Stories
Slash Boxes
Comments

SoylentNews is people

We've Killed IPv4!

posted by NCommander on Tuesday April 01 2014, @12:00PM   Printer-friendly
from the there-was-much-rejoicing dept.
As part of wanting to be part of a brighter and sunny future, we've decided to disconnect IPv4 on our backend, and go single-stack IPv6. Right now, reading to this post, you're connected to our database through shiny 128-bit IP addressing that is working hard to process your posts. For those of you still in the past, we'll continue to publish A records which will allow a fleeting glimpse of a future without NAT.Believe it or not, we're actually serious on this one.

Linode IPv6 graph

We're not publishing AAAA records on production just yet as Slash has a few minor glitches when it gets an IPv6 address (they don't turn into IPIDs correctly), though we are publishing an AAAA record on dev. With one exception, all of our services communicate with each other on IPv6.

Perhaps I will write an article about our backend and the magical things that happen there :-).
 
This discussion has been archived. No new comments can be posted.
We've Killed IPv4! | Log In/Create an Account | Top | 71 comments | Search Discussion
Display Options Threshold/Breakthrough Mark All as Read Mark All as Unread
The Fine Print: The following comments are owned by whoever posted them. We are not responsible for them in any way.

  • (Score: 5, Insightful) by githaron on Tuesday April 01 2014, @01:26PM

    by githaron (581) on Tuesday April 01 2014, @01:26PM (#24132)

    There is a difference between world-routable and world-accessible. IPv6 is world-routable. The network firewall would decide if a device is world-accessible.

    Starting Score:    1  point
    Moderation   +3  
       Insightful=3, Total=3
    Extra 'Insightful' Modifier   0  
    Karma-Bonus Modifier   +1  
    Total Score:   5  

  • (Score: 2) by NCommander on Tuesday April 01 2014, @01:44PM

    by NCommander (2) Subscriber Badge <michael@casadevall.pro> on Tuesday April 01 2014, @01:44PM (#24140) Homepage Journal

    This, this, a thousand times this. You haven't experienced the joys of networking when all you need is a firewall and NOT NAT. We could even run IPsec over IPv6 and it would work for most people without hours of pain.

    --
    Still always moving

    • (Score: 1) by bill_mcgonigle on Tuesday April 01 2014, @01:53PM

      by bill_mcgonigle (1105) on Tuesday April 01 2014, @01:53PM (#24148)

      This, this, a billion times this.

      We're past a thousand users on the Internet now. :)

  • (Score: 1) by monster on Tuesday April 01 2014, @01:55PM

    by monster (1260) on Tuesday April 01 2014, @01:55PM (#24151) Journal

    Yes, but turning every layman into a network administrator is pure comedy gold waiting to happen.

    • (Score: 2, Informative) by urza9814 on Tuesday April 01 2014, @06:58PM

      by urza9814 (3954) on Tuesday April 01 2014, @06:58PM (#24408) Journal
      That's the situation we *already have*, IPv6 is going to make it *better*, not worse. You *already* need to be a freakin' network administrator to properly set up a NAT. What protects you isn't the NAT, it's the firewall, and that will still be included in the router. But you'll be able to actually turn it off where and when needed now, which will be nice. (And no, DMZ doesn't count, because it's one system at a time)

    • (Score: 2) by sjames on Tuesday April 01 2014, @09:09PM

      by sjames (2882) on Tuesday April 01 2014, @09:09PM (#24466) Journal

      Why would that be an issue. The Ap/router will just come with a default configuration that does the right thing for nearly everyone and home users won't understand it, just like with IPv4 and NAT, only it won't overload the tiny embedded processor as easily.