China government mandates a complete switchover to IPv6 by 2030

Harambe

@ezeth said:

When domain is too expensive and it's only possible to remember IPv4

Domain names are a scam, just edit /etc/hosts

mike1s

@ezeth said:

@TimboJones said:

@user54321 said:
What will do all the sys admins that didn't learn how to work with IPv6?
IMHO that is good news, I run a lot of stuff IPv6 only for some years and with that even the last ape should understand that IPv4 is legacy stuff and only a fallback for very old gear.

Laid off and replaced when cheaper people.

When domain is too expensive and it's only possible to remember IPv4

Ok Boomer.

netguy

China isn't the whole world and isn't a standard for other countries.
They may play with IPv6 but we will continuing using IPv4.

ezeth

So not having IPv6 = "firewall" to block china?

Harambe

@ezeth said:
So not having IPv6 = "firewall" to block china?

Pretty much. v4-only networks will be the safest in the world, lol

yoursunny

@Harambe said:

@ezeth said:
So not having IPv6 = "firewall" to block china?

Pretty much. v4-only networks will be the safest in the world, lol

IPv9-only networks are even safer.
Only a handful of regions can reach our network.

redcat

Only mjj use ipv6.

Daniel15

@team_traitor said: ! Even if it is hard to configure and remember hahaha

Do you not use DNS? 🤔

BetaRacks

Please don't disturb my dreaming

vedran

@amadex1337 said:
But IPv6 seems to be as impossible as switching to electric cars. Why?

Oh we'll switch to electric cars way sooner than to IPv6, even if it costs trillions and ends up being even worse for the environment.
But we can't switch to IPv6 because that one guy somewhere has a 20 year old router and we can't force him to buy a new one.

Xiaoming

Great, cause IPv4 address is way to less for six billion people and the various devices they use in their daily lives.

ezeth

@Xiaoming said:
Great, cause IPv4 address is way to less for six billion people and the various devices they use in their daily lives.

Shared IP is good. Unique IP is bad. Just like how VPN is good. Change my mind

jmgcaguicla

@ezeth said:
Shared IP is good. Unique IP is bad. Just like how VPN is good. Change my mind

Boomer take, living up to the brand.

jerry_me

I live in Shenzhen, Guangdong, China Telecom (the largest carrier in China) assigns us /56, if I need, I can ask them to assign the maximum /48, but if I want to use my own IP address, it doesn't support BGP announcement.

amadex1337

@Xiaoming said:
Great, cause IPv4 address is way to less for six billion people and the various devices they use in their daily lives.

Corona did a thing, free'd up planet from people. We have now more IPV4's.

dahartigan

@deank said:
Chia.

Chia Virus

BlaZe

@salakis said:
Not too surprising, it's a great opportunity for the CCP to gain power and relevance by being the driving force for "innovation" and standardization.

BlaZe

@TimboJones said:

@ezeth said:

@TimboJones said:

@user54321 said:
What will do all the sys admins that didn't learn how to work with IPv6?
IMHO that is good news, I run a lot of stuff IPv6 only for some years and with that even the last ape should understand that IPv4 is legacy stuff and only a fallback for very old gear.

Laid off and replaced when cheaper people.

When domain is too expensive and it's only possible to remember IPv4

Translation, someone?

find a boomer to translate that...

jenkki

IPv6 are bad joke our times. Just hope Corona Virus not going faster to 2030 than this bad joke.)

team_traitor

@default said:

@team_traitor said:
I wish my country does the same. Ipv6 rocks! Even if it is hard to configure and remember hahaha

You remember IPv4?

yeah? why ask? if my country all change and implement ipv6 then I have no problem forwarding my router to my office vice versa. I can even access my music/movies box anywhere or simply host an e-mailbox on my home.

Port forwarding is not available/hard for me due to my ISP not giving us static Ipv4. We only have private ones.

wpyoga

@that_guy said:
IPv6 seems to be as impossible as switching to electric cars. Why?

IPv6 looks like a second system to me: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Second-system_effect

Further reading:

• https://apenwarr.ca/log/20170810
• https://blog.apnic.net/2020/08/03/ipv4-ipv6-and-a-sudden-change-in-attitude/

Also, IPv4 is good enough for most use cases. Personally, if it were up to me (a layman), I would extend the current 32-bit address space to 64-bits. And make all the currently available IP addresses available inside a special subnet. So for example if archive.org is 207.241.224.2, it will become 4.4.4.4.207.241.224.2. We would have almost 2^64 IP addresses, with almost all the semantics of IPv4 intact.

yoursunny

@wpyoga said:
IPv6 looks like a second system to me:

I consider IPv4 as a second system.
Since 2011, I wrote my socket programs using AF_INET6.
They can communicate with IPv4 hosts via IPv6-mapped-IPv4 addresses.

---

@wpyoga said:
Personally, if it were up to me (a layman), I would extend the current 32-bit address space to 64-bits. And make all the currently available IP addresses available inside a special subnet. So for example if archive.org is 207.241.224.2, it will become 4.4.4.4.207.241.224.2. We would have almost 2^64 IP addresses, with almost all the semantics of IPv4 intact.

This is not IPv4 anymore.
It's called jsgnet.

Supporting it is as difficult as deploying IPv6.

wpyoga

@yoursunny said:
I consider IPv4 as a second system.

How is IPv4 a second system?

@yoursunny said:
This is not IPv4 anymore.
It's called jsgnet.

Supporting it is as difficult as deploying IPv6.

I once read something similar, to my layman solution actually. But I forgot what it was called. I thought it was IPng or something similar, but googling doesn't give me anything useful.

Also, in the case of the alternative expanded address space implementation, I don't think supporting it will be as difficult as deploying IPv6 -- the added address space is actually implemented using unused IPv4 options, so legacy routers should still be able to route all the traffic to legacy IPv4 hosts.

rm_

@wpyoga said: Personally, if it were up to me (a layman), I would extend the current 32-bit address space to 64-bits.

You could go back to 1996 and do just that. Whereas in this timeline IPv6 was designed the way it was, and it already won. There is no way any third alternative could conceivably arise by now and cancel the IPv6 transition. Like it or not, it is what we (groundbreakingly invented || got stuck with), so it is pointless to keep grumbling, better just get on with the migration, start learning it -- oh, and most likely you'll discover there are ways around most or all of your perceived annoyances.

And really, it actually works just fine, and some of the features we got as a result of a clean break are very useful (such as the address space being spacious enough to allow for easy autoconfiguration and truly random or even cryptographically-based IPs).

Boogeyman

@yoursunny said: You are allowed to blame me after 301 push-ups.

Your 404 pages should be like "404 Push-ups not found "

jsg

@yoursunny said:
This is not IPv4 anymore.
It's called jsgnet.

Supporting it is as difficult as deploying IPv6.

BS! But oh well, not surprising coming from an almost obsessed IPv6 fan ...

---

@rm_

I read that differently. China is moving towards IPv6 single stack and does some first steps that look big but actually aren't because moving 700 mio end points from 4 to 6 is virtually nothing; that's just one or a couple of large providers switching the edge (to customers) .... Quite possibly the whole story is more about 'offering IPv6 too' than about 'offering IPv6 only' (now and toll 2023 or 2025).
Also note that 700 mio are planned to be switched or enabled within about 1.5 years - but in the 2 years after that only 100 mio more ...

All that said I even can understand the chinese government. Having ca. 1.5 bln people but a small number of IP4 in relation to the USA which wastes hundreds of millions of IPs, China sooner or later just had to switch to IPv6.

Note btw that all that seems to be China-intern. They might well gate in and out via IP4.

TimboJones

Complete citizen tracking in full effect.

On the other hand, maybe with IPV6 tied to specific people and their social reputations, maybe shit will get cleaned up.

vimalware

Well, that's one way to build your own Internet. Kudos for the initiative.

Harambe

@vimalware said:
Well, that's one way to build your own Internet. Kudos for the initiative.

Sadly no blackjack, nor hookers

wpyoga

@rm_ said:
You could go back to 1996 and do just that. Whereas in this timeline IPv6 was designed the way it was, and it already won. There is no way any third alternative could conceivably arise by now and cancel the IPv6 transition.

Wow. OK.

@rm_ said:
Like it or not, it is what we (groundbreakingly invented || got stuck with), so it is pointless to keep grumbling, better just get on with the migration, start learning it -- oh, and most likely you'll discover there are ways around most or all of your perceived annoyances.

I'm sorry you perceived my voicing my opinions as grumbling. Well, maybe you've been seeing too many people are complaining about IPv6. I hope you're OK.

@rm_ said:
And really, it actually works just fine, and some of the features we got as a result of a clean break are very useful (such as the address space being spacious enough to allow for easy autoconfiguration and truly random or even cryptographically-based IPs).

True.