Slashdot Mirror
The State of IPv6
Gnea writes submits this article "about the current state of IPv6, the Next Generation of Internet Protocol version 6, mostly according to Cisco. It's also an interesting roadmap about where and how IPv6 will proliferate around the world.. Apparently China has a grasp already with Korea and Japan, who leads the "Five key Chinese carriers, including China Telecom, China Unicom, China Netcom/CSTNET, China Mobile, China RailCom and CERNET (China Education and Research Network), are slated to join CNGI, building their own national IPv6 backbone independently, while interconnecting with at least two IPv6 IX." while Verio appears to have already tuned into some turnkey solutions recently that are publicly available."
And SgtChaireBourne writes "ZDNet is reporting that the EU and South Korea will collaborate to develop IPv6 applications and services. The agreement was finalized at the
Global IPv6 Service Launch Event in Belgium last week. There are good reasons to move to IPv6, including security, multicasting, simplified header structures, and better routing to name a few."
...if we don't quickly develop a plan to start working with IPv6. Most Pacific rim countries have already started, and for them, it is a matter of necessity. Since the US was responsible for a lot of the early internet (DARPA), we have the vast majority of the IPv4 addresses. Other countries (such as China) see IPv6 as a way to "equal the playing field" in addition to solving their "how do I get enough IPs for 1.2 billion people" problem.
libertarianswag.com
another short article from GCN on the subject.
Will I be able to patch my ZX81 to understand the new protocol? Or will I have to upgrade?
If China, South Korea, Japan move ahead of the US, with regard to broadband, the internet, and amount of homes hooked up to broadband, etc.?
If so how will this change our direction, or would it?
umm couldn't we use this as a cheap spam filter? since AFAIK ipv4 can talk to ipv6 but ipv6 can't talk to ipv4?
Not something I saw mentioned in the article links, but it's worth bearing in mind that the support of IPv6 is mandated in the protocol stack definitions of the 3GPP standards. This means, to cut a long story short, that all 3G telecoms kit (handsets, basestations and switchgear) will support IPv6 out of the box. At least in Europe and Japan.
:)
So, when it finally stops being vapourware, and assuming that people actually buy into this technology, I'd say that was a fairly good driver for other industries to adopt it too. Not looking forward to the transition though.
These sigs are more interesting tha
It's about time we move on from the archaic state of the internet we're at right now. Besides the content, nothing's really changed in 10 years, and it needs to. With the current prolonged influx of security problems caused by an infrastructure that was never meant to handle the things we do to it, I'd say it's about time someone big pushes IPv6.
Notice how North American-based networking gear manufacturers (Cisco, Nortel, et al) are all offering IPv6-ready devices? Ironically, it will be North Americans that will be late to the party.
The telecoms sat on their thumbs during the dot-com-boom on IPv6, they won't be too eager to spend the money now that cash is tight.
Trolling is a art,
Vast majorities don't get left behind.
How did they manage to put six carriers in five? Perhaps if you use NAT you can fit six integers in five... Or is it CCT (Chinese Carrier Translation)? "Five key Chinese carriers, including..." 1. China Telecom 2. China Unicom 3. China Netcom/CSTNET 4. China Mobile 5. China RailCom 6. CERNET (China Education and Research Network) "Including" even implies there are more... OK, sorry. I'm tired.
I'm sorry if I haven't offended anyone
OK, we don't have anough addresses. Ok, lets firewall and subnet. Outcome? I can't connect directly to my friends's computer, and I can't run games (or any other) servers. Decentralised P2P suffers similarly. Rock on IPv6! I have my own IP address, unlike about 1/2 the people at my university and all my friends at other universities, and it's damn useful. Rock on IPv6!
I am one of many. My idea is not unique, nor do I expect my voice alone to sway you. I speak in a chorus of opinion.
> somewhat hopeful research* suggesting that the average home contains 250 devices (toasters, electric toothbrushes, vibrators?)
err... ummm... vibrators? I guess that's just further proof that porn really does run the internet!
Do they still give those out for free? What happened to the people who had to turn their IPv6 addresses back in? Does ARIN issue those numbers?
But this is slashdot. A slashdoter who didn't build his own computer is like a Jedi who didn't build his own lightsaber!
Now's as good a time to start drawing up the drafts as any.
An Indian-American Hindu committed to non-violent thought/speech/action alarmed by the global explosion of radical Islam
I'ts well known that *BSD has the best IPv6 support. Thus we can conclude that IPv6 is dying, if not dead. Once Al Gore and Tom Harkin endorse it, we'll know for sure.
With ip4 its failry easy to set up a box yourself with dns, hosts file etc because of the simplicity of the numeric addresses. However good :: as a shortcut for a block of zeros and leaving it at that.
ip6 might be in other respects , in this respect however its a nightmare. A 128 bit number converted to hexadecimal is NOT a pretty site and leaves a huge scope for typos and other cock-ups.
Ok , this isn't a reason not to use it but it should have been something the designers could have addressed other than just having
http://www.winternet.com/~mikelr/flame80.html
This looks like the (english?) manual of my 'Made in China' calculator I bought last week ...
Parent is obviously trolling but just in case not:
the only thing that would happen if the US decided to shut down 'their' internet is that the rest of the world would lose access to US sites (when we've reconfigured some routers).
This is good news. It lets me just blacklist everything purporting to come from an IPv6 address, instead of having to figure out which netblocks are registered in China.
Cole's Law: Thinly sliced cabbage
... isn't ipv6 slow? This is what people say sometimes...
Invented IPv6 as an afterthought after inventing the Internet.
Keith Moore, an author/co-author of a number of RFCs on IPv6 and other topics, posted the following to the IETF mailing list, regarding what IPv6 will enable and can be used for.
The comment was in response to somebody's claim that residential users would be happy with NAT, and non-globally routable IP addresses for their "internal" networks.
Re: dubious assumptions about IPv6 (was death of the Internet)That's like saying residential telephone users don't need to have a phone number at which they can be reached. (after all, the purpose of their residential phones is to call businesses for the purpose of obtaining services, right?)
There are lots of apps that would be valuable to residential users if residential users had reachable IP addresses. check the status of your alarm system, or your roast in the oven, or your freezer's inventory. Grab a picture from your baby-cam while you're out for dinner and have left the kid with the baby sitter. Reset the thermostat if you're going to be out of town longer than you thought. Do all of these from your portable phone/PDA which is running guess what? -- IPv6.
Also, don't assume that IPv6 addresses will be used by people or their personal computers. IPv6 enables lots and lots of individually addressable devices which don't have to be associated with individuals. Every km of highway can have an addressable traffic sensor so that police and emergency crews know exactly when and where a traffic accident happened. Every streetlight can be monitored to see if it is functioning properly or if it needs service. Every traffic signal can be made individually controllable so that they can dynamically adapt to changes in traffic patterns. For reasons like this, the demand for IPv6 addresses won't be determined by some linear multiple of the number of humans on the planet.
Finally, don't assume that IPv6 devices will require the support burdens we associate with PCs. PCs as we currently know them are dinosaurs. Appliances that talk to the network aren't going to need the same kind of technical hand-holding that PCs do (because they'd never succeed if they did), and neither will the devices that replace what we now think of as personal computers.
IPv6 will eventually replace IPv4, but it's misleading to think of IPv6 as just a replacement for IPv4. By the time IPv6 replaces IPv4, we won't recognize the IPv6 network as something that resembles what the IPv4 network is used for today. Even though the underlying technology is very similar, IPv6 is really a new kind of network, one that enables things that were really never possible with IPv4 on a large scale.
The Internet's nature is peer to peer - 20050301_cs_profs.pdf
If you look at the OSes used to access Google (which is a good indicator of total OSes used), Win98 is listed at the top with 27%. And with Microsoft extending support, it creates a speedbump.
Free XBox, PS2
Well looky-here billy-bob! Them foreigner seem ta be cooking some kind of net-gizmo. It's them chinese foreign fellow, you know them ones next to Guatemoly and Condo.
God-damn, we ain't caring about what them fellows do, we own 'da intarnet! Like uncle Bob said after his four day hike through new zealand, sweden and canada, them foreigner ain't good for nothing, so they can do whatever they want, no matter to us. We sure as hell ain't gonna do nothing to work with them foreigners.
Hell, most'a them don't even own a shotgun, that ain't bein' free!
Could someone pleas paraphrase what this guy is trying to say? It seems everyone is too intent on flaming the appaling English when he could in fact have a good point...
:)
I would do it.. but I cant understand a flocking word of it!
If you read the various followups to that posting you linked to, you'll see that there are two separate IPv8s. One was a proposal that competed with IPv6 and lost. It's dead. The other is a joke.
So the deal is that there is not, in fact, a serious IPv8 effort underway.
IPv6 may have a better and safer design, but have you ever considered the software that's going to use it? I see networkrelated security issues popping up "all the time" with IPv4 software. Now, what will happen when we do move over to IPv6, which is in fact a more complex protocol? I have a feeling we will be seeing quite a few security reports on not only the various stack implementations, but also on userspace programs.
Either that, or you have been trolled.
I'll put my money on the latter.
Dewey, what part of this looks like authorities should be involved?
Interesting name when pronounced out loud: My dong long.
Also amazing how hideously mangled the grammar is, without a single misspelled word. I think we may have ourselves a Babelfish troll -- try copying a block of text into Babelfish, translate to Chinese, then back again. It looks remarkably like the parent.
When we remember we are all mad, the mysteries disappear and life stands explained.
Mark Twain
If you want a 128-bit address, then you need a 128-bit address. No way around it. Remembering an IPv4 address is a pain in the butt too. I can never remember a whole address, so i'll have to look back and forth several times to make sure I got it right. If that's the biggest problem with IPv6, I'll take it.
.. MAC address. now they can not only ban the IP they can ban a specific MAC.
Its in the IPv6 headers, watch more MAC filtering take place on an internet scale.
IPv6 is a solution looking for a problem. The IP address exhaustion scare of 4 or 5 years ago is a moot point these days after the dot com bombs, the explosion of usage of NAT, etc. People are beginning to realize there's NO point in having every device use an Internet accessible IP address. Our entire campus of 5,000 machines is behind 2 IP addresses.
If you have trouble with IP4 then just imagine the hours of fun you'll have with IP6.
I guess I'm not quite sure I "get it", but why is NAT necessarily a "bad thing"? Because it's not "how it's supposed to be"? Because it's klugey? Bad design? Insecure?
... it basically needs to happen sooner or later. But what's wrong with IPv6 plus keeping NAT around? Or is it just the excitement of "We don't have to anymore!"?
I guess my thinking is, if I've got a house full of electronic devices (let's say a dozen computers, an IP-enabled toaster, fridge, television, etc.) I don't really need or want world-visible IP addresses on all of them. I'd like them to be just 10.* or whatever IP addresses, and if any communication ever needs to go on between them and the Internet they should necessarily go through some central house-server/router/firewall. I should have the option of having, say, three of the computers have world-visible IP addresses, but the rest having local 10.* addresses. But why make my toaster be visible to the Internet when, really, there's no need for him to be?
Or am I missing something terribly here?
Not to say that IPv6 isn't a good thing
Dlugar
Computer Go: Writing Software to Play the Ancient Game of Go
IP exhaustion is only one problem that IPv6 addresses. Better & smarter routing, security, etc etc. are all benefits that IPv6 was designed around.
Um, is this just an oversight, or is the poster so US-centered (s)he doesn't realize that one of the major reasons why IPv6 is interesting to us in that weird "foreign" part of the world is that is expands the address space?
I don't recall how large the US allocation of IPv4 addresses is, but I'm pretty sure it's at least 25% of the space, and that's being conservative. Since the US doesn't even have 1/16th of the population, that's obviously b0rken, and IPv6 is a more or less natural fix.
Now, I'm Swedish, and I'm sure we have enough IP addresses for our puny country, but the nations of Asia probably can't say the same. Thus, more interest in switching over sooner, and less in the US where there's no (or less) pressure from simply running out of addresses.
main(O){10<putchar(4^--O?77-(15&5128 >>4*O):10)&&main(2+O);}
A few quotes from the follow up emails
write it off to loonies and sociopaths not taking their meds. - Randy Bush
"IPv8" is a joke. Unfortunately it is a joke that has gone on too long and is still wasting people's time. - Brian Carpenter
"The recent postings you have received, despite the use of the string "IPv8" and being posted to the IETF list, have nothing to do with this actual IPv8. Despite the use of the string "RFC" in these postings to the IETF list, they having nothing to do with any IETF RFC. The link you cite below is merely to an area with public comments, not an area with any sort of official output by NTIA. It is as though these postings were an effort to cause confusion. - Donald E. Eastlake 3rd
Visit his site here to make your own judgement - IPv8. The site seems to be having some problems, make sure you get the groovy soup can version.
IPv6 is going to last a long, long time, there is no need to spend time on "IPv8".
The Internet's nature is peer to peer - 20050301_cs_profs.pdf
If you want a 128-bit address, then you need a 128-bit address. No way around it. Remembering an IPv4 address is a pain in the butt too. I can never remember a whole address, so i'll have to look back and forth several times to make sure I got it right. If that's the biggest problem with IPv6, I'll take it.
;-)
Two checkdigits wouldn't have hurt though.. At least you'd be more likely to get an "IP address wrong" error than, say, DDOS the wrong target
The same charges were leveled at IPv4 back when it came out -- it was considerably longer than was considered necessary (32-bits? That's way too much space!), it's a far bigger number than is convienently held in short-term memory, and yet, according to you, it's simple.
Funny how people adapt.
Between that and the mystic thing called "cut and paste" that's available on pretty much every platform known to man nowadays, this is a real non-issue.
Those benefits don't necessitate a switch of the entire Internet to IPv6. Only a severe problem, like IP exhaustion, would.
Besides from the added bonus of making the networks failover. (c;
'I am become Shiva, destroyer of worlds'
...and I agree we must protect the sanctity of married packets. Even if it takes a constitutional amendment to every router's firmware.
I think that switching to IPv6 is really a civil rights issue. The United Nations supports the "free and unfettered communication" of people as a basic civil right. There is no way a system where people have to pay for IP addresses can in any way be "free and unfettered". The switch should be done as quickly and smoothly as is possible to ensure that every individual who wants to express their views on the internet can do so. People should also be albe to get IPv6 addresses on demand. This is the best way IMO to ensure that free speech is protected. Imagine if you had to pay for you street address to receive mail.
A 128 bit number converted to hexadecimal is NOT a pretty site and leaves a huge scope for typos and other cock-ups.
Correct me if I'm wrong, but I thought ipv6 was set up in a way that made DHCP almost compulsary, precisely because assigning IP adresses by hand gets difficult with 128 bits of address information.
WTF is "virtually infinite?" Does that mean you'll virtually never run out?
You are joking, right? IPv4 is getting about as useful as the 8.3 filenames, and NAT has its place, but it's not likely to allow for any real growth. Just imagine the bottlenecks when one branch of a NAT gets totally slashdotted!
Do you by any chance own a lot of stock in a company that claims it owns the internet?
Given the size of IPv6's address space, if you type in a random address you're far far more likely to get "Host not found" than you are to actually connect to anything.
Notice that most addresses (for PC-like devices, at least) will be autoconfigured.
You will have some sort of central daemon handing-out the prefixes to your net, and the device will concatenate that prefix with its own MAC address, and voila, you have a working IPv6 address. Its very easy for the end user (in fact, it is almost like a sub-set of DHCP "pre-configured").
Of course, there can be also a DHCP-like protocol to give the client other information (adresses for routers, proxys, etc.).
With ip4 its failry easy to set up a box yourself with dns, hosts file etc because of the simplicity of the numeric addresses.
Indeed, when I set up OpenBSD on our router, I just told it to use DHCP. Then I set it up to serve DHCP, and set up all the Windows boxes to use that. What does this have to do with the somplicity of the numeric addresses?
Can IPv6 do anything to halt spam and virus propogation that IPv4 cannot?
Surely, that would merit migration.
Because its a damn site easier if you only got a few machines to spend 60 seconds entering 10.0.0.1 etc into a hosts file than setting up DHCP. With IP6 this will no longer be the case.
DNS is your friend.
-
ping -f 255.255.255.255 # if only
Why can't we just start checksumming IP addresses. The number of guys who get IPv4 addresses wrong (even on my intranet - I tell them that the server sits at 10.1.0.1 and they type in 10.0.1.0 or something else) is amazing. And don't get me started on NAT
Exercise your right not to vote. thinkoutside.org
"device will concatenate that prefix with its own MAC address"
Superb. And if you're not using ethernet what does it concatenate onto it then? Random numbers? Your CPUs serial number?
Well, by your post, you probably haven't grokked the true beauty of IPV6. There are a lot of mechanisms in place to address your issues. Host configuration will be done by querying an upstream router. The only people that really have to key in the huge hex addy are the root guys, maybe. Then they'll probably automate it or at least use cut-n-paste. But seriously, IPV6 is quite beautiful, and really has a lot of thought put into the headers and routing to make everything work seamlessly without massive amounts of configuration.
But, before we rush headlong into support of radical IPv6 transformation, we must consider some of the disadvantages. First, there are the costs of migration. Interoperability with IPv4 is an absolute must, lest we make the same mistake that ISO did when it proposed CLNP/CONP in the same breath. Fortunately for us, hardware developers have already seized the opportunity to build IPv6 into routers, and software developers have already integrated IPv6 into the core of popular operating systems such as Linux, Windows, *BSD, etc. But aren't there are some applications that will break if we migrate right away?
Anyway, perhaps that's not a big deal. I'd say the more serious issue is that fast route lookup is made considerably more difficult with the longer prefixes of IPv6. It is fundamentally harder to build switching technology into routers that can handle the longer prefixes and still preserve existing performance guarantees. So unless we don't mind slowing down the internet a bit, we may want to hang on to IPv4 a little longer. Perhaps there is something that ISPs can do such that they can switch IPv6 on shorter prefixes, but I have not yet seen any proposals...
...but it's limiting.
say you've 2 webservers behind NAT. you can't run them both on port 80 as the port forwarding has to go to one IP address or the other.
or if you have 2 apps that use an overlapping port range - big problems.
it just doesn't *scale* but for home use, sure, NAT does the job.
But im not DNS' friend...will *you* be my friend?
I'm not sure what country you are from, but in order to get a street address and receive mail in the US, you usually DO have to pay. Usually it is bundled in a grading and excavation permit, and that can be as cheap as $100 or as much as several thousand, depending on what exactly you are putting at the address. Counties are free to make up their own pricing structure for this.
Get rid of everything Micro and Soft: Buy Viagra and/or Linux
Funny, I set up dhcp in about the same time, and I've only got 5 machines on my network. I find it much easier when dealing with a dynamic IP assigned by my cable modem provider to have the changes propagate through via dhcp internally. I used to make hosts files and all that crap, but I've got better things to do. I don't even set the time on my boxen anymore, I use ntpd synced to Argonne National Labs.
Clear as mud? OK, here's an example. Say you've been assigned the 2001:1:2:3::/64 netblock. Your router will send that information out on all of its LAN interfaces. Suppose your workstation's NIC's MAC address is "05:04:03:02:01:00". When it hears the advertisement, it will assign itself an IPv6 address of "2001:1:2:3::504:302:100" [1] and a netmask of /64. Voila! It's configured and has a world-routable address.
[1] Actually, the format for the last 64 bits is slightly different - I don't recall the exact transformation function - but that's the gist of it. If you look at a host's autoconfigured address and it's MAC, you can see the correlation.
Dewey, what part of this looks like authorities should be involved?
If? South Korea is number one in the world for broadband penetration, while in Japan, 10mbs is common and Yahoo recently launched a 26mbs service - for around $35/month.
Because all bits of an IP address are significant, so there aren't any to throw away on ECC. Since this stuff has to be routed at high speeds, there's no place to add additional bits that convey no new information. You could argue for checksumming in the human-readable addresses, but then you have to propose a standard address format divorced from the actual wire address, which causes headaches for implementors. Furthermore, adding a checksum would make the address even longer than it is now.
That depends on if your typo is in the least or most significant part of the address space.
Sure, why not?
What are you using, if not ethernet, out of curiousity?
I've had this sig for three days.
Yes, that's right... I think IPv6 is a stupid, stupid move.
While the expanded address space is good, that is the only advantage I can see to IPv6. As a system admin, and one of the people responsible for moving my company to IPv6, I've taken a couple training courses on it, and I have found it wanting... alot.
From an end user standpoint, IPv6 is no big deal. I'm not worried about that. But from a sysadmin standpoint, IPv6 is going to be an utter troubleshooting nightmare. The biggest problem that immediately jumps out at you with IPv6 is the fact that individual addresses in a subnet have absolutely no relation to each other. So John in the cube next to me will have an entirely different address than I do, and it will have no relation to me. From a troubleshooting standpoint, it's just plain illogical.
I dread the day we have to officially switch over to IPv6, because keeping the lists of ip's in use on the network, then finding that list (have to *always* use search and find, as opposed to scrolling to the appropriate place on the list).. and if you mistype an hextet (since it's not an octet!), trying to track that down is going to be a nightmare.
I'm sure there's a lot I don't know about IPv6, but everything I've read on it, and everything I've experienced with it has proven it to be just plain stupid. Like I said, the expanded address space is nice, but it's a dumb protocol from an networking standpoint. There are plenty of things they could have done to make it better and easier to manage and I guess that's my major beef. IPv6 is a thousand times more difficult to manage for a large network than IPv4 is. You'd think managment should get easier, but it doesn't, and it just pisses me off.
I think we're going to have a lot of people suprised by how unwieldy IPv6 truely is, once they have to begin deployment... but by then, it will be too late.
What I think will eventually happen is the large backbone providers and large companies will deploy IPv6 externally, and internally (behind the corporate firewall, etc...) we'll see IPv6 networks on private subnets, just because they will be easier to manage. So I don't believe IPv6 will change much for the end user, and most of them will still be on IPv4 networks, with the encumbant problems we currently have.
V8 was invented by one of the denizens of Bell labs and the guy who funded ihnp4, and actually works. Because he refuses to let ISOC copyright his stuff and has been burned by the various I* groups he is somewhat of a pariah. However v8 actually works today and interoperates with v4 and has for years and is already in the Microsoft, Linux and BSD stacks.
If you look at the "6 over 4" spec and the v8 spec you'll realize it's the same thing and was adopted several years back, they simlpy adopted v8 and changed the name, the addresssing is exactly the same - just look at the bits.
Whenever somebody says IPV8 isn't real or is a joke ask them to explain it to you - they can't. THe derision is for political, not technical reasons.
And bseides, haveing Randy Bush call you a sociopath means you're on the right track
Need Mercedes parts ?
PPP via a serial link. Or theres SLIP. Or theres other forms of network card such as token ring. What makes you think every PC is connected to an ethernet network?
Eh, I'll wait until I'm plugged into an IPv6 net to judge whether or not it works beautifully, or just works. There being a difference, mainly in the amount of work necessary by someone, somewhere, to get it all up and running. I imagine the IPv4/IPv6 changeover will leave a lot of fubar'd network stack configurations for some time to come.
I'm happy to say that I attended that event and it was really great. The demonstration area was really amazing...
They had a HDSDI TV receiving a 270Mbps stream from Madrid (1.5Gbps uncompressed). Another great demo was the IPv6 over satellite from ESA (European Space Agency). They were streaming videos using the award winning Videolan.
There is still some way to go on IPv6 but the main problem is the lack of IPv6 link requests from users that makes the ISPs ignore IPv6 as an important issue.
The best thing of the event was one of the girls that was part of the organization!!! just amazing....
Fear is the mind-killer.
Not really. The vendors building the equipt for IPV6 are also building in translators to the IPV4 space. I'm talking Lucent, Cisco/Linksys, etc. They're doing the work, us little guys will reap the benefits, assuming the equipment even gets installed.
If you're really industrious, you could try it out with a bunch of Linux boxen on a network. Make your own IPV6 net at home! Be the first on your block and the envy of all your friends!
You just need to pick a 128 bit InterNAT address and the current criticisms about it go away. It's a lot more useful the the broken V6 will ever be.
Need Mercedes parts ?
There is another interesting article about this on Technology Review written by Simon Garfinkel which covers possible security risks of early IPv6 software routing as opposed to hardware routing as the technology becomes widely used. In addition to that, he predicts that p2p will actually increse due to the fact that NAT troubles disappear.
German version
English version (free registration, blabla)
So when are we going to see operating systems that can run only with an IPV6 address and still talk to the internet? And still _work_?
The sysadmins on my site say that much of Solaris works with IPV6 but not all of it.
How is Linux doing with IPV6? Any issues?
The "Third World" of over 4 billion persons being the best example of your thesis?
Dlugar
Computer Go: Writing Software to Play the Ancient Game of Go
Oh for heaven's sake, that's a pretty lame excuse.
I didn't find it particularly difficult to set my entire server network running with IPv6. DNS wasn't hard to set up (both forward and PTR). Routing was no more difficult than IPv4. My website is available over IPv6 and even the forum is IPv6 aware (including having an IPv6 whois).
Once it's set up in DNS, you seldom have to touch it again - that's what DNS is there for.
Oolite: Elite-like game. For Mac, Linux and Windows
I've got two houses (different countries), each with a generic router/NAT box, cable modem service, and a coupla Mandrake, coupla WinXP, a MacOS 9, and a MacOS X box. Oh, and i the US a TiVo with Home Media Option. Also the sweetheart needs to boot into Win2K sometimes for work.
I'm willing to swap out the router/NAT boxes if someone can point to ones that supports IPv6. I've already installed IPv6 on the XP boxes, I'm told it's straightforward on MacOS X, I assume it's no biggie for Mandrake. MacOS 9 - I recall Apple making some noise about IPv6 for it years ago but it's not a deal-breaker for me.
The needs are the usual (web browsing/email/listening to streaming audio, etc.) plus I need some way of connecting the two houses so they appear on the same private network.
Any suggestions? Boxes to buy? I strongly prefer to use a consumer router/NAT box over a PC for my gateway but don't see any of them mentioning IPv6 support, anyone got a firmware retrofit? How about getting IPv6 IP#s assigned while inside my ISP's (cable company) IPv4 space, without a fixed IP there? Is there an IPv6-friendly dynamic DNS service out there?
Lotsa questions I know, but I bet lotsa folks would be willing to start getting experience at home if there were some "How-To-IPv6-for-the-Home" pages out there (I've looked, haven't found anything appropriate yet.)
I don't read ACs: If a post isn't worth so much as a nom de plume to its author then I wont bother either.
They do when they're not necessary. You think if everyone else wants to move to IPv6 and we stubbornly sit on our asses, they won't just walk right around us? They don't need us to keep the Internet moving, so, yes, they can most certainly leave us behind and I've little doubt they will.
Alito: A vote for Alito is a punch in the eye to put that bitch back in her place!
Those are all valid, of course. But why do I get a sense you're dodging the question? What are you using that lacks a MAC address? The people who are most interested in IPv6 are the people most likely to be using the currently pervasive networking technology.
I've had this sig for three days.
get your copy of nmap and scan the products in your neighbour's refrigerator.
the new version of McAfee can protect your toaster from unwanted viruses.
Doh.... hard to remember the numbers?
... We have something called DNS for the rest...
Good thing that IPv6 includes stateless address autoconfiguration, so you don't have to touch shit on your client computers.
And doh^2
ok
all I really want is IPsec
(and maybe MobileIP)
imagine that all your IP conections are secure !
screw that crap 802.11 security just let the router only allow IPsec connections and if you want to lock it down ask for the machines keys and only allow these
why is this so hard ?
IPsec is in all modern linux *BSD *ix MacOS and Win2k WinXP (win98 with download util)
really I have not seen a laptop with a OS that could not use IPsec
IPsec is manditory part of IPv6
why do these people miss the point ?
regards
John Jones
It's vital to Americans that the United States maintain it's lead as a technological innovator, because from a global economic perspective, what do we have left?
We don't really build anything here anymore. We have gotten out of the business or agriculture (We could, even now, provide enough food to end world hunger, but we don't.). Metaphorically, we are becoming a nation of gurus and burger flippers. We have people that can afford expensive cars, and people that wash them.
Our niche lies in development. If we are no longer the leader in that space, then the United States will be doomed to global mediocrity.
Domestically, we already have a kind of class warfare between the "Haves" and the "Have nots" (I don't particularly subscribe to that... It's closer to "Haves" and "Have laters." Even poor Americans have televisions and refridgerators.). Having enjoyed a prosperous history, America as a nation could not stomache becoming a nation of "Have nots."
IPv6 is coming... In some places, it's already arrived. In others, it'll be there Real Soon Now. It needs to find it's way here, and the sooner the better, for three reasons:
Making the switch today would be traumatic, because there are a lot of devices that need to be upgraded, modified, or otherwise reconfigured.
Further delay will only mean that there are even more devices that will need to be changed in the future. The Internet continues to grow explosively.
A conversion to IPv6 now would result in far less duplication of effort later.
For those that would die defending it, Freedom
has a sweet taste that the protected will never know.
The US is already way behind Europe and Asia in mobile phones - coverage, market penetration and standards.
My Karma: ran over your Dogma
StrawberryFrog
The same charges were leveled at IPv4 back when it came out -- it was considerably longer than was considered necessary (32-bits? That's way too much space!), it's a far bigger number than is convienently held in short-term memory, and yet, according to you, it's simple.
Funny how people adapt.
Between that and the mystic thing called "cut and paste" that's available on pretty much every platform known to man nowadays, this is a real non-issue.
Sure, people will adapt, but consider this. When I was in college I had 5 computers connected to the internet each with their own IP address (different locations - vastly different IPs) and I was able to memorize them all. For one of them I was using a public DNS system that crapped out all the time, so when my domain name was down, it was convenient to have the IP memorized. Try memorizing 1 IPv6 address. I'm not saying it's impossible, but it takes a ton of effort where glancing at one IPv4 address is enough to get it memorized.
Don't get me wrong, I am looking forward to IPv6 (I really dislike having to use NAT at home, though I don't have a choice at work since we're firewalled up the wazoo), but for the human mind this is going to be a huge jump, and you can't cut-and-paste all the time, not when you're on a foreign system trying to remember how to access your home computer and DNS isn't working or set up for it.
I bet the ISP's will still charge for extra IP numbers. It's too easy of a revenue source to pass up. It costs them next to nothing to set up, and with anywhere from a $5 to $15 a month extra charge, it is a great moneymaker.
According to Connexion by Boeing, the average home contains 250 devices that someday could be connected to the Internet via IPv6
If anyone was mad enough to allow their devices to connect directly to a public network so that their neighbours can use their phone, pop up their toaster and mismanage their digital rights, then IPv6 might be just the tool!
Interestingly, the 3G phone provider in the UK appears presently to be ensuring that its standards-mandated IPv6 network of handsets doesn't connect directly to the internet, possibly so it can control the services (and hence revenues) that are available.
I have enough issues with typing 127.0.0.1 Are they going to make me start typing 0000::000000:ff0000:00000:f00000 now?
If we had been on IPv6, it would have taken the Code Red worm years, decades, or maybe even centuries to find the first vulnerable Microsoft IIS web server to infect.
Switching to IPv6 would just about halt any scanning of large blocks of IP addresses for vulnerable computers.
Remember that a MAC address need only be unique on a given subnet.
In a point-to-point connection, the PPP interface could use the same MAC address as the host's Ethernet card, and the two resulting IPv6 addresses would be differentiated by the different network addresses.
In a device that had no ethernet adapter, like a mobile phone, a hardware address could be generated from any uniqueness of the device, such as a serial number, or it could simply have a hardware address built into it's firmware (much like Wi-Fi cards do today).
Even forgoing that, if the two devices connected via a point-to-point connection choose random hardware addresses, the odds of them choosing the same one are simply astronomical.
In the unlikely event that they did, there could simply be a mechanism where they each backed off, and recomputed a new one.
The more likely scenario, like in the case of a dial-up ISP connection, would be that the head-end would be configured as the auto-conf device, and the calling side would simply have to choose an address that was different from the head-end, or that the head-end would simply assign the remote side an address, a la DHCP, much like today.
In a WAN scenario, the network engineers would probably be assigning the addresses at both ends of a serial link by hand anyway.
For those that would die defending it, Freedom
has a sweet taste that the protected will never know.
This echos the early days of the Internet, where IPv4 was layered on top of DECnet, SNA, X.25 and other protocols.
I wouldn't expect to see IPv6 in a firmware update. You will probably have to buy a new box to get IPv6 support.
The interesting thing will be the reaction of the mass-market ISPs, especially cable operators, who tend to view their residential customers as peons down on the farm.
Mea navis aericumbens anguillis abundat
If you have an opinion on IPv6, why not let NIST know, in addition to posting on Slashdot?
Go to http://www.access.gpo.gov/su_docs/aces/fr-cont.ht
The last 64 bits of an IPv6 address is usually a format called EUI-64. Actually slightly modified EUI-64 in that IPv6 complements the Universal/Local bit. You take your 48-bit MAC address (EUI-48) and split it in half. Insert 'FFFE' between the two halves. Then complement the next to the least significant bit in the first octet. So, to use your example, if your MAC address was 05-04-03-02-01-00 (which it could not be since this is a multicast MAC address), and your link prefix was 2001:1:2:3::/64, your autoconfigured address would be 2001:1:2:3:704:3FF:FE02:100.
I've got my own little ipv6 /64 subnet running here :)
Not much to do with it but if I really want to I can post to Slashdot.org via www.sixxs.org.
Slashdot via ipv6
Ok, my os (MacOS 10.3.2), a lot of my software, and my personal philosophy all support IPv6. Where are the publicly accessable routers? Where do I write to get an IP block assigned to me? I'm not going to hold my breath waiting for my cable company or workplace to start passing out longer IPs, the majority of the users probably have trouble with it as it is. But there has GOT to be some free service provider (ala DynDNS) passing out v6 addresses or at least agreeing to route to me if I give them my hardware assigned one and a v4 routing path.. I don't know all the details of the protocol but I doubt they would have missed the opportunity to turn all those NAT-like addresses into real, routable ones. Help!!
I saw we go back to good old, reliable, IPX. Yes, IPX - the successor to XNS. IPX is a great protocol, it's fast and zippy, easily understood, and doesnt have all that crappy overhead of IP.
I can't beleive IPX was surpassed by TCP/IP. If as much effort was poured into IPX as was IP, the world would be a better place.
I give AT&T/NOVELL kudos for boldly deploying a global IPX "Internet" back in 1992. I was sad to see it disappear.
I'm Ashton Kutcher, and I pranked him... in the head!
With a crowbar!
I'm *awesome*!
Anyone who thinks IPv6 has even the slighest chance of hitting mainstream needs a serious reality check. While the current trend may be an increasing number of nodes on the net, there is also another hugely popular phenomenon that is countering that trend - namely our friend NAT.
The purely peer-to-peer internet that IPv6 was desined for is a thing of the past. Problems that IPv6 handles at the network layer are being handled at the applicaiton layer. Not only does NAT resolve scarcity issues with respect to address space, but the multi-cast message distribution is also being handled at the app-layer by the trend to make use of publish and subscribe mechansims.
Remember the 'Network Computer' of the mid-90's? I did the IPv6 port for the DEC Shark prototype.
All your base are belong to us!
There are good reasons to move to IPv6, including ... multicasting
Like there are tons of people multicasting out there. There are hundreds of papers every year on it, but not many actual users. To paraphrase, the most common implementation platform for multicast is powerpoint.
and better routing to name a few.
Haven't heard of this one. Care to explain?
Another point that I failed to mention in my other reply is that in a point-to-point connection, a hardware layer address is completely unessesary.
It's only required for a multi-access medium. It's required there because all stations on the medium will see every frame that's transmitted (and every packet contained in those frames). The destination hardware address in the frame header let's the recipient station know "Hey, this one is for Me!"
In a point-to-point connection, every frame coming across the link is destined for the recipient station, lest it would not have been routed that way. If the receiver happens to be a router, he still needs to accept the frame, and then determine what to do with the packet based on it's destination IP address (Be it IPv4, or IPv6).
In a frame-relay network, the same thing occurs, and the frames are directed toward a specific end-point by PVCs, which are desribed to the sending station as DLCIs.
Your point is moot... Carry on.
For those that would die defending it, Freedom
has a sweet taste that the protected will never know.
Ahh, cool. Thanks for the clarification! Out of curiosity, what's the point of complementing that bit? I found the IEEE explanation of EUI-64, but it's a little information-dense for someone not up on their terminology.
Dewey, what part of this looks like authorities should be involved?
IPv6 has only one compelling advantage over IPv4: larger address space. It is marginally useful to have a 24 bit flow ID, and it is esthetically pleasing to have extension headers. All of the other "advantages" don't exist. All the other additional functionality has been ported to IPv4a (e.g. IPSec). There are also a couple of compelling disadvantages: 1. new code=new bugs. The IP stacks of most devices have been pretty well shaken out, so we will have to go through some pain getting the new bugs found and fixed. 2. More overhead. For most applications, this isn't a problem, but for some, it is. In most cases, it either doesn't matter, or header compression can be used to solve the problem. The abortive attempt to switch to ISO networking protocols has made cynics of much of the networking world. However, it will eventually happen, if only because Asia has to migrate due to the lack of IP addresses available to them. Keith Moore's comments, referenced in another post, are all true, but the time where we are going to need so many devices is still in the future.
Nonesense. While IPv6 was noble concept, it's outlived it's usefulness. The days of network layer modifications are over. Everything is handled at the application layer these days. Back when IPv6 was conceived, it was conceivable that you could 'change' the internet. Those days are gone.
See this
All your base are belong to us!
I disagree. New technology brings new exploits and/or means to exploit. It's a myth to think exploits are going to hit a ceiling. As a given hacker's understanding of a given protocol or technology increases so will the chance of him cracking it somehow. While Code Red in its current incarnation may have been stimied, it is far more likely that a new "Code Red" would be implemented. In the short term, obscurity would be on your side but the more pervasive a technology the more likely it will be targetted.
espo
Vendors other than Cisco have been shipping fully fleshed out and functional IPv6 for years to Asian Pacific rim countrys and Europe.
Look at networks in Japan that have been running IPv6 networks FOR YEARS NOW!
IPv6 is nothing new outside the US.
The US is probably 4-6 years behind already, thats probably why the DoD decided to light a fire under the US technical community.
Juniper and other router vendors have been shipping fully functional dual stack IP in their base OS's for several years.
Nothing new here, move along, move along...
guess I need to check /. more often...
I assume you meant to say "The US is less densely populated than Europe and Asia".
Otherwise, I'd beg to differ.
Tuus crepidae innexilis sunt.
*laff*
"Left Behind"?
You mean now America won't be able to access those awesome Chinese web sites? Oh no!
Please.
IPv6-only in America (and therefore the rest of the world) is a fantasy that will never happen. Let China NAT themselves behind one IP, what do we care?
Notice I said IPv6-ONLY.. if we keep any IPv4 around then IPv6 is a pointless excercise. (Think before you say: "but, we can TUNNEL! And get all the benefits of IPv6!").
For everyone else, here's the real dope.
Once you receive an address space allocation, all of the machines on your main subnet have the same initial sequence. If you can't remember the subnet, write it down. You'll use it everyday. Secondly, from that point, you can allocate numbers in any manner you see fit. If you want consecutive addresses, you can do that. If you want to create additional subnets for routing and firewalling purposes you can do that. But rather than being stuck with only 254 possible values per class C, you've got (4 billion * 4 billion) values to work with.
A quick example for those new to the game. You've been allocated the following subnet:
If your original computers were numbered sequentially, do the same here.
Now, here's something you couldn't do with IPV4 because there wasn't enough space on your company's class C network: sensible subnetting.
Every group can have their own subnet leaving administration of those subnets to other people. Dan in development may get
From an administrative point of view, there's really not much to complain about.
-AC
There are good reasons to move to IPv6, including security, multicasting, simplified header structures, and better routing to name a few.
And the number one reason to move to IPv6 is so we can stop having so many stories about it here! Please, for the love of all that is good, we must adopt IPv6 before slashdot is buried beneath a tsunami of IPv6 stories.
With multicasting, I bet a worm could spread through an IPv6 network much faster than an IPv4 network.
-Clio
Karma: Bad (mostly from not giving a fuck)
Blog: http://clintjcl.wordpress.com
LinkLocal addresses begin with fe80 and contain the mac address in the lower portion. This is generally not the IPv6 address you should be dealing with from an administrative point of view. All addresses that would interest you must be assigned to the interfaces manually, just like IPv4. DHCP is also available for IPv6 if you don't want to configure them by hand.
If the only change were to increase the addressing to 128 bits, that would be wonderful.
The benefits of unique addressing every device exist, as do the benefits of NAT. It would be nice to have the choice of where to apply each of those techniques instead of being shoe-horned into NAT by necessity.
There is no technical reason not to use the period, our good friend ".", to act as a separator just the way that "." does now. I've seen lots of uses of the decimal representation of the 32 bit IPv4 addressing, especially in spam as an obfuscation method, like "http://2349879177/vi@gara/porn.cgi"
There is, however, no other benefit of IPv6. People can yell "better routing" all day long, it doesn't make it so. Routing tables are not improved by being made larger. All it means is greater and greater functionality required of the networking hardware, which means just more and more ways for the network itself to fail.
Several people have asserted that IPv6 fixes the "problems" of IPv4. The cure is worse than the disease.
I have a challange for supporters of IPv6: Leaving out the increase in addressable space, what is being "fixed" that simply leaving it out of the specification wouldn't solve?
Bob-
The Ludwig von Mises Institute. The reasoning individuals economics
Not ALL the rest of the world. One cannot deny the abarasive personality of it's creator if you're on his bad side (I'm not) but that is true of many things. Look at DJBDNS, if you're on the wrong side of Dan (I'm not) he comes off asa jerk, yet his code, I posit, is among the best, if not the best C code I've ever seen. One certainly cannot argue the performance merits of his software compared to bind by any metric.
"IPV8 may be the answer to everything, but keep in mind the net is about consensus, not truth. Never confuse consensus with truth" - Brian Reid
Need Mercedes parts ?
But, I confidently predict that it will be at most weeks, certainly not years, before a worm or virus brings down IIS running IPv6. IIS has more holes than code....
actually, you can tunnel back and forth (there's ipv6tov4 and ipv4 to ipv6)
www.freenet6.net
If we all moved to IPv6, spam would be easy to trace and stop, so it will never happen so long as politicians and telcos make tons of money from spam houses.
> --- All Of The Above --- >
If you look way back there were various verions of ip, 7 and 8 were spec'd out long ago and dropped. The "new V8" is a result of extending Postels early Catanet work, and bears no relationship to the earlier V8 which was abaondoned.
Need Mercedes parts ?
While hardly a complete security measure, can we still use NAT under IPv6? Nothing personal, but even with a firewall and proxy, I NEVER EVER want to give machines, on my private LAN, which have NO need to be accessed from the outside world, a public IP.
Oh the irony.
What's the point in having two different DNS names for the same service? If your website is identical over IPv6 and IPv4 (and it should be), simply give www.alioth.net two different address records (AAAA and A), and allow the client to choose its preferred protocol automatically. Don't force me to enter a different URL.
I appear to have a blog. Odd.
Here's where your logic breaks down: The only addresses that are going to be really complex are the ones that are auto-generated, which you won't need to type. Suppose you have a prefix of, say, 2001:f4c:2a5::/48. 2001 is a pretty easy number to remember, and f4c:2a5 is the same number of bits as an IPv4 address. Just tack on other easy to remember numbers and you're set:
2001:f4c:2a5::1 for the gateway,
2001:f4c:2a5:1::/64 for the first subnet,
etc.
It's really not hard.
I think you're exaggerating a bit there, IPv6 addresses are quite flexible in their notation. For example if you get a /48 it could be shortened to 2001:888:145d::1, 2001:888:145d::2 and so on. Perhaps in very large complex corporate networks you would actually have to type out all the blocks but then again you would probably use autoconfiguration of IP addresses which is taken care of in the IPv6 specs. It's just something you have to get used too. We're probably going to depend on DNS a bit more.
There's a huge difference. IPv6 is something we have to do, to stay in contact witht he rest of the world once they move there. Mobile phones? Noone cares, penetration isn't higher because the market sin't there- the people who still don't have them (like me) don't want them.
I still have more fans than freaks. WTF is wrong with you people?
America's not really considering switching to IPv6. We just want places like China, Korea, and Russia to switch to IPv6, and then we can filter SPAM that much more easily. Just block all mail from xxx.xxx.xxx.xxx.xxx.xxx ... which would work great, unless you want email from somebody in China.
Sure Cisco makes enormous routers with IPv6 capabilities. But who makes an IPv6-enabled DSL modem?
As an ISP we would dearly like to go IPv6 across our network, but it's hard to find an IPv6 replacement for the $20 DSL modems we supply to our customers today.
And of course, we will need legacy IPv4 support for all the Win9x boxes out there.
Mainly because I've only just set up a permanent IPv6 presence and I need to spend some time playing with it. It's a learning experience.
Oolite: Elite-like game. For Mac, Linux and Windows
Fair enough; if it's an experimental/at-risk service, then a new name makes sense. It's just that the nice IPv6 people went to all the effort of ensuring that it played nicely in DNS with IPv4 only clients, and I'm used to PHBs who believe that because it's new, it can't share a DNS name with an IPv4 node.
I appear to have a blog. Odd.
Out of curiosity, what's the point of complementing that bit?
::1, which is not global). Without the inversion it would be something like prefix:2:0:0:1.
To make manually-configured addresses shorter. For example, the router's address is normally prefix::1 (the EUI-64 part is
The type of data to remember has a large effect on how well we can remember it. Take for example:
ABC
WTF
BBQ
NFL
Is much easier to remember than
RNW
YOP
QHK
VTI
Our short term memories also have capacities. The fact that phone numbers are only 7-10 digits makes them fairly easy to remember. By the same token an IPv4 address that is 4 3-digit numbers is also not too hard to remember.
The difficulty with IPv6 will be that the length of the addresses are larger than what is easily manageable in short term memory and they are also a mix of numbers and 6 letters. Our brains aren't too attuned to memorizing mixes of letters and numbers unless they can be separated into logical pieces.
IPv6 uses 128-bit addresses instead of the 32-bit ones we're used to with IPv4. Check out 2^128 on a calculator sometime; it's a pretty big number. "Virtually infinite" means "so damn many that we could assign a seperate IP address to every man, woman, child, dog, and atom on the planet and be nowhere near running out".
Most people don't use DHCP at home (myself included), so when they drag their computers to LAN parties they have to reconfigure everything.
BTW does IPv6 have any simple mechanism to configure browser proxies and other location specific protocols? (since this is yet another annoyance raised by moving your computer between networks)
09F91102 no, 455FE104 nope, F190A1E8 uh-uh, 7A5F8A09 that's not it, C87294CE no. Ah! 452F6E403CDF10714E41DFAA257D313F.
Whassamatta? Your little eurodick gotchya down today?
USA! USA! USA!
WooHoo!!
Two of the most best covered countries in Europe for mobile phones - Sweden and Finland - are arguably as sparsely populated as the US.
Besides, I doubt your parent poster was referring to cell coverage in the Alaskan wilderness. Seems the US market has made a pretty good mess of the thing in dense urban areas as well.
Trust the Computer. The Computer is your friend.
Noone cares, penetration isn't higher because the market sin't there
The market isn't there becuase your phones are crap - it is an effect, not a cause of the lag. I've heard of several people here in London who have decided not to bother with a landline at all.
My Karma: ran over your Dogma
StrawberryFrog
I'm at it right now, as I type, in Chiba Japan (outside of Tokyo). Everyone here is furiously testing IPv6 and IPsec interoperability. IPv6 seems to be getting quite mature as a technology (I don't profess to know a lot about it; I can configure interfaces and routes, that's it). IPsec, however (the IKE protocol in particular) is still experiencing real growing pains.
:-).
Anyway, back to slaving away in a hot room with people who speak a language I don't understand
ERROR 144 - REBOOT ?
Better and smarter routing? I don't see how. All I see is the routers need to hold far more info than they already do which will slow them down. Most routers need to know very little about where packets next hop is and you could treat the world as 16 million /24 and make the decisions of which next hop at L2 cache speeds if you used 8mb of content addresable memory (like used for L2 cache). I don't see how buding a system where you can't do that kind of lookup is going to be faster.
According to the CIA, Finland is about the size of Montana and has 5.5 times the population. I'm guessing that means it would have 5.5 times the population density as well. US cities are the least population dense cities in the world. Even Australia and New Zealand's cities are more dense than most cities in the US. And with GSM's 25km limit, it would be too ineffective to try to cover the mid-west states let alone the north western states. In thouse areas 3 Watt AMPS (analog) phones work much better than anything else thats out there.
Where can I find out more about this? The earliest I know of Internet Protocol per se is IEN 123 (ca 1979), which has 32-bit addresses. Is there a document online showing the arguments which took place against addresses that long?
Larry
And again, nodoby would argue that the US mobile system isn't pretty messed up in urban areas as well. When people talk about USA lagging behind in mobile phone technology and deployment, it is not rural coverage they are talking about.
As for the coverage, both Finland and Sweden have areas with high population density, as well as very large areas with very low population density - a situation not unlike the US but on a smaller scale. Yet they manage to cover pretty much all populated areas.
Trust the Computer. The Computer is your friend.
No, its because people just don't want them. They see no use for them. If people wanted a cel phone they'd get one. We don't. The people who don't have one by now pretty mucch have no uuse for them.
I still have more fans than freaks. WTF is wrong with you people?
At the moment, I've got a garden variety Netgear firewall/router, obviously IPV4, and the rest of my LAN is behind that. Nor do I have any open ports, though I plan to.
By the time I open ports, I plan to have a dual-homed secondary firewall/server on Linux behind the Netgear, with my home lan on the far side. I'm starting to play with Gentoo, and find that it brings up interfaces in both IPV4 and IPV6, which may well be what I want, because I've got some Windows boxen on my lan too, and need the back compatability.
I'd think in terms of running IPV4 and IPV6 internally, use the firewall/server to bridge to IPV4 to my ISP, and occasionally get on the 6bone, or something like that. The main reason for the Netgear is so I don't have to be as paranoid about updates as if I were directly connected. Connecting to the 6bone puts me right back there, so I only want to do it when I know I'm ready.
Truthfully, IPV4 does just fine for me, even with NAT, especially considering my ISP's AUP. It would be fun to get some IPV6 learning, though.
The living have better things to do than to continue hating the dead.
Do you really care how much you dislike or like the author of some code?
Edison was an insufferable jerk. Do you use light bulbs?
Often time you may also find people respond in kind. I've never pissed off Jim Fleming or Dan Bernstein and they've been remarkably civil to me for over a decade. Shrug.
Need Mercedes parts ?
URL ?
Need Mercedes parts ?
I couldn't agree with you more and so Ill share with you something I posted to my LUG no more than 3 days ago.
Basically, Ive been toying around with IPv6 for the past couple of months and I decided to make myself a nice little init script and share it with you guys. I made this init script for Mandrake but AFAIK it should be compatible with any Redhat-like distro. There is alot of information on IPv6 and alot of the good info is scattered all over. There are quite a few ways to set up an IPv6 tunnel but though much searching and testing I found this way to be the easiest. If you want to try out IPv6 just follow these easy steps.
- You must compile IPv6 Support into your kernel
- You must register with an IPv6 Tunnel Broker. Fortunatly enough there
are quite a few free ones, and I list two below:
- Once you register with the Tunnel Broker they will issue you a
/64
subnet. That's right a /64 subnet which allows you to have up to 2^64 (18.4
million-billion) IP's!! - Download my init script at www.identityflux.com/ipv6 (Slashdot effect here I come!)
- Once you get all the information from the Tunnel broker, simply edit my
init script and start'er up. Here are the 5 variables you must edit:
- LOCAL4: This is simply just your IPv4 address
- LOCAL6: This is the IPv6
/64 subnet address that I was talking about earlier
- REMOTE6:. This is the IPv6 address of the server on the other end of the
tunnel
- NUM_ALIAS: This is how many aliases you want to bind to your new IPv6
interface. You can assign a differnt host name to each one, www/ns/mail etc
etc.
My init script creates the conf file for radvd which is basically the IPv6 Router Advertisment Daemon. This is not necessary to have for the tunnel to work, but its a nice feature. Just make sure you start up radvd after you start up my ipv6 script. To test that your IPv6 tunnel is working, just ping6 any IPv6 enabled server. For example:- Hurricane Electric: http://tunnelbroker.net (Based In California)
- Bt Exact: https://tb.ipv6.bt.com (Based in the UK)
Due to the predominate IPv4 nature of the Internet, you must tunnel your IPv6 packets encapsulated into IPv4 packets and send them off to your tunnel broker who will then route them nativly within the sixbone. Therefore you want your tunnel broker as close as possible, so choose accordingly. Unfortunatly HE recently banned IRC traffic due to abuse, so If you want to join an IPv6 enabled IRC server you are forced to use Bt Exact which is what im currently using.One of the other cool features of IPv6 is that you are currently allowed to host your own reverse DNS for your IPv6 addresses. Thus if you want to spoof your IP on IRC without having to resort to running your own hosting company or doing illegal activities this is how you would do it. My hostname on IRC currently resolves to 0.0.0.0
All but LOCAL4 will be given to you by the tunnel broker.
Agree with me or DIE!
multicast!=broadcast
Pim dense is what you're thinking of, which no one uses except on a flat lan, so it wouldn't get past their local router.
With pim sparse, you have to specify rendezvous server which then connects you to the server sending the data.
Multicast is more like an opt-in email subscription list and not like a usenet feed.
I'm actually using an ISDN modem. There is no ethernet or any kind of NIC card in the PC.
Why are they crap? They are all made by the same multinationals... ..and even if they are not as good I suspect the lack of a 5 megapixel camera in our phones is not what is holding us back.
I'm with the other guy. Our phones are plenty affordable and feature-full, but I just don't want one. I don't want people calling when I'm takin a piss just so I can look important.
#6495ED - cornflower blue
I don't think they are 8.3 style limited, I'd say more like 32 chars limited like the original Mac OS.
#6495ED - cornflower blue
The target audience for that statement is the U.S., where many authors seems to miss any points beyond additional addresses. However, the misunderstanding is not limited to the U.S. and may even be intentional. Common arguments run something like, "my [puny|midsized] country has enough IPv4 addresses, therefore IPv6 is irrelevent to the world."
As stated earlier, scalability is probably the least important issue for most (i.e. non-Asia) countries when compared to IPSEC and routing.
Beta is broken and the link to classic doesn't work. Stop wasting our time or there won't be anybody left here.
Population-density in Finland 17 people/square km
Population-density in USA: 29 people/square km
Comparing Finland to Montana is pointless. I assume Montana is one of the leat populated regions in USA, so why compare Finland to Montana? If you are going to do comparison like that, why not compare Montana to Finland's Lapland for example?
Lesbian Nazi Hookers Abducted by UFOs and Forced Into Weight Loss Programs - -all next week on Town Talk.
My mobile phone has no MAC address that I know of.
Comparing any entire country isn't really very useful. Every country has cities and rurual areas. If you've got a country like Canada, then is most of the population within relativly small physical areas, and the rest of the county is almost unpopulated. A country like France has small unpopulated areas, and the rest of the country with quite evenly spread population.
Ok, compare Lapland to Montana. They both have about the same population density and Montana is just one of several of the states with very low population and its population is very spread out. Montana had decent mobile phone coverage over a decade ago but it did require a big bag phone but it worked because you can crank up the power of an AMPS system and it extends the range. If the choice was GSM or nothing, there still wouldn't be coverage there. You just can't afford to cover that much area where there aren't too many customers. From what I've read, Lapland doesn't have very good coverage even now. GSM has its place but its not a univerally better solution.
It's impossible to cover 100%, but Lapland has a very good coverage.
Lesbian Nazi Hookers Abducted by UFOs and Forced Into Weight Loss Programs - -all next week on Town Talk.
> This is one area the US could get left behind...
who cares - there are other countries in the world, get over it.
But when I worked at the MCI Internet Engineering Dept, someone explained what HE called multicast. This was a network capacity planner, and the MCI (now Cable & Wireless) backbone at that time was the largest (I believe) in the country. I got the joy of staying late to provide the Dept Of Justice with traffic statistics when MCI was being audited prior to their merger with WorldCom. They placated the antitrust issues by selling my department to Cable & Wireless. I quit and came back to my same job a year later and quit again.
Oh sorry, Tangent mode was on.
Anyway, he said there was a way to send packet X to multiple receipients without having to send multiple packets. Basically the packets would create a "tunnel" (his word), and the tunnel would split and fork into 2 separate paths only when network topography made this manual. So the outgoing bandwidth cost of streaming a video to 500 users simultaneously would be identical to streaming a video to 1 user simultaneously. And bandwidth in general would be preserved. (This could be useful for webservers too, as they could avoid the slashdot effect.)
I may be imagining all this. You tell me.
-Clio
Karma: Bad (mostly from not giving a fuck)
Blog: http://clintjcl.wordpress.com