this post was submitted on 11 May 2026
58 points (95.3% liked)

Selfhosted

56957 readers
429 users here now

A place to share alternatives to popular online services that can be self-hosted without giving up privacy or locking you into a service you don't control.

Rules:

  1. Be civil: we're here to support and learn from one another. Insults won't be tolerated. Flame wars are frowned upon.

  2. No spam posting.

  3. Posts have to be centered around self-hosting. There are other communities for discussing hardware or home computing. If it's not obvious why your post topic revolves around selfhosting, please include details to make it clear.

  4. Don't duplicate the full text of your blog or github here. Just post the link for folks to click.

  5. Submission headline should match the article title (don’t cherry-pick information from the title to fit your agenda).

  6. No trolling.

  7. No low-effort posts. This is subjective and will largely be determined by the community member reports.

Resources:

Any issues on the community? Report it using the report flag.

Questions? DM the mods!

founded 2 years ago
MODERATORS
ruud@lemmy.world
Loki@lemmy.world
CannaVet@lemmy.world
devve@lemmy.world
HybridSarcasm@lemmy.world
HybridSarcasm@lemmy.hybridsarcasm.xyz
58
What does your IPv6 setup look like? (feddit.org)
submitted 3 days ago by marius@feddit.org to c/selfhosted@lemmy.world
59 comments fedilink hide all child comments
 

except for nor using it at all, of course.

So I want to make my homelab IPv6 ready, because I have too much free time, i guess. There are two decisions that I'm currently unsure about:

  1. ULA or not. Do you have local only addresses or do your clients communicate using the global IPv6 address? Does not using ULAs work without a static IP from the ISP?
  2. DHCPv6 or is SLAAC enough?

For each question both options seem to be possible and I'm interested in your experience

Cheers

you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
[–] hobata@lemmy.ml 0 points 3 days ago* (last edited 3 days ago) (1 children)

I have that conf: /etc/sysctl.d/01-ipv6.conf

net.ipv6.conf.all.disable_ipv6 = 1
net.ipv6.conf.default.disable_ipv6 = 1
net.ipv6.conf.lo.disable_ipv6 = 1

But that falls under your exception. It seems to me that IPv6 causes more problems than it solves.

[–] NotEasyBeingGreen@slrpnk.net 1 points 2 days ago (2 children)

I mean, you can get rid of NAT and subnet your systems in a logical fashion. That's pretty awesome.

[–] hobata@lemmy.ml 1 points 2 days ago

Yes, maybe, but do I want to do that? Everything's going perfectly right now.

[–] timwa@lemmy.snowgoons.ro 0 points 2 days ago

You can subnet logically with IPv4.

If you go IPv6 on the internal network you 'win' not having NAT, and exposing all your intrrnal services to the net (which... just why?), but lose the ability to do redundant ISPs/failover/loadbalancing, policy based routing, VPNs... Unless you do IPv6 address translation. Which puts you back to "IPv4+NAT, except more complicated."

IPv6 inside the firewall is more or less entirely pointless.