Alias Native not combining ASN enumeration with custom list in same rule
-
@lohphat said in Alias Native not combining ASN enumeration with custom list in same rule:
but like any new thing, the more we encourage its use
No I don't buy this to be honest.. A user or 2, or even 10,000 of them isn't going to move IPv6 along any faster ;) If your isp hands you out some shitty deployment of IPv6 you using it or not using it isn't going to slow or speed up the adoption of IPv6 at a global scale.
Now if enough users called their isp and said hey we need IPv6.. Maybe they might think about adding it, but they can also ask you why you need it - what resource are you trying to get to that you can not ;)
And they might up your cost, because hey switching to and deploying IPv6 sure isn't free ;)
-
@johnpoz This is a protocol issue transparent to the user community.
It no different than you asking your airline which tires they use on their aircraft or what they fill them with. The decision to use a particular vendor and to use nitrogen instead of air was not a user issue, but one of operations to improve reliability. The users weren't consulted.
The decision of IPv6 functionality is not at the user level no more than a user deciding what the flag bits are in a TCP packet or enet frame.
Users don't deal with the IETF or even need to know they exist, but WE at the operational level do.
IPv6 is a thing. QUIC is a thing. Infrastructure vendors need to accommodate progress or stand aside with their excuses so that others can meet the market changes.
-
@lohphat said in Alias Native not combining ASN enumeration with custom list in same rule:
IPv6 is a thing. QUIC is a thing
While I agree, vendors do need to support current protocols, etc. but doesn't mean the users have to leverage them if they see no benefit.
A user not using IPv6 is not going to slow down progress was my point.. Me and the local ipv6 cheerleader bump heads over this quite a bit.. My advice to a user that is having issues with IPv6, and doesn't want to put in the time to learn about all the differences, and how to properly manage and or even have to deal with a isp nonsense deployment of it.. The simple solution is just put it away for another day.. And you will save yourself a lot of grief.. The "requirement" of having IPv6 is years away, years! Now it could come quickly at some point in the future as when they finally get to the top of the hill and start rolling down the other side.. To me IPv6 is actually here when you have a major player say, hey on XYZ date, even if 10-15 years in the future will be turning off IPv4 access..
Have you heard of any such announcements? Until that happens, IPv6 is just an option that you do not need to use if you do not want too. Until there is actually something that requires you to have IPv6 - it is a choice.. Users making the choice to use or not use is not going to slow down or speed up its global adoption.. Quic is an option, Some site that says hey you can use quic to connect to me, nothing saying I have to allow or use that.. Unless they turn off other normal means of access. Quic has been around for a long time as well, don't really see it taking off like a rocket either ;)
We are going to be stuck in this middle ground for a really long time, where mobile devices, things that require large number of IPs will leverage IPv6, this just frees up IPv4 space for other users where it not cost effective to transition to IPv6..
To be honest there is a very large grey market for selling IPv4 space.. We had sold off a portion of our IPv4 space that we were not using, and really had no plans of ever using for a nice chunk of change.. And now those locked away IPv4 can be used by people that have need/use of them, its a win win for al involved.
-
@johnpoz The either/or of IPv4 vs Ipv6 is a false dichotomy you're imposing on yourself where it doesn't exist from external pressure. Not even the IETF is proposing a sundown for IPv4 but they ARE pushing for dual stack interoperability ASAP.
The better throughput due to improved congestion handling is a big one. Most of my Google/YouTube traffic (the bulk of my traffic is streaming media) and now, some of my gaming traffic is IPv6. Most of my mobile traffic is IPv6.
The "we don't have to because IPv4 is not going away" mantra is only a form of procrastination and ignoring the market trend. We're already past 50% adoption in the developed world. Get your IPv6 skills and infrastructure in the game as soon as you can so that you're comfortable with it and prepared so that it's not a mystery.
As an infrastructure player, pfSense needs to stay in the game. Fine, make your personal choices for your use case, but from this point forward, if an infrastructure vendor isn't IPv6 compliant, it's off my vendor list. I'm not going to make capital investments in hobbled gear who can't support a 20 year ratified protocol with over 50% adoption.
