The short list looks pretty sensible to me with those two exceptions. The long list gets a bit paranoid for me at the end - especially 32 onwards or so.
> the bug in TCP/IP that would allow a remote, unauthenticated attacker to get elevated code execution just by sending specially crafted IPv6 packets to an affected target .. That means it's wormable
I'm not convinced it would be particularly exploitable with a firewall between the system and the rest of the internet blocking unsolicited incoming traffic -which is what most consumer routers etc are doing for IPv6.
Other operating systems weren't affected, so it's not inherent in the protocol itself.
Defense in depth is a viable approach if IPv6 features are not required.
Yes, but while not inaccurate, I've heard this since 2000.
Are there any cell providers that don’t use native IPv6? Verizon definitely does. I’d be surprised if any big ones don’t.
Every other major provider is doing a horrible mess of IPv4 CGNAT with no native v6 still.
That is, individual people, not corporate connectivity. "Customer segment" is a meaningless term here, Grandma doesn't care about customers.
A lot of this is regional, sadly. No mobile phone provider in Canada/US would not allocate ipv4 access. It'd be madness. Too many unreachable endpoints.
In fact, no endpoint anywhere in US/Canada can get by without ipv4, but many don't care about ipv6.
There will be a point where that changes, but certainly not yet.
So why does Grandma care if her router can do ipv6?
All major companies world wide, all consumer end points world wide support ipv4.
And in US/Canada, everyone does ipv4 unless they are on some political campaign against it. And it will hurt them.
No, this is a thread about homelab and prosumer routers. No consumer—not Grandma, not mom, not Aunt Alice—is adjusting or checking or modifying their settings.
This is evidenced by:
> 6. Turn off UPnP
Really? Do you know how many things that will break for the average consumer?
> So why does Grandma care if her router can do ipv6?
Does Grandma care about UPnP and/or PCP? She's probably has never heard of them, but she should care about them if she wants certain apps to work.
And if Grandma happens to use an ISP that didn't get in early on the IPv4 land rush (or doesn't have the cash to buy individual IPv4 addresses for all their customers) then she certainly should care if her router can do IPv6 (or rather someone should care on her behalf):
> We learned a very expensive lesson. 71% of the IPv4 traffic we were supporting was from ROKU devices. 9% coming from DishNetwork & DirectTV satellite tuners, 11% from HomeSecurity cameras and systems, and remaining 9% we replaced extremely outdated Point of Sale(POS) equipment. So we cut ROKU some slack three years ago by spending a little over $300k just to support their devices.
> First off I despise both Apple and that other evil empire (house of mouse) I want nothing to do with either of them. Now with that said I am one of four individuals that suggested and lobbied 15 other [American Indian] tribal nations to offer a new AppleTV device in exchange for active ROKU devices. Other nations are facing the same dilemma. Spend an exorbitant amount of money to support a small amount of antiquated devices or replace the problem devices at fraction of the cost.
* https://community.roku.com/t5/Features-settings-updates/It-s...
* Discussion, "Roku devices don't support IPv6 in 2023 and it's costing ISPs": https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=35047624
You may just happen to be in a part of the Internet/world that got in early on the IPv4 address land rush, and/or can afford to throw money at the problem to buy individual addresses for each of their customers: not everyone is so fortunate.
These are still consumer endpoints. And:
You may just happen to be in a part of the Internet/world that got in early on the IPv4 address land rush
Yes, that's precisely what I was discussing. Everyone in the regions I discussed can access ipv4, period. All domestic businesses do ipv4. All businesses worldwide which want access to these markets do too.
I'm not interested in ipv6 advocacy, but facts. And my statements stand.
> Everyone in the regions I discussed can access ipv4, period. All domestic businesses do ipv4. All businesses worldwide which want access to these markets do too.
At what cost?
Accessing IPv4 cost that Native American tribe a lot of money because one particular manufacturer couldn't be bother to support IPv6.
It would cost (e.g.) T-Mobile US [0] a lot of money, which would be passed on the public, to give people an IPv4 address on their handset (even using 100.64/10) and then run hardware to do CG-NAT for everyone.
Irrelevant. My point does not reference cost, or anything else but reality as it stands now.