IPv6 only VPS ... setting up IPv4 connection
It seems that IPv6 only vps services will become the next very big thing in the (inexpensive) VPS world.
I've never had a IPv6 only VPS. I was just wondering how to set up IPv4 connectivity to the IPv6 only vps.
I have read this:
https://iblog.ovh/how-to-get-ipv4-connectivity-on-an-ipv6-only-vps/
It seems not too difficult -- or would there be more to do here?
ta, t
Tagged:
Comments
Here's another way - using vxlan
https://yoursunny.com/t/2020/EUserv-IPv4/
The Ultimate Speedtest Script | Get Instant Alerts on new LES/LET deals | Cheap VPS Deals | VirMach Flash Sales Notifier
FREE KVM VPS - FreeVPS.org | FREE LXC VPS - MicroLXC
Tailscale.
"The imitator dooms himself to hopeless mediocrity." — Ralph Waldo Emerson
Cloudflare WARP could be a possible option too.
NAT64 makes it fairly painless, but it bemuses me that providers will sell you an IPv6-only service without running any sort of NAT64/DNS64 gateway for stupid parts of the internet that refuse to enter the 21st century (yes, GitHub, I'm looking at you).
Yes, there are public services, but it should be a no-brainer for any decent provider to provide something more local for their customers.
There are even providers who want to sell some IPv6-only services, but other services they also want to sell are IPv4-only. Makes for a perfect combination if you want to access one service from the other.
Too bad Microsoft bought them. MS is super weird when it comes to IPv6 support. Some of their services are available through v6. However here comes the irony: their login is ipv4 only... at least that's what it used to be 6 months ago. There have been some blog posts about this. I highly doubt Github will get native ipv6 any time soon. Gitlab on the other hand fully supports ipv6
I would always suggest to connect an ipv6 only server do a dual stack server through a tunnel or whatsoever and avoid any pain.
Offering IPv6 support shouldn't be hard for vast majority anyway.
I don't think it's fair to blame Microsoft for Github's insane resistance to IPv6 - they've been saying "oh yeah we're working on it" for literally decades.
Ipv4 is not expensive enough to be worth my time yet...
Action and Reaction in history
oh the horrors of setting up IPv6 on my azure vm.
youtube.com/watch?v=k1BneeJTDcU
Yeah don't get started on that. Simple solution to that is actually not using ipv6 on any azure server or service at all. Azure overall is quite overpriced for what they deliver tbh but that's just my opinion. In the end it is the company paying for it.
Btw do they still do the Nat thing for ipv6 on azure servers? All I heard was that ipv6 is at least free now and they won't charge 12$+ for a single ipv6 address-
There is quite literally nothing about IPv6 on servers. The docs are too technical. I am trying to add an IP, not setup a Cisco Router through command line (even that is easier).
youtube.com/watch?v=k1BneeJTDcU
As a provider, we do NAT64 and DNS64. Our IPv6 only VPS can reach v4 only destination, with that addition.
F4 Networks | Reliable BGP enabled Colocation, Dedicated & VPS
What packages/stack are you using to achieve this?
how about BW? limited? or full speed of VPS Link?
Host-C | Storage by Design | AS211462
“If it can’t guarantee behavior under load, it doesn’t belong in production.”
IPv4 hoarders have no interest in pushing IPv6. Microsoft bought 667,000 IPv4 addresses in 2011 from Nortel for $7.5 million on top of what they had already.
They made another purchase of 1.8 million IPv4 addresses [20.160.0.0/12,20.180.0.0/14, 20.184.0.0/13] from Computer Science Corporation (currently known as DXC Technolgy) in February 2017.
https://github.com/Ne00n/wg-mesh
Connect these 2, add a default route on your IPv6 only machine, profit.
Free NAT KVM | Free NAT LXC
Yeah, yeah, I get it. Microsoft evil.
I'm just saying, Github's distaste for IPv6 massively predates any involvement from Microsoft; it really has nothing to do with them.
I get it too. Just wanted to say that from a business perspective solely there's not much incentive for MS to push IPv6. At least not for now.
Unlike some newer businesses, they don't feel shortage because they were/are capable of investing in IPv4 hoarding.
We use Tayga for NAT64 and Unbound for DNS64
F4 Networks | Reliable BGP enabled Colocation, Dedicated & VPS
We give 5TB at 500Mbps on our v6 only VPS
F4 Networks | Reliable BGP enabled Colocation, Dedicated & VPS
Besides, they'd devalue their investments by pushing IPv6...
Having a VPS that is connected via mesh in Russia is really useful.
Github is barely usable, no way to update wg-mesh.
ip route add 140.82.112.3 via 10.0.251.1
3 files changed, 37 insertions(+), 13 deletions(-)
Profit
Free NAT KVM | Free NAT LXC
I think that IPv4 also helps people centralize the internet in their control so they can censor/deplatform/control the narrative/etc.
Start self hosting with an external IP with IPv6rs.
The only thing between your host and your data is trust. Trust is not security.
wuss
The Yeti has left the building.
I disagree. I don't think providers will ever do IPv6 only
If it's just hobby and staff is free (aka minecraft staff members) it might work. If it's an actual business where you have to pay wages it won't work
People will buy it seeing the price tag, some things won't work because of it being IPv6 only and it will result in either tons of support tickets and refund or cancellation right away. If you outsource support you're paying 3 USD per ticket. Leasing IPv4 from IPXO costs 0.35 USD per IP per month so yeah.. it really doesn't make sense.
Also if you're advertising on Google ads etc it might cost you 30 USD to get a customer. If having IPv6 only leads to worse user experience & higher cancellation rate it's not worth it there either.
"no support" (C1V / MicroNode) and "no refounds" (AliPay and crypto only).
We accept Karma donations for the last flan. 🍮 affbrr
But not every server is customer-facing. The important thing is that you don't end up having some IPv6-only and some IPv4-only servers.
I like your absolute confidence that those IPv4's will never ever change in price. You're absolutely wrong but I like your confidence nonetheless.
I don't see v4 ever costing more than the ever increasing paypal tx fees (I hate them. But just like with v6 only, convincing people to pay for their vps via SEPA will probably cost more than it's worth).
They were literally 0.50 USD a couple of months ago when IPv4 entered an all-time high...
The future is IPv6, or at the bare minimum a double stack. On the server used for our sale I was testing until near launch with a NAT + IPv6, but SolusVM doesn't like NAT for no apparent reason and it turns out that demand on NAT is absolutely scarce on that platform, so I went IPv6-only.
Obviously I was preoccupied with accessing the VM, not everyone has residential ISPs with IPv6 yet, but since the management server is double stack and actually allows access from IPv4 via VNC, that sorts things out to a very relevant extent for those on IPv4.
The remainder of it is tunnels, Tailscale, current applications supporting different address formats, etc etc etc. Github is not the best example, apparently keeps several legacy things for no good reason for such a simple platform, and Microsoft... well... if you've invested over 10 million Euros on IPv4 wouldn't you want to protect your investment? I mean, when was even the last time Microsoft made a truly disruptive product, 1995?
It's open source driving IPv6 - closed source will get there. We're already at 45.7% worldwide and when some big guy jumps the gun we'll pass the 50s very, very soon. I don't believe IPv4 will disappear, but I frankly believe it will turn a near-worthless commodity and honestly? It was about time. I mean, they're addresses.
Some of them already do.
Or, you target customers that know what they are doing and understand what they are buying. I've been running ipv6 only for over a decade and have 30+ vps's with ipv6 only, I cant remember ever opening a ticket for any of them.
Sell them without support then. It's just an additional step to scare away customers to stupid to run ipv6 only, so win-win.
Again, do not target customers that are not capable of running ipv6 only.
Indeed; my main production stuff was v6-only for the last few years. The idea that v6 is somehow tricky or complicated is just absurd.
@rcy026 I run IPv6 only where I don't need IPv4, like a website behind cloudflare proxy too.
Yes. My argument is entirely built around your average joe, not specific IPv6 know-all people.
The average joe does not even know if he runs ipv6 or ip4 and he does not care as long as his phone shows the daily facetube videos or tiktoks or whatever.
People that rent servers are usually way above the average joe when it comes to technical skills and to be honest, they should know the difference between ipv6 and ip4 or they have no business running a server on the public internet. We seriously should stop adapting everything for idiots.
While most people in here know the difference some don't. If a provider could do something so that only experienced people who know what they're doing buys it then it makes sense.
https://www.digitalocean.com/community/questions/how-to-update-packages-and-security-updates
+
countless of other posts with 1000+ upvotes on stackoverflow. I'm sure you could imagine yourself when you first started learning Linux. Having IPv4 + IPv6 surely made the whole ordeal easier. My point is a person like this wouldn't know the difference, they'd buy whatever was cheapest and then complain. Offering no support, no refund, sure that would help but they'd get bad reviews and people might see them in a bad way. Making the user experience better, even if it costs more for the provider is worth it in my opinion. There will always be that one guy.
From a providers standpoint user experience is #1. If dual stack could improve that experience then they will do it.
If I understand things correctly, the point of going IPv6-only VS dual stacking is to save costs? In that case:
Just ask yourself: Why are they offering PayPal when only accepting ACH or SEPA is cheaper? Or why do they spend money on a nice looking UI? The answer is always UX, and most of the time having a good UX pays for itself.
There's really nothing to ask ourselves. Regular SEPA transfers are only processed during business hours and can take up to 24-48 hours to complete. There's something as SEPA instant payments, but not every bank supports it.
ACH debits, such as bill payments or withdrawals, generally take 1-3 days to process, while ACH credits, such as direct deposits or vendor payments, usually take one day to process.
Same-day ACH, which typically incurs an additional fee, processes on the same business day.
Furthermore, the seller would need both EU and US bank accounts to sell to the EU and US clientele.
When I started with Linux ipv6 was not even a thing.
Absolutely correct, I have never questioned that. Believe me, I've been in the hosting industry for over 30 years, I know very well that idiots complain. The question is, should we design everything we do to fit those idiots and cater to their every wish, or should we simply state that there will always be idiots and move on?
I made the chose to not cater to people that buy whatever is cheapest and then complain, and it is the best choice I've ever made. Today I do not have to deal with customers that buys a $4/month unmanaged VPS and then complains and register a chargeback when the vps does not automatically install wordpress and walk their dog. This whole idea that what the customer thinks he is buying somehow is more important than what the provider actually sold him has to stop.
User experience or idiot experience? We have to draw the line somewhere.
A customer that buys a vps but do not understand the difference between ip4 and ipv6 can hardly qualify as even a user. If you have any valid reason, whatever simple it might be, to run and administer your own server on the public internet, then you know that difference. Otherwise your opinion on user experience is completely irrelevant, because you have no idea what you are dealing with anyway.
Don't get me wrong, I'm all for a superior user experience as long as the user has somewhat reasonable expectations. What I'm trying to say is that if a customers buys peanuts and then complains that he did not get diamonds, the problem is not what the provider delivered, the problem is what the customer expected. The customer has a shitty user experience, yes, but that is only because he has no clue what he is doing and has nothing to do with the services provided.
As every provider does today. You will find very few providers without ipv6.
It's one of the reasons, yes. The fact that it is 2024 and ipv6 has been a standard for 30 years or so is another.
I have absolutely no idea, and I do not understand why you are asking me?
I have no idea how this discussion came to be about UI? Have I ever questioned that a nice looking UI is a good thing? I usually strongly advocate nice UI's wherever possible.
My point was, and still is, that if a provider sells a VPS clearly stating "THIS VPS COMES WITH IPV6 ONLY" and a customer buys it and expects ip4, then the problem is not with the provider and they should in no way be held responsible. The customer is an idiot and if they are unsatisfied and wants to complain, then let them complain. You will never make a customer like that satisfied and we should all stop trying.
For VPS, IPv6 is somewhat more common nowadays, but look at mail or webhosting providers and IPv6 support is still fairly hard to find (mxroute is a good example here). And even if providers claim to support IPv6, it's very often just second class support (e.g. GreenCloudVPS doesn't support Reverse DNS for IPv6). Also, how do providers treat an IPv6 outage? Will this be as high priority to resolve as an IPv4 outage (will the provider even notice? Maybe their monitoring is IPv4 only?)
Depends on where you look.
Lowend, yes, many providers still treat ipv6 like an add-on "best effort" kind of service. Some, but not all. There are some serious providers even in the lowend market, and more and more providers seems to realize that they will have to run to ipv6 pretty soon.
Go highend and it's the other way around. Big hosting providers like Scaleway, AWS and many others are ipv6 first and ip4 second, often with an added cost if you want ip4. Global carriers encapsulate ip4 to move it over their ipv6 backbones, and a lot of cellphone networks have been ipv6 only for many years. Everything new is built with ipv6 and then you solve the ip4 connectivity with proxies or tunnels.
Check this: https://developers.redhat.com/blog/2019/05/17/an-introduction-to-linux-virtual-interfaces-tunnels
ip6tnl will do
Only ipv6 is indeed more affordable. The prerequisite is bandwidth support. The network can sometimes be very fast but also slow.