Slashdot Mirror

← Back to Stories (view on slashdot.org)

Bind, Safer DNS, and IPv6

Posted by ryuzaki0 on from the coming-soon-(or-not) dept.

resistant writes: "This article at Network World Fusion (seen at Linux Today) says, "In addition to DNSSEC, BIND 9 features support for IPv6, the ability to run on multiprocessor systems and improved scalability for handling large domain name zones." The urgent need (by Nike anyway, heh-heh) to forestall easy domain hijacking could be the sleeper issue that finally ushers in universal implementation of IPv6."

3 of 89 comments (clear)

  1. Re:IPv6 why? by jd · · Score: 4
    Benefits of IPv6:

    • Mandatory IP security
    • Mandatory Quality of Service, via flow control
    • Guaranteed mobile IP addressing
    • Automatic Network Configuration, for Heirarchies
    • Simpler Headers == Quicker Routing
    • Mandatory Anycasting
    • Mandatory Multicasting
    • Mandatory Connection Fail-over Support
    • IDRP Routing Protocol
    --
    It's a small world and it smells funny; I'd buy another if it wasn't for the money; Take back what I paid (SoM)
  2. But how? by squiggleslash · · Score: 4
    The "need" for IPv6 is rarely questioned, though I have a gut feeling that most telcos and ISPs rather like the limitations they can impose on service that IPv4's limitations have caused ("What? You want static IP addresses? And you have TWO computers? You must be a business! That'll be a zillion dollars please"), but how do we get there?

    While IPv6 has a lot of transition features, it nonetheless remains the case that as soon as people start using it, there will be IPv4 sites that can't access IPv6 sites and vice versa. Some will run both protocols, but if v6 is to be made use of, there are going to be many machines that don't, and transparency is going to be awkward if not impossible.

    How's it done?
    --

    --
    You are not alone. This is not normal. None of this is normal.
  3. IPv6 and the IETF by mwalker · · Score: 5

    At every IETF meeting I've been to, including the most recent one in Pittsburgh, the IPv6 discussion went like this:

    Q: Is microsoft going to support it in a release OS?
    A: No, but microsoft research has a stack in development
    Q: Does Cisco support it?
    A: We're working on it.

    Then half the room walks out the door, and all that's left is the Kame project talking about how they can tunnel their ipv6 site through ipv4 to see the dancing turtle.

    IPv6 is dead till it ships in a microsoft stack. When it does, IPv6 will be real instantly.

    And you can quote me on that.

    --

    --
    What happens when you outlaw guns