Slashdot Mirror
Slashdot over IPv6
fuzzel writes "Even though Slashdot has run a number of articles about IPv6 (1|2|3) it apparently isn't reachable over IPv6 directly.
But for the people that do already have IPv6 they can use http://slashdot.org.sixxs.org and they will be automaticaly gatewayed. This trick works for most sites by simply appending .sixxs.org to the domain part of a url, eg http://www.google.com.sixxs.org, the gateway will the rewrite url's to have it appended automatically so that everything goes over IPv6. Full information is available on http://ipv6gate.sixxs.net. Oh and yes if you don't have IPv6, those domains under sixxs.org won't work :)"
I'm not entirely clear on why IPv6 such a cool/neccesary thing. As far as I, in my limited knowledge, know, IPv6 will allow for more IP address, but is that it? I'm not questioning its usefullness, but am simply curious if there are any other benefits that come along with IPv6.
Does it have any advantage to use IPv6 today? As far as I understood it is still experimental and has no practical use yet. What did I miss?
yea go and sign up for a free ipv4-ipv6 tunnel somewhere. It'll create a virtual interface on your pc with the end point on some ipv6 network somewhere. ten seconds on google will tell u where to find this, the only url i can remember is he.net but they are not only full of spammers but also laggy as fk so I would find somewhere else.
tbh most of the current implementations of ipv6 are slow as shit, I am hoping this is just because they are overloaded with people testing them...
There is also the small fact that IANA is still holding about 60 class A's in their reserved zones, so forgive me if I say the ipv4 address shortage is bullshit. I bring this up lots here but nobody can ever give me an answer as to why they are holding back millions of perfectly useable addresses while at the same time making us all jump through hoops to get any address space and claiming we are running out.
My limited understanding of IPv6 is that you can deploy v6 addresses locally, and advertise them globally via DNS using AAAA records. You can then talk over the larger Internet using a 6-over-4 tunnel.
Assuming this is correct, why doesn't Slashdot simply advertise an AAAA record, then accept connections through a 6-over-4 tunnel (or natively, if their bandwidth provider can speak it)? What are the technical considerations preventing this from working?
Schwab
Editor, A1-AAA AmeriCaptions
Ignore that, what i meant to say was:
/16 and the nubmer of ips in each range, check out powersource, who has a fantastic representation of the scope of ipv6.
For a complete matrix of ipv6 ranges right down to a
Everyone knows the Chicken and the Egg story (which came first), with IPv6 it's the same:
*) IPv6 is ready to deploy, however not much ISP's are supporting IPv6.
*) ISP's are not supporting IPv6 because there are no customers who uses it.
*) Customers aren't using IPv6 because there are no applications who uses it.
*) Software developers aren't creating software because nobody uses it.
As you can see there's a loop. The main thing is to break this loop and this project is a step in the good direction.
I'd like to encourage all ISP's to actively implement and promote IPv6. And you as 'consumer' can also promote IPv6, play with it even when you ISP doesn't support IPv6 yet (with IPv6 Tunnels for example).
Just my 2 cents.
Daxy's Networking Blog
Lets face it , unless you've got a Phd in networking chances are that some facet of IP4 routing , setup etc still confuses you. This goes for network admins too. Now multiply the complexity of ip4 by 10 and you get the nightmare that is IP6. I've tried to set up a home ip6 network that linked out to the internet but , oh my god , what kind of idiots invented this system? I'm sorry , but even computer admins are human (yes its true) and we REALLy don't want to have to mess around with 128 bit meaningless entries in routing tables that were complex enough with 32 bits! Yes ip6 does some autocofiguration but someone has to set up the system so that some host does the autoconfig. Ever tried it? Don't , not unless you want to end up in a padded cell. Even networking protocols should be designed for people to be able to use and I'm afraid with ip6 that simply hasn't happened. Back to the dsrawing board guys!
The fact that IPv4 addresses were running out is most ofton sited as the reason for the development of IPv6, but the real reason is the size of the default-free routing table. That\'s the routing tables that the big Tier-1 ISP\'s have to carry.
/16\'s, which is obviously untrue.)
;)
Several time in the 90\'s the entire Internet backbone crashed because there were simply too many routes/networks in the backbone tables. The routers didn\'t have enough memory to store them all. IPv6 was developed to help solve this problem by introducing a sort of \"super-aggregation\" scheme.
As an example, the current size of the IPv4 default free table is about 150,000 routes (or so.) The current size of the IPv6 default free table is about 400 routes. Those 400 routes represent about 2^18 more networks than the IPv6 routes do. (And that\'s generously assumming that all of the IPv4 routes represent
Thus, we can represent by far more networks with fewer prefixes in IPv6 than in IPv4. The default-free routing table is small, the backbone routers are happy, there are no more crashes due to running out of memory, AND you get all of the extra features that IPv6 provides free of charge.
Jumpstart the tartan drive.
From what I can tell MS-Windows is still a little behind, as can be seen from this page.
.NET and any of their other newer OSen.
There is an experimental IPv6 stack for Windows 2000 Service Pack 1 (which will not install on 2 or 3), but there will never ever ever in a million billion years be a production-quality stack for Windows 2000, because of issues with people not spending $200 on XP.
XP comes with a development IPv6 stack included on the CD, and Service Pack 1 comes with a production-quality IPv6 stack. Windows 2003 will include a production-quality stack as well, as will CE XP and
As much as I disapprove of MS for not bothering to support IPv6 in 2k, and despite knowing why they did it, I still encourage people to upgrade if the choice arises, if for no other reason than you won't have to upgrade again later to support IPv6.
Oh, and write your ISPs.
--Dan