Hacker Newsnew | past | comments | ask | show | jobs | submitlogin

ipv6 would be completely unnecessary. Only a handful of things on the internet actually need to be publicly addressable. Even something as simple as SRV record support in browsers would solve 99% of the invented ipv4 "crisis". Furthermore if people could come up with actual technical reasons why NAT is bad, rather than "I don't like it"... because guess what? It's here, it's now, and it's been working just fine for 30+ years.

That being said ipv6 offers some really nice features around flow-ids and getting rid of dumb and dangerous ipv4 flags. Credit is due where credit is due and these debugging features of ipv6 are worth mentioning as they really did get it right.

Despite this, in my opinion, we simply don't have a use case for ipv6. ipv4 + NAT + BGP (and maybe some SRV records) is all humanity needs, forever.

I will continue to disable ipv6 on all the networks and devices I manage, as it's an unnecessary and useless attack surface that ultimately offers me 0 benefit, just downsides.



NAT is not working fine. Have you ever needed to set up STUN + TURN?


I think many people are oblivious to STUN/TURN, and the amount it happens in alleged "peer-to-peer" stuff like <insert "Show HN: I built X on top of WebRTC" article here>.

Or setting up port-forwarding. Or having to deal with "hairpin NAT". Or having to deal with trying to route two networks together over VPN without having their address spaces collide because literally everyone uses the low end of 10/8. Or the amount of money being siphoned off for the privilege of having an IPv4 address.


Never actually once in 30 years.




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

Search: