Hacker News new | past | comments | ask | show | jobs | submit login

Is IPv6 fixing such cases by design or it's not changing anything ?



Not really. Early IPv6 documentation kind of assumed that the vast address space would lead towards hierarchical addressing and that a multi-homed user would use addresses assigned by all of their ISPs, but at least in my experience, that doesn't really pan out --- if you have router advertisements from two different ISP prefixes, automatic configuration on common OSes (windows, linux, freebsd) will lead towards often sending traffic with ISP A through the router from ISP B, which doesn't really work well, especially if either or both ISPs run prefix filters. There's probably ways to make that style of multihoming work, but it's not fun.

Turns out, most multiphomed IPv6 users need provider indepdent addresses, just like with IPv4. And then you need to make sure your all your ISPs allow you to use all your prefixes. On the plus side, it's much more likely to get an IPv6 allocation that's contiguous and that you won't outgrow; so probably you only need one v6 prefix, and you may not need to change it as often as with v4.


The advantage of IPv6 is that can multiple addresses. This means that good way to organize network is to have machines use local provider addresses to access the Internet.

Then have ULA addresses for internal network. Those will be routed with tunnels and VPNs. That separates accessing the internet from internal network, and means that don't need to have routable address space.

The only people who would need own address space have data centers and routers.


> Then have ULA addresses for internal network

Except that ULAs don't really work. They are less prioritized than GUAs.


Yeah, there are ways to make it work, for example by specifying source addresses or nets on the the routes. In openwrt it's a checkbox to tick on the upstream interfaces.




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

Search: