← Home ← Back to /g/

Thread 106931692

58 posts 18 images /g/
Anonymous No.106931692 >>106931735 >>106932248 >>106932262 >>106932868 >>106937078 >>106938309 >>106939639 >>106940862 >>106940998 >>106942526 >>106942984 >>106943097 >>106943249
Why people who refuse to learn about IPv6 are the most vocal? We would bid farewell to IPv4 if it weren't for those retards.
Anonymous No.106931735
>>106931692 (OP)
>Why people who refuse to learn about IPv6 are the most vocal?
Vocal idiots are common in every field
>We would bid farewell to IPv4 if it weren't for those retards
Realistically, no we wouldn't
Anonymous No.106931823
ipv6 is not for humans, it's for ai robots
Anonymous No.106931925
don't want it, don't need it
Anonymous No.106932150
>why dont people want a jewish barcode assigned to all of their machines?
Anonymous No.106932223 >>106932315
>CVE-2024-38063
Keep in mind that this was 2024; we are not ready yet.
Anonymous No.106932238
though it is true that we don't need ipv6, but y'all talk about it like it's the devil.
Anonymous No.106932248 >>106932310 >>106938583
>>106931692 (OP)
Why did they limit IPv6 to only 128bits.
If they had gone with 512bits we could have done so much more with it. Unfortunately they gimped us with their stingy limited attitude.
I guess maybe it made sense back in the 90s to limit it, but in retrospect it ruined all reason to even adopt it.
Anonymous No.106932262 >>106937133
>>106931692 (OP)
Kek, even IPv6 memes are too long to read
Anonymous No.106932310
>>106932248
>done so much more
name 2 things
Anonymous No.106932315 >>106932322 >>106932597 >>106942606
>>106932223
>CVE-2024-38063
>Microshit hires jeets
>jeets write vulnerable code
>somehow that proves IPv6 is not ready
Anonymous No.106932322
>>106932315
post desktop i'll wait
Anonymous No.106932597
>>106932315
why are frogposters always so smug? I bought an additional windows laptop for my gf (who is mac curious) just now just to know I spited one of you
Anonymous No.106932868 >>106933538
>>106931692 (OP)
My ISP doesn't support v6
Anonymous No.106932905
Network Card > Protocols > IPV6 > Disable
Anonymous No.106933538
>>106932868
My ISP gives a /64
Anonymous No.106935827
Use case for IPv6? What makes you think browns on the internet is a metric?
Anonymous No.106935844 >>106936758
>implying that CG NAT is bad
Are you retarded? NAT is good if you don't want to get hacked
Anonymous No.106935857 >>106936772
is there a use case for an imageboard which only accepts connections from ipv6 enabled source?
Anonymous No.106936758
>>106935844
Add this one to the image, OP.
Anonymous No.106936772 >>106942522 >>106942555
>>106935857
Yeah getting spammed to death because IPV6 has a gazillion more IPs to ban evade with
Anonymous No.106936793
>ipv6
cringelennial unc tech lmao fr
ong we need ipv16 with 2048-bit addresses so that every smart anal plug can have an entire ipv4 pool equivalent reserved for it's communication needs no cap
Anonymous No.106937078 >>106938487 >>106940744
>>106931692 (OP)
We just had this thread. Unemployed IPv6 lintroon hobbyists got utterly destroyed and humiliated by anons who actually work in IT (not just tinker with their troonix shitboxes in moms basement). The only "people" who shill IPv6 are deranged linuxoids, who desperately need to show off to other linuxoids, that they can wireguard into their "homelab". These troglodytes are terrified that their mom might not want to pay for a static public IP. In the previous thread, we already established that static public IPs should have been a paid service from the start. This would cause many archxisters to commit sudoku, but also would save countless public IPs (which are actually useful to society).
Anonymous No.106937133
>>106932262
Anonymous No.106938309
>>106931692 (OP)
ipv6 was literally a scam and most isp don't even allow incoming packet by default
Anonymous No.106938487 >>106939316 >>106939639 >>106942522
>>106937078
>Pay for static IP
Why should you have to pay for a static IP when you already pay for the internet? You already need an IP to connect, DHCP just means you can't use that IP for anything useful because you might arbitrarily get your IP reassigned. Considering that ISP usually don't reassign it unless you start using it like a static IP I don't see the point in not just giving you a static IP besides just wanting to make more money.
Anonymous No.106938583 >>106939158
>>106932248
Stingy? What are you even talking about? Every IPv6 expert and proponent encourages you to be wasteful as fuck with the addressing scheme. You're even excoriated for NOT using /64s on PTP links.
Anonymous No.106939158 >>106940756
>>106938583
64 bits isn't even close to enough. It may have been back in the 90s but these days there are billions of computing devices, soon to be trillions.
Anonymous No.106939316
>>106938487
No, you are either behind ISP NAT or you have a static public IP that you pay for, simple as.
Anonymous No.106939639
>>106931692 (OP)
>NOOOOOOOOOOOOOO IF YOU DISLIKE IT YOU... YOU... YOU JUST DON'T KNOW ABOUT IT!
No you nigger, the people most vocal about how much they fucking hate IPv6 are those that had to work with it before.
>b-b-b-bb-b-b-b m-m-m-m-muh p2p u-utopia!
No amount of cope is ever going to fix the fact that the spec is designed by actual braindead retards and that ISPs don't care about the toilet paper post-hoc optional recommendations they've shat out after noticing that they are braindead retards that designed a failed spec either.
It isn't going to fix NAT66 or the fact that it has to exist in the first place either.
Even if people wanted to use IPv6 the way you faggots hallucinate about they couldn't because most ISPs in the world still don't assign the correct subnet size to customers never mind assigning them static prefixes like the toilet paper I already talked about later tried to amend but even failed at that. If you go outside and pick up a random stone you will have found something with more intelligence than the subhumans that designed IPv6. Kill yourself.
>>106938487
>Why should you have to pay for a static IP when you already pay for the internet?
Because that's what the contract says that you signed, not that I'd expect an IPv6 apologist to be able to read.
Anonymous No.106940744 >>106940987 >>106942557 >>106942891
>>106937078
Curious how every serious network like any competant carrier or datacenter operator deals in ipv6 and it's simply devshitters that cannot into networking. Sysadmins for ""networks"" if you could call them that, that ""manage"" maybe 200 switches at most and a handful of routers all seethe at ipv6 because they are literally the bottom rung but think they are fairly high up in the field. IPv4 is a bloated protocol from when everyone was retarded and didn't know what computer networks would or should look like and has required more cope hotfixes to stay functioning than nearly any jeetware programs you can name.

Do not reply to this post if you personally haven't dealt with BGP as a transit AS or MPLS, peasant.
Anonymous No.106940756
>>106939158
the greatest mistake was giving every retard the access to a computer and the internet
Anonymous No.106940832
>Another /g/ fails at networking thread
kekek
Anonymous No.106940862
>>106931692 (OP)
>using DNS
Bloat
Anonymous No.106940987 >>106942466
>>106940744
Man ChatGPT is bad at networking.
Anonymous No.106940998 >>106942366
>>106931692 (OP)
I disable ipv6 on every system I have. Why would I want direct addressing? NAT just works, I don't care. My computer is not a server and I don't want anything poking any ports. I can even run Windows XP if I want. Security of my OS doesn't matter. I'm safe and my system doesn't need to even know about some security nonsense. Fuck off, glowie.
Anonymous No.106942366 >>106942522
>>106940998
>Why would I want direct addressing?
Because it's better.
Anonymous No.106942466
>>106940987
>Man ChatGPT is bad at networking.
What a coincidence niggers who are unable to discern bot post or not also blow cock at networking. Same shit retarded computer inept leftoid boomers did all through the early to mid 2010's with muh russian bots. When you realize most posts aren't bot written you will actually understand, or have any semblance of pattern recognition.
Anonymous No.106942522 >>106942544
>>106936772
ban the entire /32 then
>>106938487
You want a business-tier service, pay business prices then.
>>106942366
good luck readdressing all your devices because your ISP rotated your prefix.
Anonymous No.106942526
>>106931692 (OP)
Extreme level of retardation out there, but there is also extreme Judaism too in the form of penny pinching on dogshit networking equipment.
It's really insane how bad it is out there. Shit allocations at my work are so out of control, people are starting to use 240/4, which breaks various shittier firewalls. IPv6 is literally not negotiable, but the cope will be to slather more NATs instead. All the k8s projects are using some designated /16 block subnet for NATs and shitty CNIs and taking performance off the table as a result.

All networking cuckolds must be genocided, along with Cisco and their ilk.
Anonymous No.106942544
>>106942522
Proper routers handle all of that for you. There's nothing to re-address. A static IPv6 lease ignores the prefix.
Anonymous No.106942555 >>106942656
>>106936772
You'll get spammed no matter what.
Proof and point, pic related.

Retards like (You) haven't come to terms with the fact the Internet is massive and hostile, whether it is v4 or v6 enabled. Force authentication, use PoW for expensive functionality, etc. that's the only way to stop spam in 2025.
Anonymous No.106942557 >>106942609 >>106942758
>>106940744
>Curious how every serious network like any competant carrier or datacenter operator deals in ipv6
But they literally don't? There are numerous massive ISPs that still do not support ipv6, and plenty more that only have half assed support via tunneling.

>IPv4 is a bloated protocol from when everyone was retarded and didn't know what computer networks would or should look like and has required more cope hotfixes to stay functioning than nearly any jeetware programs you can name.
That doesn't make IPv6 is the holy savior that it gets made out to be. Multiple things can be shitty at once for different reasons. I'm not going to buy a Jeep just because Nissan makes the shittiest CVTs in history.

Your large datacenter examples are in areas where they're actually buying new hardware frequently and microseconds of extra latency between shit in the ceph cluster starts to matter. IPv6 is clearly a better solution with modern equipment. Nobody in their right mind is going to argue otherwise. As soon as you start introducing retarded legacy infrastructure that goes right out the window. You still need the IPv4 network for legacy reasons, so why double up when the IPv4 network works fine? It's a pile of shit cobbled together by half a dozen different layers of stupid indirection and bullshit? Absolutely. Does it do the job SME clients want? Sure does.

>Do not reply to this post if you personally haven't dealt with BGP as a transit AS or MPLS, peasant.
I remember when MPLS was the big new hype in the early 2000s. I also remember when ASICs and related hardware accelerations embedded in switching equipment made a lot of it redundant outside of ISP level stuff. Swathes of MPLS use cases are getting eaten by SD-WAN now too.

BGP, yeah I worked at an ISP a while back. I left because I could make 3 times as much with similarly outdated equipment in the SME sphere. End client facing ISPS are in a perpetual race to the bottom.
Anonymous No.106942606
>>106932315
>Microshit hires jeets
Geeks pretend all is hunky-dory and keep writing honest performance reviews and never discriminate against jeets in the hiring process. The love is mutual.
Anonymous No.106942609 >>106942741
>>106942557
>There are numerous massive ISPs that still do not support ipv6
It should literally be illegal to claim and operate an ISP and not provide dual stacking to customers, desu. I don't know why they get away false advertising Internet access when they don't even work with IPv6 only services.
Anonymous No.106942656 >>106942731
>>106942555
I null route all of Russia, China, India, North Korea, Northern Africa, and the Middle East. It's not more secure because they can just VPN elsewhere or use infected machines elsewhere, but banning China, India and Russia cuts down on hostile probing and site scraping by at least 90%.

Oh no, some slavs can't connect to my self hosted website. I think I'll find a way to manage living with that knowledge.
Anonymous No.106942731
>>106942656
Ok, good for you? Doesn't change anything I said, dipshit.
Anonymous No.106942741 >>106942765
>>106942609
I don't disagree in principle. At the same time, you've got to admit that it's fucking hilarious how we're on the second thread of this retardation and people keep bring up ISPS as an example of IPv6 adoption when it's inconsistent at best, and often times is done in such a retarded way that it's borderline unusable.

A while back I migrated to a new VPS provider and didn't bother configuring IPv4 for the teamspeak server before going on vacation for 4 days. Something like a third of the people connecting from Germany couldn't connect to an IPv6 address, and this was in 2019. Two of them were able to connect via a direct IPv6 address. Their ISP allowed IPv6 connections, but it was hijacking DNS and it literally took 2 days for the records to propagate.
Anonymous No.106942758 >>106943210
>>106942557
>>There are numerous massive ISPs that still do not support ipv6
>competent

>You still need the IPv4 network for legacy reasons
IPv6 doesn't exclude nor preclude IPv4 stop implying otherwise like every other retarded devgroid.
>does IPv4 just werk? Yes
So did ATM and Frame Relay. Guess which protocols just werked but sucked and so were replaced? ATM and Frame Relay. IPv4 will never be replaced even if linux troons sysadmin shitters and devjeets could learn anything about networking but you know what just werks substantially better than IPv4? IPv6. You know where this difference actually matters and so everyone uses it? Datacenters and large carrier networks.

>I remember [...] SD-WAN now too.
You have no clue what the point of MPLS is in transport networks. Networks of any significant complexity use MPLS literally everywhere to solve issues that are otherwise intractable with other protocols. A brief example is how nearly everyone uses MPLS for egress peering engineering per server and then binding SID's to simplify service chains. Cloudflare Facebook and Apple all do this and talk about it, there are a ton of networks that also use MPLS everywhere but don't outright post about it on their blogs. MPLS isn't simply just for VPN's it's for scaling transport networks. Good carriers put internet in a VRF and label switch all internet traffic because it's far more manageable than leaving internet prefixes in the base routing table. MPLS will never leave transport networks or any large scale network in any of its various forms (SR, SRv6, static, LDP, whatever).

As for hardware IP lookups being done at linerate has been a thing since before MPLS was deployed essentially everywhere. No one uses MPLS for linerate forwarding since it effectively never alleviated the problem of chips being lookup limited as it didn't show up in time. This is fuddlore leftover from ATM which absolutely did allow for linerate forwarding on lookup limited chips compared to IP.
Anonymous No.106942765
>>106942741
I still don't have IPv6 at home and the upstream blocks protocol 41 so I can't even use Hurricane Electric tunnels. End up having to use my tinc network to route my IPv6 traffic to the public Internet on my vps.
Anonymous No.106942891 >>106942993 >>106943072
>>106940744
>every serious network
Is that why github and gmail still refuse to support IPv6? Did they become the largest in their fields because of their (according to you) stunning incompetence?
Anonymous No.106942984
>>106931692 (OP)
when they invent an ipv6 where i can give a computer telephone an ipv6 address, (and invent a suitbable protocol for telephony), and dial another ipv6 telephone, and not have to connect to some cloud routing service, or pay monthly fee for line rental as well as pay per call when i can video call people for no cost btw, then i'll CONSIDER to adopt ipv6. but i wont be happy about it.
Anonymous No.106942993
>>106942891
Ya, probably. GitHub is literally only getting worse and Gmail is just a way to collect data from you to personalize ads, kek.
Anonymous No.106943036
My isp didn't give me an ipv4 for a week but ipv6 somehow worked. Not something I would like to repeat
Anonymous No.106943072
>>106942891
jeethub and jeetmail aren't networks, once again devshitters do not matter.
Anonymous No.106943097
>>106931692 (OP)
Not this bullshit again. Ipv6 sucks, just stop it already.
Anonymous No.106943210
>>106942758
>IPv6 doesn't exclude nor preclude IPv4 stop implying
Mate I literally said you could do both but asked why you'd bother if one of them did enough for your use case. Stop tilting at windmills.
>So did ATM and Frame Relay. Guess which protocols just werked but sucked and so were replaced?
IPv4 actually provided usability benefits over those ancient techs.
>IPv4 will never be replaced
We agree on that.
>you know what just werks substantially better than IPv4? IPv6.
If you have equipment that supports it, and that's the problem. Most applications don't care overly much about what v6 does better, so they're largely synonymous, except that half the stuff out there can't use one of them. We've piled enough bullshit on top of v4, that v6 doesn't really "do" much that's special feature wise. It does things better, but again, if that doesn't matter to your use case, why care?

>You have no clue what the point of MPLS is in transport networks.
I understand MPLS. I also understand that it has zero relevance outside of large scale stuff where you're running semi-sane equipment.
> MPLS will never leave transport networks or any large scale network in any of its various forms (SR, SRv6, static, LDP, whatever).
I never said MPLS was going away, but it's ridiculous to claim that it's the panacea that it was marketed as in the early 2000s. Large portions of stuff that was hyped up as going to the realm of MLPS in 2005 simply didn't, and there have been regressions in adoption in a variety of use cases because hardware got better or because newer protocols do specific tasks better.

Honestly, it sounds like we largely agree on stuff, but I'm far less bothered by all the legacy IPv4 equipment. I'd love to see it all magically get replaced with IPv6 stuff and for things to actually follow standards, but we don't live in that world. I see no reason to be perturbed by that.

I'm out of this conversation for now. Have a pleasant evening.
Anonymous No.106943249
>>106931692 (OP)
I like my rolling IPV4 that changes every couple days
enjoy being tracked