← Back to context

Comment by mahboi

11 hours ago

6to4 and NAT64 are not what I'm saying. Those involve a relay server and v4 translation, and there's an entire memo on why that's unreliable and abandoned. I want to switch to fully native IPv6 without changing any of my addresses. There's no reason this should be impossible.

> I want to switch to fully native IPv6 without changing any of my addresses. There's no reason this should be impossible.

… except for the fact that you have to have completely new data structures and packet format to fit more address bits, and once you change the structures you need a new version field so any gear that sees a packet knows where to use the old code paths or new ones.

Then you're at the point where you have to push new code everywhere to handle these changes, and some nodes will have only the old code and some the new code, so now you're into translation and/or tunnelling to make sure the old addresses can talk to new addresses. Depending on their risk tolerance, some operators will enable the new code and some will not.

You also have to update DNS with new records, as A records are hard-coded to 32 bits. So now you're updating DNS libraries and user land.

There is no way to expand address space without going through all the same issues as what we call "IPv6" (originally SIPP) has gone through.

* https://github.com/becarpenter/misc/blob/main/why6why.md