starred/ntfy

Fork 0

mirror of https://github.com/binwiederhier/ntfy.git synced 2026-05-09 08:26:00 +02:00

[GH-ISSUE #519] IPv6 on the official ntfy.sh server #396

New issue

Closed

opened 2026-05-07 00:23:47 +02:00 by BreizhHardware · 9 comments

BreizhHardware commented

2026-05-07 00:23:47 +02:00

Owner

Originally created by @bernhardschmidt on GitHub (Nov 26, 2022).
Original GitHub issue: https://github.com/binwiederhier/ntfy/issues/519

I would highly appreciate it if you would enable IPv6 connectivity on the official ntfy.sh service. Right now it seems to be hosted on DigitalOcean. Enabling IPv6 there should be pretty straight forward.

https://docs.digitalocean.com/products/networking/ipv6/

Originally created by @bernhardschmidt on GitHub (Nov 26, 2022). Original GitHub issue: https://github.com/binwiederhier/ntfy/issues/519 I would highly appreciate it if you would enable IPv6 connectivity on the official ntfy.sh service. Right now it seems to be hosted on DigitalOcean. Enabling IPv6 there should be pretty straight forward. https://docs.digitalocean.com/products/networking/ipv6/

BreizhHardware

2026-05-07 00:23:47 +02:00

closed this issue
added the
server

enhancement
labels

BreizhHardware commented

2026-05-07 00:23:48 +02:00

Author

Owner

@binwiederhier commented on GitHub (Nov 27, 2022):

There are multiple reasons I haven't done that yet:

I know nothing about IPv6
There are assumptions in the server about IPv4 addresses (for rate limiting mostly)
Rate limiting is 100% based around IPv4 addresses right now. Given that IPv6 addresses are cheap I think I'd be opening myself up to some bad times.

So while intriguing, I would not hold my breadth right now. I'm always happy to accept code contributions or discuss it further though.

@binwiederhier commented on GitHub (Nov 27, 2022): There are multiple reasons I haven't done that yet: 1. I know nothing about IPv6 2. There are assumptions in the server about IPv4 addresses (for rate limiting mostly) 3. Rate limiting is 100% based around IPv4 addresses right now. Given that IPv6 addresses are cheap I think I'd be opening myself up to some bad times. So while intriguing, I would not hold my breadth right now. I'm always happy to accept code contributions or discuss it further though.

BreizhHardware commented

2026-05-07 00:23:48 +02:00

Author

Owner

@gsauthof commented on GitHub (Mar 11, 2023):

When enabling IPv6, you could rate limit IPv6 addresses using only their /48 prefix, as this the smallest prefix usually assigned to an entity. So this should be pretty conservative approach, for a start.

However, most entities surely just get /56 or even /64 prefixes, so a less overly cautious approach would be to rate-limit those.

Or use a tiered approach were you have an IPv4-like rate limit for /64 prefixes and higher limits for /56 and then an even higher one for /48.

Background: With IPv6, the address is 128 bit wide, and the idea is that a network gets at least a /64 prefix delegated. If a provider hands out a /48 prefix that means that the customer may create up to 2**16 networks under that prefix, i.e. he/she is able to sub-delegate longer prefixes in his/her own infrastructure quite flexible.

@gsauthof commented on GitHub (Mar 11, 2023): When enabling IPv6, you could rate limit IPv6 addresses using only their `/48` prefix, as this the smallest prefix usually assigned to an entity. So this should be pretty conservative approach, for a start. However, most entities surely just get `/56` or even `/64` prefixes, so a less overly cautious approach would be to rate-limit those. Or use a tiered approach were you have an IPv4-like rate limit for `/64` prefixes and higher limits for `/56` and then an even higher one for `/48`. Background: With IPv6, the address is 128 bit wide, and the idea is that a network gets at least a `/64` prefix delegated. If a provider hands out a `/48` prefix that means that the customer may create up to `2**16` networks under that prefix, i.e. he/she is able to sub-delegate longer prefixes in his/her own infrastructure quite flexible.

BreizhHardware commented

2026-05-07 00:23:48 +02:00

Author

Owner

@binwiederhier commented on GitHub (Mar 12, 2023):

Using a large-enough prefix sounds like a reasonable compromise. It's still not high on my list, though; so much other stuff to do :-D

@binwiederhier commented on GitHub (Mar 12, 2023): Using a large-enough prefix sounds like a reasonable compromise. It's still not high on my list, though; so much other stuff to do :-D

BreizhHardware commented

2026-05-07 00:23:48 +02:00

Author

Owner

@arjan-s commented on GitHub (Sep 6, 2023):

I think there may be more to do than just enabling IPv6 on the main server. My personal server has both IPv4 and IPv6, my home has both too, but my mobile provider only has IPv4. I've noticed that the ntfy Android client regularly loses connection to my dual-stack ntfy instance and takes a very long time to reconnect, which causes my notifications to arrive very late and in batches. My second ntfy instance only has an IPv4 DNS record and I have none of the problems there.

@arjan-s commented on GitHub (Sep 6, 2023): I think there may be more to do than just enabling IPv6 on the main server. My personal server has both IPv4 and IPv6, my home has both too, but my mobile provider only has IPv4. I've noticed that the ntfy Android client regularly loses connection to my dual-stack ntfy instance and takes a very long time to reconnect, which causes my notifications to arrive very late and in batches. My second ntfy instance only has an IPv4 DNS record and I have none of the problems there.

BreizhHardware commented

2026-05-07 00:23:48 +02:00

Author

Owner

@binwiederhier commented on GitHub (Jun 9, 2024):

This is a great article that describes the reasons for why ntfy.sh does not support IPv6 yet: https://adam-p.ca/blog/2022/02/ipv6-rate-limiting/

@binwiederhier commented on GitHub (Jun 9, 2024): This is a great article that describes the reasons for why ntfy.sh does not support IPv6 yet: https://adam-p.ca/blog/2022/02/ipv6-rate-limiting/

BreizhHardware commented

2026-05-07 00:23:49 +02:00

Author

Owner

@RokeJulianLockhart commented on GitHub (Jun 18, 2024):

https://github.com/binwiederhier/ntfy/issues/519#issuecomment-2156231591

@bernhardschmidt, considering the PRs mentioned at github.com/adam-p/adam-p.github.com@f8a8c1ee8e/content/blog/2022-02-20-ipv6-rate-limiting.md (user-content-fn-2-4d1d3136096ba6b2ebad92ddc2261cb2):~:text=I%20submitted%20PRs%20to%20tollbooth%20and%20httprate – https://github.com/go-chi/httprate/pull/10#issue-1145095727 and https://github.com/didip/tollbooth/pull/98#issue-1145095717 – have both been merged, how much of it applies? Although everything stated is correct, it appears somewhat outdated.

@RokeJulianLockhart commented on GitHub (Jun 18, 2024): > https://github.com/binwiederhier/ntfy/issues/519#issuecomment-2156231591 @bernhardschmidt, considering the PRs mentioned at https://github.com/adam-p/adam-p.github.com/blob/f8a8c1ee8e42e568dccdf57165373cad45db314a/content/blog/2022-02-20-ipv6-rate-limiting.md#user-content-fn-2-4d1d3136096ba6b2ebad92ddc2261cb2:~:text=I%20submitted%20PRs%20to%20tollbooth%20and%20httprate – https://github.com/go-chi/httprate/pull/10#issue-1145095727 and https://github.com/didip/tollbooth/pull/98#issue-1145095717 – have both been merged, how much of it applies? Although everything stated is correct, it appears somewhat outdated.

BreizhHardware commented

2026-05-07 00:23:49 +02:00

Author

Owner

@binwiederhier commented on GitHub (Jul 4, 2025):

WIP https://github.com/binwiederhier/ntfy/pull/1380

@binwiederhier commented on GitHub (Jul 4, 2025): WIP https://github.com/binwiederhier/ntfy/pull/1380

BreizhHardware commented

2026-05-07 00:23:49 +02:00

Author

Owner

@binwiederhier commented on GitHub (Jul 5, 2025):

@bernhardschmidt @RokeJulianLockhart @gsauthof Please check out https://staging.ntfy.sh/app and test with IPv6.

I think I've thought of everything, but it doesn't hurt to have more people try it out. It rate limits on /56.

Changes:

@binwiederhier commented on GitHub (Jul 5, 2025): @bernhardschmidt @RokeJulianLockhart @gsauthof Please check out https://staging.ntfy.sh/app and test with IPv6. I think I've thought of everything, but it doesn't hurt to have more people try it out. It rate limits on /56. Changes: - https://github.com/binwiederhier/ntfy/pull/1380/files - https://github.com/binwiederhier/ntfy-ansible/pull/4/files

BreizhHardware commented

2026-05-07 00:23:49 +02:00

Author

Owner

@binwiederhier commented on GitHub (Jul 10, 2025):

Deployed in 2.13.0

@binwiederhier commented on GitHub (Jul 10, 2025): Deployed in 2.13.0