IPv6 is Here

shawn(at)fsu writes "Reuters is running a story that Vinton Cerf of the Internet Corp. for Assigned Names and Numbers (ICANN) says that "IPv6 been added to its root server systems" I like how they said that it will run along side IPv4 for 20 years to get rid of the bugs. A few previous Slashdot stories out of many here, here and here"

Comments

v6 could help solve some net problems

[erick99]

Perhaps we will get to the point where static IP addresses are required. That might help track down spammers and other bad netizens. I'm sure they will find a way around it, but, still, an assigned IP for each user and each piece of hardware would be a good start. And, it would seem that there would be enough to 'round:

Cerf said about two-thirds of the 4.3 billion Internet addresses currently available were used up, adding that IPv6 could magnify capacity by some "25,000 trillion trillion times."

Of course, if v4 runs along side of v6 for 20 years that may mean that it would be harder to implement an IP-per-user scheme. I don't know. But, 20 years should be enough time to work out any bugs:

He said the IPv6 system would run parallel to IPv4 for about 20 years to ensure that any bugs or system errors were weeded out.

Cheers!

Erick

Re:v6 could help solve some net problems

[jerde]

IPv6 is big enough to give a class C subnet to every living person on the planet

Um. IPv6 is big enough to give a Class A subnet to every living person on the planet.

It's big enough to route an entire IPv4 numberspace to every living person on the planet, and to each of their pets, favorite invisible friends, and pieces of furniture.

2^128 is a big, big number.

The point is, they'll be able to "waste" huge swaths of the that numberspace as they build the routing hierarchy, making the network more scalable.

I'm worried about remembering ssh 2031:0000:130F:0000:0000:09C0:876A:130B

:)

- Peter

Perfect!

[mfh]

FTA: Cerf said about two-thirds of the 4.3 billion Internet addresses currently available were used up, adding that IPv6 could magnify capacity by some "25,000 trillion trillion times."

Perfect for colonization of other planets. If each human being has their own IP, then we would need to pack a whole bunch of planets to require more than that! They aren't kidding when they say they'll run IPv4 with IPv6 for twenty years. In that time, we won't have used even a fraction of a couple percent of available IPs, even if we assign every human being on the planet with one, and every company with a giant block.

Re:Perfect!

[ultrabot]

If each human being has their own IP, then we would need to pack a whole bunch of planets to require more than that!

Binding IP's to humans is arbitrary - it's more realistic to expect that every human with money is going to have several IP addresses (appliances, toasters, whatever), while most of the people in the world will have none.

Also, for some reason, I don't really like the idea of persistent per-human IP addresses. The idea has an Orwellian feel to it.

My IPv6 Rant

[GeorgeH]

I posted How the Internet is broken, how to fix it, and why that's not going to happen, a rant about IPv6 adoption, to my personal site.

Basic idea - include IPv6 over IPv4 tunneling software in Linksys routers. This would allow people to run IPv6 networks in their houses and talk to IPv6 networks elsewhere. This would fix a lot of problems that NAT introduces, and would sidestep the wait for IPv6 ISPs. It would also provide enough of a user base to encourage application developers to include IPv6 support.

Of course, this would kill Linksys' NAT router sales, so they have no incentive to do so, but I like to think it's a good idea.

Might not be a bad thing.

[Gordonjcp]

After all, registration numbers ended the concept of motor car anonymity, and most people would agree that the advantages far outweigh the disadvantages.