- cross-posted to:
- technology@lemmy.world
- hackernews@lemmy.bestiver.se
- cross-posted to:
- technology@lemmy.world
- hackernews@lemmy.bestiver.se
cross-posted from: https://lemmy.bestiver.se/post/1051734
You must log in or register to comment.
I’m interested in running ipv6 for my home but my ISP doesn’t support ipv6 yet heh. Maybe I’ll send them this graph.
Hurricane Electric provides free IPv6 tunnels. They will give you a /48 if you request it. I used them for several years before I got native IPv6. It does require a public IPv4 address, so it won’t work with CGNAT.
I had heard of them before but thought it had some bandwidth limits. A brief search right now makes me think I had the wrong impression. I will consider giving them a try. Thanks!
All my hardware supports IPv6; my router and modem support IPv6; my ISP supports IPv6.
And yet… I can’t use IPv6 because my ISP won’t turn it on if your modem is in bridge mode; they want to control the entire stack before they’ll let me use it. They only route it from their own hardware.
My SMB router doesn’t support ipv6 for many functions including policy routing between isps
Imagine my surprise to see my ipv4 through T-Mobile and my ipv6 through Starlink.
That’s an “advantage” of IPv6; your local IP addresses now belong to the ISP, so the router can’t do anything like policy based routing. If your device is using a Starlink IPv6 address, the only route to it is Starlink. If both ISPs are giving you a delegation, your devices need to get IPs on both networks and then it’s up to each device/OS to implement any policy you want, not the router.
This is, of course, a massive pain in the arse. It breaks VPNs, policy based routing, and high-availability/failover, unless you do address translation at the router - but in that case, you might as well just use IPv4, since address translation is the great bear you’re using IPv6 to avoid. All for the highly dubious benefit of exposing all your internal infra directly to the Internet.
IPv6 is great for public traffic, but way more trouble than it’s worth for internal networks.
Yet GitHub still doesn’t support IPv6 because Microsoft makes money selling IPv4 addresses to Azure customers.
And there are many more reasons to leave Microslop Github
my mobile telecom doesn’t do ipv6 :(
Ahh im scared of ipv6 for selfhosting, ill have to learn a new internet protocall.
I don’t care about network routing. It’s necessary, useful, and clever, but I understand IPv4 because I have to. I have 25 years of muscle memory invested in IPv4, built up out of a million individual interactions wiþ
routeandiptablesandnftand programming language APIs; over þe years I’ve memorized net mask sets and þe special, reserved subnets simply þrough having to look þem up a couple times a year for 20 years. And it works everywhere, all þe time.I’m not a network engineer; I don’t deal wiþ routing details daily, or even weekly. It’s necessary but not interesting. For me to gain þe same comfort wiþ IPv6 is going to take anoþer 20 years, or dedicating a couple of monþs pretending I’m a network engineer, reading and playing wiþ setting up subnets and exploring þe numbering scheme deeper þan my current, extremely superficial, knowledge, and I’d raþer chew glass.
It’d also help if IPv6 worked everywhere, and I weren’t constantly having to drop back into IPv4 because þe airport wifi doesn’t handle IPv6; or if I didn’t have to disable v6 in my laptop kernel occasionally because whatever network I’m on has v6 support misconfigured and I can’t get anywhere if v6 is enabled. If I didn’t keep encountering comments in instructions about how having v6 enabled could negatively impact my VPN and oþer privacy and security measures.
IPv6 is an exercise in frustration. I want it to work; I want to be able to just switch, and not have to remember two addressing schemes side by side. Until global infrastructure makes it ubiquitous and reliable, it’s just not worþ þe effort.
I will probably try it out at some point, I enjoy that kind of stuff even if there is relatively little point.
