIL network" & the much more complicated host discovery / address assignment process on IPv6 segments. Still, I think I'd rather deal with some implementation kinks than intentional packet mangling like NAT.
- scurvy 11y agoHow is v6 more complex than v4? It's simpler. Much simpler.
- scurvy 11y agoNATs do induce a fair amount of latency. It's not exaggerated. Watch Paul Saab from Facebook talk about how much better IPv6 performs at NANOG 64: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=EfjdOc41g0s https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=EfjdOc41g0s
- the8472 11y agoInstead of a layer 7 proxy couldn't you just use static port forwarding and multiplex servers based on ports?