[gentoo-user] [OT] Browser support for IPv6 Link-Local: oh, the shame...

[gentoo-user] [OT] Browser support for IPv6 Link-Local: oh, the shame...

[Grant Edwards]

I just found out that Firefox recently _removed_ support for IPv6
link-local addresses.  It was a very useful feature -- at least to me
-- but it wasn't required by law, so they removed it.  Yes, that's
_actually_ what the devs said in the thread I found.

AFAICT, chrome has never supported it.  Links doesn't. w3m doesn't.

Internet Explorer does.  

Oh, the shame...

You'd think with a nice geeky feature like that, it would be the other
way around: supported by firefox/chrome/links/w3m but not by IE.

Of course the _way_ that Microsoft supports it using some meaningless
numerical index as the zone identifier is rather half-arsed compared
to the interface names you use on Linux, but at least it _works_ in
IE.

[For those of you keeping score, curl does support IPv6 link-local
addresses, so it's not a shutout.]

Now that RFC6874 is standards-track, I assume Firefox devs will be
forced (against their will, apparently) to put that feature back in.
Hopefully Chrome, w3m, links, et alia will follow suite.

IPv6 link-local addresses are _way_ cool for dealing with embedded
devices that have network interfaces.  You can actually set them up
and use them without having to faff about with dualing DHCP servers,
temporarily adding an IP address/route to your laptop/desktop, using
proprietary Windows-only widget-management utilities, configuring the
thing via serial console, USB port, hardware switches/jumpers, etc.

-- 
Grant Edwards               grant.b.edwards        Yow!
                                  at               
                              gmail.com            

Re: [gentoo-user] [OT] Browser support for IPv6 Link-Local: oh, the shame...

[Rich Freeman]

On Thu, Nov 6, 2014 at 12:38 PM, Grant Edwards
<grant.b.edwards@gmail.com> wrote:
>
> IPv6 link-local addresses are _way_ cool for dealing with embedded
> devices that have network interfaces.  You can actually set them up
> and use them without having to faff about with dualing DHCP servers,
> temporarily adding an IP address/route to your laptop/desktop, using
> proprietary Windows-only widget-management utilities, configuring the
> thing via serial console, USB port, hardware switches/jumpers, etc.
>

They also don't change every time your dynamic prefix changes to the internet.

I realize that 99% of people using IPv6 today at home have static IPs
with tunnel brokers, but if it ever gets rolled out mainstrem it is
likely to involve dynamic prefixes, which means anytime your ISP
changes your outside IP every device in your house will change its
internet-routable IP.  Today you don't see that since everybody uses
NAT.

Link-local is really the solution to this if you don't want to use NAT
in the IPv6 world (which is clearly the greater evil, and even then
you're using link local anyway).

--
Rich