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
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?
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.
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).
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
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.
.. 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.
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
Besides from the added bonus of making the networks failover. (c;
'I am become Shiva, destroyer of worlds'
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.
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.
The "Third World" of over 4 billion persons being the best example of your thesis?
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
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.
This is why I can't take the IPV6 folks seriously. Demand for addresses comes from the leaves, not the root. So what if every backbone provider has native IPv6 routing throughout they're backbones? They're not the ones who use addresses by the ton!
I've got an IPv6 tunnel and addresses from a TLA, but I can't get native IPv6 access because neither the cable modem that I use nor the equipment it talks to upstream knows anything about IPv6. In fact, there is little, if any, end user WAN equipment that speaks IPv6 natively. Availability of that kind of equipment is necessary before a "global service launch" has any kind of meaning.
what you're really saying is that Sun's IPv6 implementation and tools are sadly lacking from a usability point of view. Shame on Sun.
:)
I've no doubt, Sun thought that a 'GUID' per address was a good idea, and that no-one would ever want anything different... but you describe exactly why you *would* want somethign else.
Maybe its just that the tools for managing the addresses/network are poor.
(lol. maybe you should upgrade to Microsoft
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
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 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.
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
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.
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 ?
What header? All but the first and last router don't care about anything but the source and destination address, and most times not about the source address at all. So what else is there to simplify?
You're ignoring header checksums and fragmentation.
Yes, a lot of IPv4 features were simply taken out of IPv6, but that doesn't make IPv6 unnecessary. Taking a feature out of IPv4 would result in something that's not compatible with IPv4, thus you'd have to give it a new name and upgrade all the equipment. So why not increase the address size while we're at it and call the result IPv6?