Slashdot Mirror

← Back to Stories (view on slashdot.org)

Slashdot over IPv6

Posted by chrisd on from the links-you-can't-follow dept.

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 :)"

9 of 245 comments (clear)

  1. I'll guess I'll admit it.. by Longinus · · Score: 2, Interesting

    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.

    1. Re:I'll guess I'll admit it.. by boaworm · · Score: 4, Interesting

      - ... eliminates the need of NAT with special "local" addresses.


      Just a question on this one. I do agree that there will be enough IP addresses that there is no need to use special local addresses. Bit i actually find it very useful. It makes it easy to see where I am located, is it behind NAT, behind a firewall or just through a proxy ?. Currenty I can figure some of this out just by looking at my IP address, but without local IP subnets, things will get more confusing.

      And furthermore, i'd say the "end of NAT" is a bit too much. I find it very useful to use a NAT gateway/firewall and put insecure clients behind that. It reduces the need to think secure on the local network. I can for instance export my fileserver data rw onto 192.168 without much consern. Wouldn't wanna do that if they were all "real" IP's.

      IPv6 is great and it will allow those who DONT want to be behind NAT to get a "real" IP address, but its not the end of NAT.

      --
      Probable impossibilities are to be preferred to improbable possibilities.
      Aristotele
  2. Re:IPv6 today? by Richard_at_work · · Score: 3, Interesting

    Its fully usable, and is no longer experimental. There are a number of practical uses, although they vary from person to person. I use a ipv6 range for a number of different reasons, one of which is to protect me from attack when on irc (a ipv6 tunnel is a lot easier and more convenient to drop than your ipv4 connection :) ). The other reason is that you can assign IPv6 ips to machines behind a NAT gateway, and have fully routable addresses, which is handy if your broadband providor doesnt issue you with multiple ips.

    Disclaimer: i help run ipng.org.uk, a UK tunnel broker.

  3. Why the Weird Gateway? by ewhac · · Score: 4, Interesting

    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
  4. Re:Tunnel Brokers by Richard_at_work · · Score: 3, Interesting

    Ignore that, what i meant to say was:

    For a complete matrix of ipv6 ranges right down to a /16 and the nubmer of ips in each range, check out powersource, who has a fantastic representation of the scope of ipv6.

  5. IPv6 is like the Chicken and Egg story by lemmen · · Score: 3, Interesting

    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
  6. IP6 is too complex for general acceptance. by Viol8 · · Score: 2, Interesting

    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!

  7. Modified URL format by Midnight+Thunder · · Score: 2, Interesting
    Because IPv6 numeric addresses use colons as opposed as part separators, the URL syntax has had to be ammended. The following is now a legal URL (the squared bracket isolates the numbered IP addresss, so the port number is not confused with the IP addresss):
    http://[66.35.250.150]:80/
    Last time I checked this worked with Mozilla but failed will MS Internet Explorer 6.0 on Windows.
    --
    Jumpstart the tartan drive.
  8. Re:MacOS X and IPv6 and other OSs by Sentry21 · · Score: 2, Interesting

    From what I can tell MS-Windows is still a little behind, as can be seen from this page.

    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 .NET and any of their other newer OSen.

    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