* https://www.youtube.com/@ukipv6council468/videos
This includes at academic institutions where it's basically all BYOD so they have to deal with a more 'random' assortment of systems:
* https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=2B-liebzcOM
And enterprise networks, like Jen Linkova at Google:
* https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=hb98hAb5_W8
Jen also had a presentation recently (2024-11) at RIPE87, "Mission Possible: How Google Plans to Turn Off IPv4!", where they've managed to reclaim 300K IPv4 addresses:
* https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=UTRsi6mbAWM
She's currently co-chair of the IETF IPv6 Maintenance (6man) working group.
There are ways to fix that with 464XLAT/CLAT, but I never got around to deploying it.
These days I'm just running dual-stack, with no NAT64. I hate NAT with a burning passion, so adding another layer of stateful NAT is a bit of a net negative in my eyes.
Someday I'll go full IPv6 on my home network with 464XLAT. And then I'll realize that some stupid IoT device or something is not CLAT aware. Obviously there are solutions around that too, but they require an intermediate device.
By now there is a fair amount of material, eg:
https://indico.cern.ch/event/1274792/contributions/5444353/a...
But also CLAT should turn on if a PREF64 is known and no IPv4 is available, regardless of 108.
Yes, VLANs add complexity -- even the obligatory IoT VLAN -- but I generally want to keep these IoT devices isolated anyway.
My ISP does DS-lite which is some abomination where the shared (split by port) IPv4 address is calculated based on the IPv6 address? Using a fixed mapping table? Which is both very popular here and has zero linux support.
They had another option to do PPPoE IPv4 + SLAAC IPv6, but for this option they didn't support DHCP prefix delegation. So I had to use this, and to work around that I needed to make my IPv6 network bridged.
The problem is Jool hooks into the linux routing table, and in the bridged network none of the outbound packets reach that table. So I had to 1. rewrite their RAs with my own DNS64 server and 2. mangle NAT64 packets to look as if they're sent to the router directly so they hit the routing table (and get processed by Jool): https://github.com/andrewbaxter/portalino/blob/main/source/o...
Then I hit random MTU issues. MTU should be auto configured (and fixed when there's issues) but I saw problems with Chrome/Firefox refusing to load pages until I tried again at least 30s later until I forced the MTU lower.
So close, but still so far.
RedHat is working to get CLAT on regular Linux hosts, where it has been direly missing.
But this is the first time I've heard of that. Do any devices support it at all? I'm still struggling with IPv6 issues on my iphone.
* not sure about that
> I guess this is because sometimes hosts use bare IPv4 address
This, and also legacy applications just not using IPv6 sockets.
I wish it were possible to force major operating systems to prefer IPv4 over IPv6, which might be a viable workaround to a less reliable IPv6 workaround, but such a configuration appears to be unfeasible for mobile phones, Windows, and perhaps MacOS too.
"Here is the classical topology of home network." ... "And all the LAN hosts have one /64 IPv6 prefix."
Are people really deploying IPv6 like this? Rather than a /64 to a vlan?
(Personally, in the home, I'm just using DHCPv6-PD to delegate a different /64 to each VLAN).
Not just because the IoT devices are prone to attack because they may not get many updates, but also because they often need 2.4 GHz or may only support WPA 2. So my main network can be WPA3 only and 5 GHz only but the other networks are more lenient.
People may not know they're running a VLAN, but VLANs aren't uncommon either.
[0] Because what else would you use to decide how to block or permit traffic if you can't distinguish by the interface that the traffic came in on?
That is only because I want to though, I agree that the average home network will not have VLANs.
https://www.telus.com/en/support/article/create-a-guest-netw...
This, on the other hand, is Hacker News.
But the topology given in the article shows three separate, non-overlapping /64s, one for each host/router. (Although one would assume that the router at least must have an interface in each subnet, even if that's not what the diagram shows).
One might hope these would be on separate VLANs, as overlaying multiple subnets on one VLAN would be a bit iffy. I've not spotted anything in the article other than the diagram to detail interface configs.
* https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=GZ6pxh6ukCg
* https://ripe87.ripe.net/archives/video/1136/
* https://ripe87.ripe.net/wp-content/uploads/presentations/8-I...
Ansible roles:
