Arrived in my inbox Thursday not a good move for the SMB market. For those without Networking pros, including many MSPs this will be a disaster. With all addresses being internet routable I see chaos ensuing and more and more compromised systems. IPv6 was not well thought out and should be modified with private addressing and tools to make implementation easy for the SMB users on tight budgets.
Could this cause a fork of TrueNAS Core?
Can you copy on paste this email? I didn’t receive one. A really quick google does not return a hit either.
From the blog post, it doesn’t seem to me like they are actively removing support for IPv4 based features.
Also I don’t support the position that IPv6 wasn’t thought out well. It does have local addresses (fd00::/8) and I personally think it’s good to move away from NAT.
Yeah, that email just landed in my inbox and I scanned through the post. I also get the impression that ipv4 will still be supported in some fashion, and as mentioned ipv6 does have local address space. I guess a bunch of us are going to need to brush up on ipv6 in the near future and figure things out.
Would be really nice if it would eliminate CGNAT for those of us on cellular internet!
Maybe some of you are non-native English speakers so let me break this down.
TrueNAS has broadly supported IPv6 for over ten years. IPv6 clients can access NFS, SMB, S3, and WebDav shares on TrueNAS CORE, Enterprise, or SCALE. However, that support generally assumed that TrueNAS was used on dual-stack networks with both IPv4 and IPv6 access. With the introduction of TrueNAS SCALE, TrueNAS is now embracing IPv6-only networks.
TrueNAS has support for IPV6 but you were required to also have IPV4 to get that working, they are announcing that in the future you can use it in IPV6 only mode removing IPV4 as a prerequisite.
And to hammer home what Tom said:
- IPv4-only - always was and will still be supported.
- Mixed IPv4/IPv6 - long supported and will still be supported.
- IPv6-only - not supported in the past, but going forward it will be.
This is an addition, you are losing nothing.
That’s what I thought when I skimmed through it. To remove (suddenly) the IPv4 private networks would really toss a large portion of the world into a spin.
Their phrasing was anything but clear. I received several calls on the topic that I reflected in my comments. efahl stated much more succinctly in his post below how iX should have worded their post. Certain words are red flags and should be avoided so as not to misconstrue meaning.
You should be doing ix’s blog and PR. Your statement in bullet points is clear, why didn’t iX do it that way. A case of to much prose and marketing bent. Words and phrasing can be misleading, and I received calls looking for clarification which I had none yesterday. So many times the IT industry has taken miss steps from the days of “vaporware” to “Zero Trust” Unifi’s abrupt dropping product or incomplete upgrades. So please don’t drop bombs unless you intend to.
The subject field in an email does not support bullet points. You still would have had to read at least part of it’s content in order to get the explanation
Anyways… Just the the basic thought that support for IPv4 could be discontinued in a general purpose storage product mainly used in the SMB market, is so far-fetched, that the person who wrote this annoucement probably not even remotely considered, that someone could come to such a conclusion
I think you’re misunderstanding that email.
There are some networks in the world that do not have IPv4. Those people could install truenas but not do some functions like updating because the updates only worked over IPv4.
What TrueNAS is saying is that now networks which are fully IPv6 will be able to to use all of TrueNAS including the parts which were previously IPv4 only.