Slashdot Mirror
ARIN IPv6 Allocation Policy
possible writes: "ARIN has announced the last call for public comments on its proposed IPv6 address allocation policy. This last call for public comments will expire on 23:59 EDT August 03, 2001."
← Back to Stories (view on slashdot.org)
Use a logical GEOGRAPHIC based struct, 3 bits for the continent, 16 bits for the nation, 24 for the city, 48 for the company/individual, and 32 for each of the last cagegory to play with. As for the remaining 5. Let that designate the planet. Plan ahead. You've got 128 bits, right?
no one is interested it.
./'s reputation as a hang-out for those who cannot spell, or figure out just exactly what the word "capitalization" means.
Thank you for contributing this error. It will help maintain
--
--
"Outlook not so good." That magic 8-ball knows everything! I'll ask about Exchange Server next.
well, one thing with IPv6 (kind of like IPX in this respect) is that the last 48 bits of your address are your MAC address. while this is ethernet (and compatible) addressing specific, that's most everything these days. so it's not even a matter of static or dynamic anymore, as everything just *IS* what it is, and that's about it. I don't know if you remember the IPX days, or even experienced them, but there wasn't much of an issue with addressing with it (at least in the same respect as we have with IP now.) I look forward to IP addressing being less of an issue.
:)
e ntation/ip6routing.html
That being said, routing protocols will need to be furthered, and some of the new routing protocols as well as the IPv6 versions of old standbys (like BGP, OSPF, etc) are pretty slick. think about the amount of route summarization you'd need to do for BGP so you don't kill yourself! we're talking massive exponentional expansions in potential routes. ouch. I think that's why most of the IPv6 space is going to be kept close together to save us all the hassle of watching our older equipment die under the load. thinking of all those little ISP's loading up IPv6 BGP on a cisco 3640 or something equivalent just makes me want to cry
Here's a good link on the routing issues moving to IPv6: http://www.t17.ds.pwr.wroc.pl/~misiek/ipv6/!Docum
EOM
But then again, i may be dreaming.
On the otherhand, is it possible for someone to do virtual ip's in some fashion? Like a vpn connection that authenticates the client and then does shortest path routing? Something like provider x assigns me 222.222.222.222 through the vpn and then bgp's the routes to the dynamic ip address by weights (so that your traffic still goes through your local provider and doesn't need to be tunneled through the vpn).
Just wondering. Too many big companies screwing over the lil guys and customers. "It is our policy to not assign static ip's". Thats like saying you sell me a 100% connect dedicated DSL circuit and say i need dynamic ip's because it saves your space on your ip subnets.. thats bs since the same customers are going to be on.. save yourself a dhcp server and assign ips. If your all about spam and email filtering with your new no smtp/pop outside of verizon email addy policy then why not implement static ip's so you can CATCH the people doing it instead of chasing them elsewhere and ruining services for people who don't do bad.
2^48 actually.
Although this COULD become a problem when we get into nanotechnology and ever nanite needs its own IP address. A body full of these suckers COULD potentially run out of IP addresses.
"No, but you don't understand. I need an extra block of addresses because it is vitally important that I can access nanite #38273749590627
directly from a computer on the other side of the world. A double hop is simply NOT an option guys!"
Enough for anyone. Humph!
-Restil
Play with my webcams and lights here
They are basically saying that in IPv6 everyone will be given a /48 which means that as you connect to your ISP it will automatically give you a range of IP addresses large enough for you to have 2^16 or 65536 different subnets. Because IPv6 is a 64bit network with 64bit host system that means each subnet can have practically an unlimited number of devices in it. You can basically give every piece of dust floating around in your house an IP address and each room could be on it's own subnet!
/48 network numbers away until address assignment starts to become an issue again which still leaves 85% of the address space unused.
And still as they state, they can easily give up to 178 billion of these
Now the real trick as the article alludes to but doesn't really address is the complexity of handling the routing for multihomed sites. Someone still has to figure out how to make multihomed routing easy, fast, and efficient.
- Home network subscribers, connecting through on-demand or always-on connections should receive a /48.
This means that every home will have enough IP addresses for about everything in the home. Finally I will be able to telnet into my coffee machine from downstairs and brew a new pot of joe! The possibilities for us caffeine soaked programmers are endless!!!
> telnet fridge.appliance.myhome.org
/bottomshelf/beer /dev/null
Welcome to the FreezyFridge 2010
Running Linux 2.4.15
Login:root
Password:******
# mv
# exit
> _
Then no more beer!!!!
Where is your forward thinking? :)
On the other hand, I do agree with you regarding the heirarchical designation, however it appears that ARIN want to give everyone a /48 address by default (that is 2^80 addresses per person). Only 1/8th of the IPv6 address space will be available (001 designation) by default, allowing 2^45 entities to have up to 2^80 addresses.
The paper says that there will be 10billion people on the Earth by 2050. I bet IPv6 will last until 2100 at least though, and you shouldn't design upgrades into the system for something anyway, so assume that it will last forever...
In 3000, the Interplanetary Confederation will have 10 trillion people under its finger, and 100 billion companies (imagine giving each of those a unique name to avoid .com naming problems!). 2^45 is more than the sum of these (2^35), so even then IPv6 will be fine. I assume that the average person will not have more than 2^80 IPv6 addressable elements on or within their body though. I think this is reasonable... !
1. Ipv4 Address space is sufficient?
wrong. There are large chunks of the world that can't get address space to do what they want. Especially Asia which is only now starting to get into the Internet. it is also estimated that giving every mobile phone over the next 10 years or so an IP address will also make us run out of addresses.
2. NAT is the answer? No, for true secure internet you need end to end connectivity. This means live IP addresses, not hiding behind NAT. Also NAT can't pass everything through. e.g. try to pass ESP for several devices through NAT. Also try to run several independent servers of the same service type (e.g. web sites) behind a NAT. Gets very difficult.
3. Routing for Ipv6 will fall apart because of the large routing tables?
Wrong. The way strong aggregation is defined in Ipv6 results in the Default Free Zone (DFZ) of the core internet being very small (designed to be < 8000 or so entries). That same aggregation policy applies to for TLA (top level aggregate), NLA (next level aggregate) and SLA (Site level aggregate). If people adhere to the rules, there will be no routers blowing up any time soon. Router lookups will be faster than they have ever been because of the strict aggregation boundaries.
As an aside, Ipv6 does not have a header checksum so routers will no longer need to checksum all headers as they pass through. This will also reduce router processing overhead.
To qualify (3) I must add that multihoming is done differently in Ipv6. No site will ever "own" their address space so it can never be advertised into the DFZ. This is the mistake that we learnt from IPv4. To multihome you will be required to have an address space from each provider (SLA/NLA or TLA) that you are multihoming to. This means that nodes in a multihomed site will potentially have more than one visible address on the internet to maintain connectivity. The details of how to deal with the multiple address issue are in the process of being sorted out, but I can assure you there are several solutions to the issue of multihoming in Ipv6.
4. Privacy is gone in Ipv6. (in case anyone wants to raise the point).
This has been debated before about the issue of your NIC address being publicized. It is a simple matter to anonymize the address and an I-D has already been done to deal with this.
So Ipv6 is not DOA as some would suggest. It's only a matter of time before people realize that it's absolutely required for the Internet to move forward.
Do your research and you'll find that Ipv6 is needed and will make life on the internet much more saner. The availability of reasonable address space is the fundamental one, and I'm sure the IAB/IETF can bring enough pressure to bear on providers to make sure everyone gets a fair share of this address space. Don't also forget that it's a free market - giving adequate address space can be a selling point for a competitive ISP.
I've heard a lot of FUD lately about how ARIN was going to limit the amount of IPv6 space given out so that it could lease the addresses and make money. The proposed policy, if adopted, appears to mitigate that fear. As the document says:
(Now let's get IPv6 fielded! I'm ready...)this can't be slashdot.. if it is.. i feel kind of betrayed..
So they're requesting for comments before it gets publicized as a Request For Comments? No wonder the internet is so fucked up!