Hacker News new | comments | ask | show | jobs | submit login

Still no proper IPv6 support. I use v6 almost exclusively to get to all my servers.

To be fair, mosh -6 does work. I believe it’s only roaming that doesn’t work yet?

Specifically, it is roaming between IPv6 and IPv4 that is problematic. According to Anders Kaseorg, roaming amongst IPv6 nodes works fine.

* https://github.com/mobile-shell/mosh/pull/453

* https://github.com/mobile-shell/mosh/issues/81

Right, and without roaming it's kind of pointless.

I wish I had your problems, I've been waiting more than 5 years since my ISP first promised they are working on implementing IPv6 and so far I am still stuck with ~10mbit/s ADSL using IPv4 only.

> I use v6 almost exclusively to get to all my servers.

I'm curious. Does any of your servers have only IPv6 address? That is, no IPv4-connectivity.

I use mosh to connect to my workstation, which only has an IPv6 address as far as public connectivity goes.

Several friends of mine are in a similar situation, so at least in my bubble, getting easy access to computers running at home is a major use-case for IPv6 :).

Some containers/jails do, but not the entire server.

Curious on what advantages you see vs. using IPv6 Edit: IPv4

I'll chime in and say: Support for IPv6. It's ... self evident? I think we've reached a point that it's okay to call out a network client that doesn't support it.

I am not sure I understand. How is it self-evident? Is there a benefit over using mosh over IPv4? Performance, stability,anything else? Does it add anything to what mosh can do over IPv4. Is the benefit from the client end or the server end or in-between.

Well one benefit is that it works. Servers which don't have a v4 address are a thing.

Connecting to servers that aren't given an IPv4 address (because NAT sucks)?

NAT sucks, that's why.

Guidelines | FAQ | Support | API | Security | Lists | Bookmarklet | Legal | Apply to YC | Contact