• catculation@lemmy.zip
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    0
    ·
    4 months ago

    Last year my ISP forced v6 and disabled the option to set v4 only. I lost the Adgurd Home DNS configuration in all devices. But then learnt a few things and able to use internal ipv6 address for dns although still unable to configure ipv6 in Docker :/

  • Heavybell@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    0
    ·
    3 months ago

    I would like to use IPv6 but google and MS are having a dick waving contest with competing implementations, as I understand it. So fuck it.

  • computerscientistII@lemm.ee
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    0
    ·
    4 months ago

    Retardistan is hogging the biggest portion of the IPv4 addresses for themselves. That’s why they have the worst IPv6 support. The need arose last in this part of the world.

  • GTG3000@programming.dev
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    0
    ·
    4 months ago

    “Everyone is using IPv6”

    It’s barely supported. Most providers here “offer IPv6”, but each has a different gotcha to actually using it, if it works at all and they didn’t just route you through hardware that doesn’t know what it is.

    • flying_sheep@lemmy.ml
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      0
      ·
      edit-2
      4 months ago

      What’s “here”? Here in Germany, mine has it for maybe 10 years or so. Basically since launch day.

      And new ISPs only have v6 since all legacy (v4) blocks have been sold years ago.

      • Opisek@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        0
        ·
        4 months ago

        Not at all only. At times you have both IPv6 and IPv4 and other times you can still get IPv4 at no additional cost like when you run your own router or modem. The layperson will be given IPv6 by default, but it’s not the only thing you can get.

      • person420@lemmynsfw.com
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        0
        ·
        4 months ago

        Just because you have a IPv6 address doesn’t mean you’re actually using it. At best you’re tunnelling IPv4 traffic through your carrier’s IPv6 network. Current estimates (from Cloudflare) show only about 34% of the global internet uses IPv6.

        If you only used IPv6, you wouldn’t be able to access nearly 66% of the internet.

      • GTG3000@programming.dev
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        0
        ·
        4 months ago

        Mordor itself, Russia. Technically, most ISPs support IPv6 here but as I said each has something weird in config that makes using it… Fun. I don’t remember specifics since I’m mostly looking at it from consumer side, but I could try finding the article (in russian) that talked about it.

        My current connection doesn’t have IPv6 at all according to https://ipv6-test.com/, although I’m not 100% if it’s because of provider or Cisco AnyConnect blocking shit.

        When you when you sign up for internet here, you get a dynamic IP, it’s been that way for… As long as I can remember, really. Definitely more than ten years. I know in Moscow people used to get white IPs way back when, but that’s long gone. Not really a problem since most people don’t host anything.

        • flying_sheep@lemmy.ml
          link
          fedilink
          arrow-up
          0
          ·
          4 months ago

          It’s becoming more and more of a problem I’d think. Blocklists just become longer, so the more an IP is used by random people the less useful it becomes.

          I might be completely wrong about this though.

          • GTG3000@programming.dev
            link
            fedilink
            arrow-up
            0
            ·
            4 months ago

            Well, kinda-sorta. I’ve yet to hit ip block when browsing without a VPN, but VPNs and proxies definitely are getting blocked pretty consistently.

            And seeing how wonderful the situation here is right now, I’m pretty familiar with VPNs at this point.

  • rottingleaf@lemmy.zip
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    0
    ·
    4 months ago

    I’m using ipv6 when I occasionally connect to Yggdrasil.

    And I think I’ll use ipv6 if we ever need to build a new earthnet.

    It’s a fine technology.

  • RecluseRamble@lemmy.dbzer0.com
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    0
    ·
    4 months ago

    Why should we care? So address space may run out eventually - that’s our ISPs’ problem.

    Other than that I actually don’t like every device to have a globally unique address - makes tracking even easier then fingerprinting.

    That’s also why my VPN provider recommends to disable IPv6 since they don’t support it.

    • Aux@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      0
      ·
      4 months ago

      That’s the dumbest thing I’ve read today… Your ISP is fleecing you and you’re happy with it.

      • RecluseRamble@lemmy.dbzer0.com
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        0
        ·
        4 months ago

        What the fuck are you talking about? My ISP supports IPv6 just fine, but following my VPN’s advice I disable it (on certain devices at least) for privacy concerns. And it makes exactly zero difference in functionality.

          • RecluseRamble@lemmy.dbzer0.com
            link
            fedilink
            arrow-up
            0
            ·
            edit-2
            4 months ago

            It’s Proton VPN. Lack of IPv6 support is a downer but I wouldn’t call them shit.

            Edit: maybe elaborate why you deem IPv6 so crucial? As I said: everything works just fine without.

    • MrRazamataz@lemmy.razbot.xyz
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      0
      ·
      4 months ago

      Because people in countries with ISPs that are unable to provide IPv4 (e.g. too expensive) can’t access GitHub easily.

    • smileyhead@discuss.tchncs.de
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      0
      ·
      4 months ago

      that’s our ISPs’ problem

      If the Internet means for you a way to access Facebook, Netflix, Google and YouTube, yeah.
      But if it means a network to send something to another computer then it’s a huge problem.

      Because ISP won’t care if you can accept connections or not. They don’t care about decentralization and being able to host stuff yourself. Most consumers just want a pipe to big services and not to their friend’s house.

    • umbrella@lemmy.ml
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      0
      ·
      edit-2
      4 months ago

      the only reason i can think of is cgnatting ipv4 becase of depleted pool.

      i believe you can NAT ipv6 too, no?

      • Avatar_of_Self@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        0
        ·
        4 months ago

        You’d better hope that you can NAT ipv6 because if you aren’t behind a CGNAT and then your LAN is completely exposed without a NAT you’re very likely going to have devices exploited.

        NATs on people’s boundary has been doing pretty much all of the heavy lifting for everyone’s security at home.

        • orangeboats@lemmy.world
          link
          fedilink
          arrow-up
          0
          ·
          4 months ago

          The word you are looking for is firewall not NAT.

          NAT does not provide security whatsoever. If the NAT mapped your (internal IP, internal port) to a certain (external IP, external port) and you do not have a firewall enabled, everyone can reach your device by simply connecting to that (external IP, external port).

          I haven’t seen routers that do not come with IPv6 firewalls enabled by default.

          • Avatar_of_Self@lemmy.world
            link
            fedilink
            English
            arrow-up
            0
            ·
            edit-2
            4 months ago

            The word you are looking for is firewall not NAT.

            No the word I’m looking for is the NAT. It was not designed for security but coincidentally it is doing the heavy lifting for home network security because it is dropping packets from connections originating from outside the network, barring of course, forwarded ports and DMZ hosts because the router has no idea where to route them.

            Consumer router firewalls are generally trash and definitely are not doing the heavy lifting.

            By and large automated attacks are not thwarted by the firewall but by the one-way NAT.

            • orangeboats@lemmy.world
              link
              fedilink
              arrow-up
              0
              ·
              4 months ago

              Consumer router firewalls are generally trash

              [Citation needed]

              They are literally piggybacking on the netfilter module of Linux. I don’t see how that’s trash

              • Avatar_of_Self@lemmy.world
                link
                fedilink
                English
                arrow-up
                0
                ·
                edit-2
                4 months ago

                They are not layer 7 firewalls for the network which are going to be where most the majority of attacks are concentrated. No citation needed unless you believe they are layer 7 firewalls or using something like Snort.

                Added some clarification in my first sentence so it makes a bit of sense.

  • deadbeef79000@lemmy.nz
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    0
    ·
    4 months ago

    I use IPv6 at home, I selected my last few ISP’s because they had IPv6. Left one ISP when they removed IPv6 🤦‍♂️ .

    If you can choose ISP choose one that offers IPv6 and let them know why.

  • JATth@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    0
    ·
    4 months ago

    I’m actually bit sad that I had to move onto a ISP which has zero IPv6 support, as I previously did have IPv6. The last thing I did on that connection was to debug the hell out of my IPv6 code I had developed.

      • sep@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        0
        ·
        4 months ago

        That should simply not be allowed. Cgnat for ipv4 is fine if they also provide proper ipv6

  • bigredcar@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    0
    ·
    4 months ago

    Just remember we got rid of TLS 1.0 the same thing can be done with IPv4. It’s time for browser makers to put “deprecated technology” warnings on ipv4 sites.

    • NocturnalEngineer@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      0
      ·
      4 months ago

      IPv4 isn’t depreciated, it’s exhausted. It’s still a key cornerstone of our current internet today.

      We still have “modern” hardware being deployed with piss-poor IPv6 support (if any at all). Until that gets fixed, adoption rates will continue to be low. Adding warnings will only result in annoying people, not driving for improvement.

      • KillingTimeItself@lemmy.dbzer0.com
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        0
        ·
        4 months ago

        IPv4 isn’t depreciated, it’s exhausted.

        exhaustion probably also constitutes as “deprecated” once the utility of a system designed to be, well, useful no longer meets the usefulness quotient that it previously provided. Suddenly It’s “deprecated technology”

      • gamermanh@lemmy.dbzer0.com
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        0
        ·
        4 months ago

        Adding warnings will only result in annoying people, not driving for improvement.

        Given how poorly adoption has gone so far this might be the only way to get actual fast support rolled out. Piss people off, get change

  • tmpod@lemmy.pt
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    0
    ·
    4 months ago

    I just upgraded my Lemmy instance’s hardware and finally got IPv6 support :D