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

0 points

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.

permalink
report
reply
0 points

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.

permalink
report
reply
0 points

And the biggest disadvantage of IPv6 is that each of your internal devices has its own address and can be directly accessible from outside. So you need to completely rethink how you do security.

permalink
report
parent
reply
0 points

And can be identified/tracked individually by outside entities. In IPv4, a website sees both my device and my kid’s device as the same IP. In IPv6 they’re different so this just provides more ways for them to track you.

permalink
report
parent
reply
0 points

That’s the reason for rcf 4941. It randomises the host part of your IPv6 address.

https://datatracker.ietf.org/doc/html/rfc4941

permalink
report
parent
reply
0 points

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.

permalink
report
reply
0 points
*

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.

permalink
report
parent
reply

The argument for IPv6 that there could be a unique address for 200 devices for every person living on the planet was much more compelling when network security was a more simple space.

permalink
report
parent
reply
0 points

Nothing has changed about why that is compelling: NAT sucks and creates nothing but problems.

Network security is almost the same with IPv6.

If you rely on NAT as a security measure you are just very bad at networking.

permalink
report
parent
reply

Selfhosted

!selfhosted@lemmy.world

Create post

A place to share alternatives to popular online services that can be self-hosted without giving up privacy or locking you into a service you don’t control.

Rules:

  1. Be civil: we’re here to support and learn from one another. Insults won’t be tolerated. Flame wars are frowned upon.

  2. No spam posting.

  3. Posts have to be centered around self-hosting. There are other communities for discussing hardware or home computing. If it’s not obvious why your post topic revolves around selfhosting, please include details to make it clear.

  4. Don’t duplicate the full text of your blog or github here. Just post the link for folks to click.

  5. Submission headline should match the article title (don’t cherry-pick information from the title to fit your agenda).

  6. No trolling.

Resources:

Any issues on the community? Report it using the report flag.

Questions? DM the mods!

Community stats

  • 3.4K

    Monthly active users

  • 1.6K

    Posts

  • 14K

    Comments