The question above for the most part, been reading up on it. Also want to it for learning purposes.

  • tburkhol@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    22
    ·
    1 year ago

    Definitely dual stack if you do. The real benefit of IPv6 is that, supposedly, each of your internal devices can have its own address and be directly accessible, but I don’t think anyone actually wants all of their internal network exposed to the internet. My ISP provides IPv6, but only a single /128 address, so everything still goes through NAT.

    Setting it up was definitely a learning process - SLAAC vs DHCP; isc’s dhcpd uses all different keywords for 6 vs 4, you have to run 6 and 4 in separate processes. It’s definitely doable, but I think the main benefit is the knowledge you gain.

    • designatedhacker@lemm.ee
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      1
      ·
      1 year ago

      Your ISP is doing it wrong, which I guess you already know. I get a /64 net via DHCPv6 for my LAN which is pretty standard.

      +1 to dual stack. Too much of the internet is v4 only, missing AAAA, or various other issues. I’ve also had weird issues where a Google/Nest speaker device would fail 50% of the time and other streaming devices act slow/funky. Now I know that means the V6 net is busted and usually I have to manually release/renew. Happens once every few months, but not in a predictable interval.

      Security is different, but not worse IMO. It’s just a firewall and router instead of a NAT being added in. A misconfigured firewall or enabling UPnP is still a bad idea with potentially worse consequences.

      Privacy OTOH is worse. It used to be that each device included a hardware MAC as part of a statelessly generated address. They fixed that on most devices. Still, each device in your house may end up with a long lived (at least as long as your WAN lease time) unique IP that is exposed to whatever sites you visit. So instead of a unique IP per household with IPv4 and NAT, it’s per network device. Tracking sites can differentiate multiple devices in the house across sites.

      This has me thinking I need to investigate more on how often my device IPv6 (or WAN lease subnet) addresses change.

      • Faceman🇦🇺@discuss.tchncs.de
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        1
        ·
        1 year ago

        I get a fat /48 network, just in case I need one septillion, two hundred and eight sextillion, nine hundred and twenty-five quintillion, eight hundred and nineteen quadrillion, six hundred and fourteen trillion, six hundred and twenty-nine billion, one hundred and seventy-four million, seven hundred and six thousand and one hundred and seventy-six individual IPs.

        IPV6 is pretty wild, we could effectively give every service connecting to every client, in every direction, for every single individual bit its own dedicated address without getting anywhere near using that address space.

  • duncesplayed@lemmy.one
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    6
    ·
    1 year ago

    (Whoops, accidentally hit “Delete” instead of “Edit” and Lemmy doesn’t ask for confirmation!! Boo!! I’ll try to retype my comment as best I can remember)

    I’ll buck the trend here and say “Yes, for a home LAN, it’s absolutely worth it. In fact for a home LAN it is more important than in a data centre. It is absolutely the bees’ knees for home and is worth doing.”

    All of that depends on how your ISP does things. When I did it, I got a /56, which is sensible and I think fairly common. If you’re ISP gives you anything smaller than a /64, (a) your ISP is run by doofuses, but (b) it’s going to be a pain and might not be worth it. (I now live in literally one of the worst countries in the world for IPv6 adoption, so I can’t do it any more)

    The big benefit to it is that you can have your servers (if you want them to be) publicly reachable. This means you can use exactly the same address to reach them outside the network as you would inside the network. Just make one AAAA for them and you can get to it from anywhere in the world (except my country).

    When I did it, I actually just set up 2 /64s, so a /63 would have been sufficient (but a /56 is nice). Maybe you can think of more creative ways of setting up your networks. Network configuration is a lot of fun (I think).

    I had 1 /64 for statically-assigned publicly-reachable servers. Then I had a separate /64 for SLAAC (dynamic) end-user devices, which were not publicly reachable (firewalled to act essentially like a NAT). (Sidenote: if you do go to IPv6 for your home network, look into RFC7217 for privacy reasons. I think it’s probably turned on by default for Windows, Android, iOS, etc., these days, but it’s worth double-checking)

      • duncesplayed@lemmy.one
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        2
        ·
        1 year ago

        That’s less fun. I believe you’ve either got to put everything on one SLAAC network (no static IPs), or you’ve got to use DHCPv6 (with a smaller network size) instead of SLAAC.

        • orangeboats@lemmy.world
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          2
          ·
          1 year ago

          Right, everything is on SLAAC. My ISP only delegates /48 ~ /56 to business customers (according to their customer service).

          Thankfully, RFC 7217 made SLAAC-only networks sufferable - you don’t to expose your MAC address to the entire world for stable addressing.

    • iwasgodonce@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      3
      ·
      1 year ago

      Not having to deal with split horizon dns or nat hairpinning is pretty nice, especially with so many things using DoH with public resolvers nowadays, like android or firefox.

      I just put A and AAAA in public dns so things work either ipv4 or ipv6 on the outside. On the inside everything works on and prefers ipv6 so it just works on the inside too. Nothing ever even attempts to use the wrong (public) A record on the inside.

  • SheeEttin@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    6
    ·
    1 year ago

    Depends on how you define “worth it”. Most selfhosting is done not for worth, but for a hobby.

      • pachrist@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        1
        ·
        1 year ago

        Some times not financially or psychologically, and they also make my wife mad when I fat finger some config.

  • mvee@lemmy.ml
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    5
    ·
    1 year ago

    No, I like living in my nat cocoon so I don’t have to worry as much about all the devices on my network. Jk it’s turned on, but I don’t usually enable it on devices

    • Blaster M@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      4
      ·
      edit-2
      1 year ago

      Get a firewall. Malicious STUN, ALG DoS attacks, just these things make your NAT router less secure than you think it is.

  • empireOfLove@lemmy.one
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    6
    arrow-down
    1
    ·
    edit-2
    1 year ago

    For LAN, no. If you have a router NAT’ting traffic and providing DHCP service there’s really no need for ipv6. Almost every ipv6 enabled service provides both 6 and 4 usually and NAT figures it out, and many still provide only 4, meaning you can’t just get rid of ipv4 entirely.

    If your ISP has modernized and is actually providing an ipv6 address, I suppose there’s probably a tiny benefit of being able to go ipv6>ipv6 when routing, bust most all devices nowadays can handle NAT translation from ipv4 to ipv6 and vice versa with no routing penalty. I don’t know if there are any ISP’s out there who can provide static ipv6 addresses without a NAT router to your entire LAN though.

    If you’re buying a vps or something ipv6 is easier to get a static address for.

    That of course leaves the last good reason: why not? If you’re doing homelab hosting stuff why not experiment with ipv6 and fully modernize your network. They suck to type in but it’s fun to know your stuff is brand new and using the “best”.

  • BaldProphet@kbin.social
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    4
    ·
    1 year ago

    There aren’t many benefits from using IPv6 on LAN, as far as I can tell, unless you need more addresses than are available in the private address ranges.

  • dud3@feddit.de
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    3
    ·
    1 year ago

    Dual-Stack is usually no problem, but going IPv6-only is a pain, because a suprising amount of services are v4 only. Even NAT64/DNS64 doesn’t help everywhere.

  • Oxff@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    3
    ·
    1 year ago

    IPv6 is the future so I’d say yes. Dual stack is the way to go. If you can get public address block from your ISP thats great. If not I’d recommend HE tunnel or something similar. Just remember to firewall as ever device is reachable in most configurations.

  • duncesplayed@lemmy.one
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    2
    ·
    edit-2
    1 year ago

    I’ll buck the trend and say “yes, for a home LAN, it is the bees’ knees”. I don’t do it now because my country (and hence my ISP) does not do IPv6, but for most places it’s worth doing.

    It depends on how your ISP does it. When I did it before, my ISP gave me a /56, which is pretty sensible and I think fairly common. If you get smaller than a /64, (a) your ISP is run by doofuses, but (b) it’s going to be a pain and maybe not worth it.

    A /56 was much bigger than I needed. I actually only used 2 /64s, so a /63 would have been fine, but network configuration is fun (I think), so maybe you can get creative and think about different ways of allocating your network.

    I had 1 /64 for statically-assigned, publicly reachable servers. And then I had a separate /64 for SLAAC (dynamic) allocated personal devices (laptops, phones, etc.) which were not publicly-reachable (firewalled essentially to act like a NAT). (Sidenote, if you are going to use IPv6, I recommend turning on RFC7217 on your devices for privacy reasons. I think these days it’s probably turned on by default for Windows, Android, iOS, etc., but it’s worth double-checking)

    The big benefit to using IPv6 is that all of your home machines can be (if you want them to be) reachable inside your network or outside your network using exactly the same IP address, which means you can just give them a fixed AAAA and access them from anywhere in the world you like. If you’re into that sort of thing, of course. It’s a lot of fun.

  • tvcvt@lemmy.ml
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    2
    ·
    1 year ago

    There’s a pretty interesting series on the topic at Tall Paul Tech’s YouTube channel (here’s the most recent: https://youtu.be/WFso88w2SiM). He goes into quite a bit of detail over the course of a few videos about how he handled everything and highlights some of the trials and tribulations with the isp. It’s not a guide per se, but definitely stuff worth thinking through.

  • MeanEYE@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    2
    ·
    1 year ago

    Okay, so manu of these answers are just plain wrong. In short, you shouldn’t care as the biggest impact will be to network admins. They are the ones who have to configure routing and handle everything else that comes with new addresses. The rest of the world simply doesn’t know or notice whether they are using IPv4 or v6. Business as usual.

    If the question is whether you should play with it at home. Sure thing if you have the desire to. It’s the future and only a matter of time before it becomes a reality. Said network admins and ISPs have been delaying the transition since they are the ones who have to work it out and putting your entire user base behind single IPv4 NAT is simpler than moving everything to IPv6.

    From network admin perspective, yes it’s worth moving to IPv6 since network topology becomes far simpler with it. Fewer sub-networks, and routing rules to handle those. Less hardware to handle NAT and other stuff. Problem is, they made the bed for themselves and switching to IPv6 becomes harder the more you delay it. Number of users in past 10 years or so has skyrocketed. Easily quadrupled. We use to have home computers with dial-up. Easy enough, assign IP when you connect, release it on disconnect. Then broadband came and everyone is sitting online 100% of the time. Then mobile phones which are also online 100% of the time. Then smart devices, now cars and other devices start having public internet access, etc. As number of users increases, network admins keep adding complexity to their networks to handle them. If you don’t have public IP, just do traceroute and see how many internal network hops you have.

  • dan@upvote.au
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    1
    ·
    edit-2
    1 year ago

    There’s a bunch of advantages. IPv6 can be useful since your devices can have the same IP both internally and externally. No dealing with port forwarding. No split horizon DNS (where you have different DNS entries for internal vs external). No NAT. No DHCP required for client systems (can just use SLAAC to auto-generate addresses). Much simpler routing. It’s a bit faster. Proper QoS.

    I used to use Comcast, who actually have very good IPv6 support. They were the first major US ISP to roll out IPv6 to everyone, around 10 years ago. Unfortunately my current ISP doesn’t have IPv6, but they’re aiming to roll it out this year.

      • dan@upvote.au
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        1
        ·
        edit-2
        1 year ago

        A good ISP that supports IPv6 will give you a /64 range. That’s a huge number of IPs, 2^64. Easily enough for every device on your network to have a lot of public IPs. If you use Docker or VMs, you could give each one a public IPv6 address.

        When every device on your network can have a public IP, there’s no longer a reason to have private IPs. Instead, you’d use firewall rules for internal-only stuff (ie allow access only if the source IP is in your IPv6 range).

        This is how the internet used to work in the old days - universities would have a large IP range, and every computer on campus would have a public IP.

        Of course, you’d still have a firewall on your router (and probably on your computers too) that blocks incoming connections for things you don’t want to expose publicly.

  • milicent_bystandr@lemmy.ml
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    1
    ·
    1 year ago

    Thank you! I just want to say, I’ve also been curious about ipv6 every now and again for a long time, and this thread has helped me to understand more.

  • busturn@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    1
    ·
    1 year ago

    You’re asking if you should use it, while my ISP was working on it in 2017 and then it all got canned when they got bought out :( .

  • fedev@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    4
    arrow-down
    4
    ·
    1 year ago

    Because devices in your LAN will all be accessible from the internet with IPv6, you need to firewall every device.

    It becomes more of a problem for IoT devices which you can’t really control. If you can, disable ipv6 for those.

    • MeanEYE@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      4
      ·
      1 year ago

      Haha, no not really. IPv6 has the ability to provide public IP address for each device, but that doesn’t mean it will have to. Other than number of possible addresses, nothing is different. Routing, firewalls, NATs, etc. All remains the same.

    • orangeboats@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      5
      arrow-down
      1
      ·
      edit-2
      1 year ago

      It’s not necessary to firewall every device. Just like how your router can handle NAT, it should be able to handle stateful firewall too.

      Mine blocks all incoming connections by default. I can add (IP, port range) entries to the whitelist if I need to host a service, it’s not really different to NAT port forwarding rules.

      • Reliant1087@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        3
        ·
        1 year ago

        So even though the device has a public address, the route is through the firewall, hence the ability to filter traffic?

        • Unaware7013@kbin.social
          link
          fedilink
          arrow-up
          2
          ·
          1 year ago

          Yes, the firewall is still your transition point from your internal network to your ISP network. Just like with ipv4, you should be configuring your ipv6 firewall to only allow designated traffic into your network from the internet.

        • orangeboats@lemmy.world
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          2
          ·
          edit-2
          1 year ago

          Right. Packets still have to go through your router, assuming that your router has firewall turned on, it goes like this:

          1. Your router receives a packet.

          2. It checks whether the packet is “expected” (a “related” packet) - by using connection tracking.

            For example, if ComputerA had sent something to ServerX before, and now the packet received by router says “from ServerX to ComputerA”, then the packet is let through - surely, this packet is just a reply to ComputerA’s previous requests.

          3. If step 2 fails - we know this is a new incoming packet. Possibly it comes from an attacker, which we don’t want. And so the router checks whether there is a rule that allows such a packet to go through (the assumption is that since you are explicitly allowing it, you know how to secure yourself.)

            If I have setup a firewall rule that says “allow packets if their destination is ComputerB, TCP port 25565”, and the received packet matches this description, the router lets it through.

          4. Finally, the packets that the router accepts from the previous steps are forwarded to the relevant LAN hosts.

          • Reliant1087@lemmy.world
            link
            fedilink
            English
            arrow-up
            2
            ·
            1 year ago

            I understand this part :) I use a fairly complex firewall at work though I only know bits and pieces from reading different manuals. I think the part I didn’t understand was how exactly the routing worked differently in IPv4 vs v6. I get that because NAT happens in IPv4, packets can’t be routed at all without the firewall/router but I wasn’t sure what was the mechanism by which v6 made sure that packets went through the router, especially when you have stuff like v6 DHCP relays.

            • orangeboats@lemmy.world
              link
              fedilink
              English
              arrow-up
              2
              ·
              1 year ago

              Ah, I misunderstood your original comment, oops! But yes, IPv6 packets are routed just like IPv4 ones, just without the NAT’ing process i.e. the packet remains untouched the entire trip.

      • orangeboats@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        5
        ·
        1 year ago

        Port forwarding is exclusively a NAT phenomenon.

        In IPv6 every device should in theory have a public address - just like how every computer had a public IPv4 address back in the 1980s ~ 1990s.

        However, most sensible routers will have a firewall setup by default that blocks all incoming connections for security reasons. You still need to add firewall rules.

        • fedev@lemmy.world
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          2
          ·
          1 year ago

          This is correct. My router however doesn’t have that level of firewall. It’s either all allowed or nothing is.

        • MeanEYE@lemmy.world
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          1
          ·
          1 year ago

          There’s no “should in theory”. It’s only a possibility due to sheer number of possible combinations. No one was ever going to make every device public. It makes absolutely no sense. Why would your company’s printer be online or isolated networks or VPNs? There’s no point.

          • orangeboats@lemmy.world
            link
            fedilink
            English
            arrow-up
            2
            ·
            1 year ago

            IP addressing is just a way to give a globally unique number to each device. It’s just a number.

            And there wasn’t a real public/private distinction when the Internet was still in its infancy. Printers were indeed given “public” addresses because people needed a number for it.

            If you don’t want your printer to be reachable by the public Internet, use a firewall to block outside connections. If you can use NAT, you certainly can use a firewall. Heck, they are almost the same thing if you have been using the Linux kernel (iptables/nftables handle firewalling and masquerading with the same tool!)

            Routability is not the same as reachability. With NAT transversal you can reach my “private” hosts all the same, although you can’t route to me because I don’t have a public address.