[huggingmouth]

That changed (ahm.. will change) with ipv6. I was surprised to see that I can reach residential ipv6 lan hosts directly from the server. No firewalls, no nat. This remains true even with abusive isps that only give out /64 blocks.

That said, I agree that peer to peer will never be seemless thanks mostly to said abusive isps.

[kelnos]

> I was surprised to see that I can reach residential ipv6 lan hosts directly from the server. No firewalls, no nat

No NAT, sure, that's great. But no firewalls? That's not great. Lots of misconfigured networks waiting for the right malware to come by...

[theamk]

I sure hope not, this will bring in a new era for internet worms.

If some ISPs are not currently firewalling all incoming IPv6 connections, it's a major security risk. I hope some security researcher raises boise about that soon, and the firewalls will go closed by default.

[immibis]

My home router seems to have a stateful firewall and so does my cellphone in tethering mode - I don't know whether that one's implemented on the phone (under my control) or the network.

Firewalling goes back in the control of the user in most cases - the other day we on IRC told someone how to unblock port 80 on their home router.

[1oooqooq]

it kinda of already begun

[modeless]

Has there been a big ipv6 worm? I thought that the defense against worms was that scanning the address space was impractical due to the large size.

[1oooqooq]

i don't think they scan the entire space. but even before that there were ones abusing bonjour/upnp which is what chrome will bring back with this feature.

[apitman]

IPv6 isn't going to happen. Most people's needs are met by NAT for clients and SNI routing for servers. We ran out of IPv4 addresses years ago. If it was actually a problem it would have happened then. It makes me said for the p2p internet but it's true.

[justahuman74]

> If it was actually a problem

It became a problem precisely the moment AWS starting charging for ipv4 addresses.

"IPv4 will cost our company X dollars in 2026, supporting IPv6 by 2026 will cost Y dollars, a Z% saving"

There's now a tangible motivator for various corporate systems to at least support ipv6 everywhere - which was the real ipv6 impediment.

Residential ISP appear to be very capable of moving to v6, there are lots of examples of that happening in their backends, and they've demonstrated already that they're plenty capable of giving end users boxes the just so happen to do ipv6.

[apitman]

Yes and setting up a single IPv4 VPS as load balancer with SNI routing in front of IPv6-only instances solves that.

Most people are probably using ELB anyway

[immibis]

What do you mean not going to happen? It's already happening. It's about 45% of internet packets.

[apitman]

The sun is about 45% of the way through its life.

[paulddraper]

Not happening for 55%.

Try to connect to github.com over IPv6.

[remram]

It doesn't work now so it's never going to work?

[paulddraper]

If it doesn't work for a website as large as technically forward as GitHub in 2024, the odds are not looking good.

[apitman]

GitHub might work someday. Wide enough adoption that you can host a service without an IPv4 address will never happen.

[sroussey]

Honestly, it could be a feature rather than a bug…

[immibis]

Yes, that's one of the rare exceptions of a company trying to obsolete itself. It's actually one reason a bunch of people are moving away from Github.

[ElijahLynn]

"We are introducing a new charge for public IPv4 addresses. Effective February 1, 2024 there will be a charge of $0.005 per IP per hour for all public IPv4 addresses"

https://aws.amazon.com/blogs/aws/new-aws-public-ipv4-address...

[apitman]

Yes and setting up a single IPv4 VPS as load balancer with SNI routing in front of IPv6-only instances solves that.

Most people are probably using ELB anyway.