this post was submitted on 31 Jul 2023
153 points (100.0% liked)
Technology
37360 readers
327 users here now
Rumors, happenings, and innovations in the technology sphere. If it's technological news or discussion of technology, it probably belongs here.
Subcommunities on Beehaw:
This community's icon was made by Aaron Schneider, under the CC-BY-NC-SA 4.0 license.
founded 2 years ago
MODERATORS
you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
view the rest of the comments
I'm going on professional year 24 of clients requiring that IPv6 be deactivated on every device in their network. Whee.
My current ISP still does not offer IPv6 🤦 🤦 🤦
Verizon, my ISP, offers IPv6 in my area but the implementation is broken and it ends up being an order of magnitude slower than simply using IPv4 and HE as an IPv6 tunnel broker.
AT&T is the same. And the last time I looked they don't give you enough address space to host your own subnet. You get a /64 instead of a /56. And it's slower than ipv4.
Every few months I try it out, complain and then switch it off.
I'm on ATT. I can get a /60 from their V6 router. I use /64s with each of my VLANs. I use a true bridge mode that bypasses their gateway device only using it for eap authentication. My router handles the connection. It works great honestly. Not sure what you mean by it being slower than V4. The V6 is equally as fast if not faster, here in Dallas. The routes are great on both V4 and V6, it takes on average 4 hops for me to reach the rest of the Internet. It's about 1-3ms RTT to city-local addresses over ICMP echo. Very stable, too.
Interesting. In NC here. Not sure if there's a difference regionally. I was seeing that kind of RTT on ipv4, but ipv6 was slower. I'll need to give it another try. The last time I did was at my last place where I had the BGW210. I have the BGW320 now and haven't tried on that. Maybe that, or changes in their routing since then will make a difference.
Same. Well, they give you a choice: v6 and v4 with CGNAT, or just v4 and no cgnat. No real choice for me.
You'd think IPv4 would be the one that requires CGNAT not IPV6... Bizarre...
The v6 doesn’t. But your v4 is CGNATed if you want a v6 :D
The one thing I can think of, is that one is the legacy architecture and the other the current one, and they run concurrently. Legacy doesn’t have v6, so if you want it, you need to fully move to the new architecture.
Yeah, my company totally blocks ipv6 when the VPN is on. Not sure why they're so backward for a tech company.
The same goes for my place of work. It's going to be shit loads of fun when we are forcibly transitioned. I hope before that time I will be doing web development work and kissing my professional career in infrastructure good bye.
What's their rationale? Is there one?
Their network admins are old and don't want to learn new stuff, or their networking equipment is old and they don't want to replace it.
IPv6 existed when I was a kid. It is not even remotely new.
I know, but it wasn't commonly used until IPv4 depletion became a more serious issue.
I must've said this at least 10 years ago: the more people move to IPv6, the more IPv4 are left free, so the less reason for moving to IPv6.
The "migration" could easily take several more decades.
We were talking about it when I was in undergrad.
Yeah, but for all we know you went to college thousands of years in the future, Time Lord.
That is why I think IPv6 is a non-starter. ;)
Compliance.
"Compliance with regulations."
Is there really any problem with that on the internal though?