Drift/issues
17
1
Issues 172 Wiki Activity

Make IPv6 addresses more similar to IPv4 addresses #330

New Issue
Open
opened 2026-01-31 04:40:25 +01:00 by oysteikt · 3 comments
oysteikt commented 2026-01-31 04:40:25 +01:00
Owner
Copy Link

The IPv6 addresses situation is INSANE

It would be kinda nice if our ipv6 addresses followed a pattern more close to the ipv4 addresses.

instead of

Name IPv4 IPv6
brzeczyszczykiewicz 129.241.210.205 2001:700:300:1900::1:50
microbel 129.241.210.179 2001:700:300:1900::1:2
principal 129.241.210.233 2001:700:300:1900::4:233
sanctuary 129.241.210.170 2001:700:300:1900::1337 (this one is kinda cute, it can stay)
sleipner 129.241.210.193 2001:700:300:1900:FAB:CAB:DAB:7AB (broder, hva er det du driver med)

how about

Name IPv4 IPv6
brzeczyszczykiewicz 129.241.210.205 2001:700:300:1900::205
microbel 129.241.210.179 2001:700:300:1900::179
principal 129.241.210.233 2001:700:300:1900::233
sanctuary 129.241.210.170 2001:700:300:1900::1337 (this one is kinda cute, it can stay)
sleipner 129.241.210.193 2001:700:300:1900::193

If we are worried about breaking something with this change (skill issue from the people who hardcode our ipv6 addresses tbh, they don't even work at the moment), we could add the new addresses and keep the old ones around for a while. Maybe even log who are using the old ones, to try to determine if we are the ones with a skill issue somewhere.

# The IPv6 addresses situation is *INSANE* It would be kinda nice if our ipv6 addresses followed a pattern more close to the ipv4 addresses. instead of | Name| IPv4 | IPv6 | |-|-|-| |brzeczyszczykiewicz| 129.241.210.**205** | 2001:700:300:1900::**1:50** | |microbel| 129.241.210.**179** | 2001:700:300:1900::**1:2** | |principal| 129.241.210.**233** | 2001:700:300:1900::**4:233** | |sanctuary| 129.241.210.**170** | 2001:700:300:1900::**1337** (this one is kinda cute, it can stay) | |sleipner| 129.241.210.**193** | 2001:700:300:1900:**FAB:CAB:DAB:7AB** (broder, hva er det du driver med) | how about | Name| IPv4 | IPv6 | |-|-|-| |brzeczyszczykiewicz| 129.241.210.**205** | 2001:700:300:1900::**205** | |microbel| 129.241.210.**179** | 2001:700:300:1900::**179** | |principal| 129.241.210.**233** | 2001:700:300:1900::**233** | |sanctuary| 129.241.210.**170** | 2001:700:300:1900::**1337** (this one is kinda cute, it can stay) | |sleipner| 129.241.210.**193** | 2001:700:300:1900::**193** | If we are worried about breaking something with this change (skill issue from the people who hardcode our ipv6 addresses tbh, [they don't even work at the moment](#285)), we could add the new addresses and keep the old ones around for a while. Maybe even log who are using the old ones, to try to determine if we are the ones with a skill issue somewhere.
oysteikt added the dnsnetworking labels 2026-01-31 04:40:25 +01:00
oysteikt added this to the Kanban project 2026-01-31 04:40:25 +01:00
oysteikt moved this to Low priority in Kanban on 2026-01-31 14:19:25 +01:00
felixalb commented 2026-01-31 16:32:08 +01:00
Owner
Copy Link

I 110% agree with this, except for microbel, unless IP Reputation for e-mail isn't really a thing for IPv6? Also mayhaps sanctuary, øøøh

I 110% agree with this, except for microbel, unless [IP Reputation](https://postmarkapp.com/glossary/ip-reputation) for e-mail isn't really a thing for IPv6? Also mayhaps sanctuary, øøøh
danio commented 2026-02-06 13:13:48 +01:00
Owner
Copy Link

Sanctuary doesnt run things its ok

Sanctuary doesnt run things its ok
oysteikt commented 2026-02-06 13:16:34 +01:00
Author
Owner
Copy Link

Not at the moment no, but we still might want to keep a domain reserved for it in DNS until it one day gets back onto the local net

Not at the moment no, but we still might want to keep a domain reserved for it in DNS until it one day gets back onto the local net
Sign in to join this conversation.
No Branch/Tag Specified
Branches Tags
Labels
Clear labels
dns
Involves modifications to dvask
 exploration
See the galaxy!
 gitea
mail
epost nord
 new stuff
Adds a new service / new functionality
 openstack
NUTN OpenStack, more like closed stack
 services
Everything regarding selfhosted services
 software
Everything regarding homebrewn software
art
The issue needs someone to be creative
 backup
big
No, not bug, **big** - this is gonna take a while
 blocked
This issue/PR depends on one or more other issues/PRs
 bug
Something is not working, and it's not the shield hero
 crash report
Report an oopsie
 disputed
kranglefanter
 documentation
Documentation changes required
 duplicate
This issue or pull request already exists
 enhancement
New feature
 good first issue
Get your hands dirty with a new project here
 logging
networking
TTM4100
 nixos
Requires changes to our nixos setup
 question
More information is needed
 salt
Requires changes to our salt setup
 security
Skommel
 servers n' hardware
Regards hardware, servers or VMs
 wontfix
This won't be fixed
No Label dns networking
Milestone
No items
No Milestone
Projects
Clear projects
No project Kanban
Assignees
Clear assignees
adriangl albertba alfhj bjornoka chrisfjo chrivi danio davidk dungby eirikwit felixalb frero jonmro jovre karolds knuta krisleri larshhan olived oysteikt pederbs root torsteno vegardbm yorinad
No Assignees
3 Participants
Notifications
Due Date
No due date set.
Dependencies

No dependencies set.

Reference: Drift/issues#330
Delete Branch "%!s()"

Deleting a branch is permanent. Although the deleted branch may continue to exist for a short time before it actually gets removed, it CANNOT be undone in most cases. Continue?