Hacker Newsnew | past | comments | ask | show | jobs | submit | dpkirchner's commentslogin

I try enabling IPv6 every year or so. The last time I tried IPv6 at home I couldn't figure out what my netmask was, nor the size of my allocation. Some folks say my ISP issues /60s, others /64. I couldn't figure out how to get my IP to remain static long enough to have long-running TCP sessions, either. It was a mess and not much better than it was 20 years ago when I first tried it (and had to disable it because it being on broke all sorts of things).

Maybe 2026 will be the year of IPv6. I kinda doubt it given I'm some jackass and dedicated network professionals still don't use IPv6.


Why are you setting up anything? You turn on IPv6, the router figures out its prefix from the upstream router, and then router broadcasts the network to devices.

The netmask for IPv6 is nearly always /64. ISPs give out /60 to allow multiple subnets, but router makes /64 subnets from that.


Not OP, but when I first tried to learn IPv6 for my home internet, I found that it's very important that you get the DHCP-PD prefix size right when configuring your router, or it would just not work at all.

I have Comcast, and they do give me a /56, but you can't ask for a /56 in the DHCP-PD request, because they don't support a single request grabbing all of your prefix space. You have to ask for /60's, which I had to find out through trial and error.

But it may have been even worse (my memory is fuzzy) because I think at one point I did successfully get a /56, but that then exhausted my DHCP allocation, and then after I rebooted my router I couldn't get anything any more. It didn't help that the router I had been using (Unifi security gateway) didn't seem to keep a static DUID that comcast was happy with, so I kept getting new prefixes every time it rebooted.

Comcast probably has so few customers that bring their own cable modem/router at this point that they basically don't have any support for this, you won't get anything from them over the phone, they just push you to pay them to rent their equipment (where they configure all these parts the way their network expects.) You have to be adventurous to run your own equipment with IPv6.


Nah. There are lots of things you’ll need to know.

Does it use SLAAC on the WAN side or DHCPv6? How do I get a range for my lan then, DHCPv6 prefix-delegation? Or maybe it’s statically assigned somehow. Some carrier’s just use link-local ok the WAN, with no public v6 just RAs for the link-local, and a GUA block via IA_PD.

Regardless there are too many ways this is done, and this hampers adoption as it’s not just the “switch it on” operation you suggest.


All of those are handled automatically. The only people who have problems are ones who want to configure manually. More importantly, this is no different than IPv4 where have DHCP or manual.

Nearly every ISP uses DHCPv6-PD cause harder for manual configuration. The range is in the DHCP-PD, your router picks a subnet. The WAN address is automatic, and don't care about it cause never see it. Mine is link-local and hadn't known until I checked.


I need to know what IPs they might assign to my network, and then what IPs are to be assigned to my computers (or what I can assign statically).

You find out the addresses after it is configured automatically. This is no different than IPv4 and DHCP.

If you don't want to use the public addresses internally, then you can assign ULA addresses. If you don't want to use MAC derived addresses, assign them static host addresses.

For names, I use mDNS. I don't know the IPv6 address for my server. If I did need it, I would get it from the router.


Probably the largest barrier to IPv6 adoption is the myriad ways IP allocation to clients can be done and the various options that exist.

It’s fine for mobile providers, where the client activation defines what’s needed and the carrier essentially just needs to support two OS’s (iOS and Android).

Also mostly fine for residential when the carrier provides the CPE, and can set it up to work with how they have the network built.

But if you’re managing your own router it can be complex to know exactly what to use. And most ISP support aren’t very good either.

If you happen to be an expert it’s fine, but if you’re a power user not a full time network guy there is still way more complexity than there ought to be.


If you have ATT fiber, it’s a pain in the butt. Their default router will only issue a single passthrough /64 on request. If you have multiple VLANs you have to setup some scripts to ask for more, and even then you only get 8 of them. The gateway reserves the other 8 from the /60 it gets for its own use.

The only way I got IPv6 working well with them was to bypass their gateway. Now all my VLANs have /64, which is the standard subnet size.


I think bypassing their gateway, that is - bringing your own router is the only way to do VLANs, because their gateway is very basic and doesn’t support VLANs at all.

You can do VLANs with their gateway but only IPv4, or you have to write custom scripts to ask for additional IPv6 delegations.

Interesting. Which model of their gateway do you have? I have BGW320 and it definitely doesn’t support vlan tagging.

I have my cameras connected to a N150 server running hostapd and dnsmasq and no IP forwarding. That server runs Frigate. I figured if I need a server anyway it might as well be the AP.

It's a little bit of a pain to set up the cameras because of the mobile app. I have to connect to the AP on my phone and as it doesn't have internet access my phone nags me, and this specific model doesn't have an external antenna. If it did I think it might be the ideal setup.


Where we're going... we don't need clothes

It has to be us vs against us because that's what law is all about -- outlawing certain actions.

It's one thing to believe as you do, it's quite another to push for legislation that would (in your example) deny childless couples societal advantages, whatever that actually means.

If you're not in favor of a-or-b arguments the answer is to allow a and b, eh?


One answer I've seen to this (very legitimate) concern is using CNAME delegation to point _acme-challenge.$domain to another domain (or a subdomain) that has its own NS records and dedicated API credentials.

"If we admit to it we may have to compensate per SLAs, so dishonesty it is!"

Maybe they're one of today's lucky 10000, learning that other people are different.

Sure, and they should have that option. But in my experience business-folks ask techies to evaluate services all the time, and ideally we can just start out in the low-/no-touch tier to feel things out. If that tier isn't available, us techs might just try a different service.

The kind of products hidden behind sales calls are generally the sort where the opinion of IC-level tech staff is next to irrelevant. With these kinds of products, the purchase decision is being made at a group level, the contract sizes are large, and budgetary approvals are required. It’s a snowball the size of a house, and it started rolling down the mountain months (or years) before it got to your desk. Literally nobody cares if you buy a single license or not, and if you (personally) refuse to try it because it doesn’t have self-service, you’ll be ignored for being the bad stereotype of an “engineer”, or worse.

About the only time you’ll be asked to evaluate such a product as an IC is when someone wants an opinion about API support or something equivalent. And if you refuse to do it, the decision-makers will just find the next guy down the hall who won’t be so cranky.


I think this is true at larger organizations, but even a “small/medium” startup can easily sign contracts for single services for $100k+, and in my experience, salespeople really do care about commissions at those price points. A lot of software gets a foothold in an org by starting with the ICs, and individuals, not groups, are often the ones that request or approve software. Github and Slack are good examples of services who make very good use of their ability to self-serve their customers out of the gate, in spite of also supporting very large orgs.

In these conversations, I never ever see the buyers justifying or requesting a sales process involving people and meetings and opaque pricing.

It’s true that complicated software needs more talking, but there is a LOT of software that could be bought without a meeting. The sales department won’t stand for it though.


> A lot of software gets a foothold in an org by starting with the ICs, and individuals, not groups, are often the ones that request or approve software.

Not really. Even if we keep the conversation in the realm of startups (which are not representative of anything other than chaos), ICs have essentially no ability to take unilateral financial risk. The Github “direct to developer” sales model worked for Github at that place and time, but even they make most of their money on custom contracts now.

You’re basically picking the (very) few services that are most likely to be acquired directly by end users. Slack is like an org-wide bike-shedding exercise, and Github is a developer tool. But once the org gets big enough, the contracts are all mediated by sales.

Outside of these few examples, SaaS software is almost universally sold to non-technical business leaders. Engineers have this weird, massive blind spot for the importance of sales, even if their own paycheck depends on it.


This is really not true in my experience. In fact, all my experience has been with products that aren’t THAT expensive, and the individual dev teams do decide. These are SaaS products, and sometimes the total cost is under $1000 a year, and I still can’t get prices without contacting sales.

Also, it isn’t just ICs. I have worked as a senior director, with a few dozen people reporting into me… and I still never want to talk to a sales person on the phone about a product. I want to be able to read the docs, try it out myself, maybe sign up for a small plan. Look, if you want to put the extras (support contracts, bulk discounts, contracting help, etc) behind a sales call, fine. But I need to be able to use your product at a basic level before I would ever do a sales call.


You seem to have more proof of their alleged crimes than the government has offered anyone else, where did you get it?

I have also seen people believe that those boats have drugs, it's wild. I mean if they had drugs we would gather proof and hold trials instead of just murder, murder, murder.

I am looking at the map and confused. How can these small boats reach US? Venezuela is over 900 nautical miles away from US, assuming 40 knots it can take 24 hours. Do they have enough fuel? Why strike boats on the Pacific Ocean? One cannot reach the Pacific from Venezuela unless via Panama canal.

So, to be very clear, what do you believe were in those 55 gallon drums on that multiple engined long hull speed boat?

I'm not going to assume they are drugs, I'm not that weird. I'm confident our military could figure it out and share the evidence, though. They should be competent enough.

Well we'll never know will we? because they blew it up.

I get it. If you are travelling in a high speed boat with 55 gallon drums then you get executed, for the crime of travelling in a high speed boat with 55 gallon drums.

Fuel oil deliveries to smaller communities that don't buy in tanker quantities. Those boats are basically the u-hauls of the sea.

They could be smuggling other things, we got tariffs all over the place.

Gold? Gems? Cartel victims? Or... a 'boatload of cash'?!

We'll never know now will we?


> I mean if they had drugs we would gather proof and hold trials

That's the reason you believe the boats weren't carrying drugs?


Guidelines | FAQ | Lists | API | Security | Legal | Apply to YC | Contact

Search: