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."
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,
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
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
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.
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?
Yes, but most ISPs don't allow "servers" to be run on most of the non-premium residential services they provide. (here I'm using a broad definition of server meaning any program that listens for a session open)
What makes you think they're going to allow "servers" on IPv6?
My stove, or VCR, or whatever may speak IPv6 in the future, but ISPs will charge us an arm and a leg to hook them up to their premium service to allow them to be used remotely.
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...
Ah, but you could make the same argument about telephone extensions (you know, the ones you need to dial when you want to reach a specific person at a business with a PBX). In truth, there's really no reason why you couldn't add an additional protocol to allow access to services through NATs. The global level network would just route between IPv4 nodes, and then the public firewall/NAT router would route things to the internal network.
IPv6 is a much more elegant solution, but this whole idea that IPv4 + NAT couldn't meet the needs of Web-connected refrigerators is a false one.
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.
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.
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.
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.