Slashdot Mirror
The Next Net
Qa32 wrote to give a heads up on a BBC article discussing the IETF's plans for the future, including information on VoIP, IPv6, and security concerns. From the article: "Given the net was designed for the whole community, it has done well to reach millions. If you want to reach the whole population, you have to make sure it can scale up."
IPv6 is nothing, it was just created because we are running out of IP addresses quickly. The future as I see it is mass distribution of media. Instead of running out and buying movies you could download the whole dvd and watch that.
From part-way down TFA:
Interesting for many here that the new guy at the head of the IETF seems to give this issue such emphasis.
If you disagree, post your argument. (-1, Overrated) isn't your personal censorship tool for views you don't like.
Donald 'Duck' Dunn: We had a band powerful enough to turn goat piss into gasoline.
This history of IPv6 will never be introduced on our planet when the big players (ISP, Datacenters) and universities start using our their network. Someday I asked my Internet provider when will they start using IPv6 on dial-up networks, imagine what response did I got? "IPv6??? What is it"
http://www.michel.eti.br
"If you want to reach the whole population, you have to make sure it can scale up."
I thought with the current schema the internet uses it was allways setup to scale and allow for redundency, where one section can do down and a new one can take place. Or new networks could easily be added, and expanded off of.
Even new technologys like P2P and torrent etc were able to come out, still functioning correctly with the internet with no changes.
Maybe they mean the ability for the technology to scale up, meaning situations like the IPv6 would not be such a consern. But then again IPv6 is a huge change to the entire structure of how the internet functions.
TruePunk | Games
Try it yourselve with dig or nslookup - try looking up AAAA records for any of the sites you visit, and see how many would be accessible via IPv6.
For example, try
www.eFax.com are spammers
I can't remember which is greater, the number of available IPv6 addresses or the estimated total number of atoms in the universe, but either way you can rest assured that there will be more than enough IPv6 addresses to handle any foreseeable addressing needs we're going to have any time soon, even if everyone winds up with dozens of personal IP-assigned devices.
If you disagree, post your argument. (-1, Overrated) isn't your personal censorship tool for views you don't like.
I believe IPv6 has something like 50 addresses for every square foot of land on the earth.
That's amazing. Soon we'll be able to wire up our entire house and everything from the fridge to the alarmclock would be accessible from the internet.
I only hope if it gets to that, nobody can hack into my microwave when I'm cooking my dinner, or someone hacking into my alarm clock and messes with the settings.
If microsoft does good on their desire to control it all, they'd better finally have some reasonable measure of security. I wouldn't want to wake up to find out some low life got to my hot water heater and turned it off because of a buffer overflow vulnerability.
Wouldn't it just be easier to lower the population to millions rather than changing current infrastructure?
Remember alot of those IP's will be within a private network. I doubt they will be handing out static IPs to lightbulbs any time soon.
Seriously, mate, this joke is so old it's about time it was put out of its misery (as it's no longer funny) and bury it under three miles of solid rock (otherwise, the stench would be unbearable).
Man is a slave because freedom is difficult, whereas slavery is easy.
What that means to you, MBAs, is that it sounds like by i-deploying its cross-market and granular mix of best-of-breed technologies for today's e-enterprise, the interweb will finally be scalable!
Small potatoes make the steak look bigger.
Whatever happened to Internet2? Was it just another Bubble scam, in reverse? Just a way for academics to rip off government and investors with handwaving promises of "Next Generation" apps, from the magic cloud that birthed the first Internet (but without the genius and visionaries)? Internet2 has been in "startup" phase for almost a decade - where's the return? And if it's just percolating beneath the surface of these announcements, why isn't my taxpayer investment getting the credit? For starters, where's the massively scalable multicast infrastucture that would enable all these hypermultimedia apps that everyone wants?
--
make install -not war
Number of addresses:
IPv4 : 4 × 10^9
IPv6 : 3.4 × 10^38
That means about 4.3 x 10^20 addresses per sqr inch on Earth's surface. So, yes, it will be enough, even for whatever embedding plans people might have.
From what I can see, what's held up IPv6 adoption is the NAT router, and IPTables/Netfilter in particular. These IPTables guys have managed to come up with hacks for many of the difficult protocols, so that even cranky beasts like MSN Messenger are fully functional. NAT has its problems, of course, and at some point we're going to have to dump IP4, but I think it's longer off then some hope.
The world's burning. Moped Jesus spotted on I50. Details at 11.
There are more ipv6 addresses then atoms in your body. My back of hand calculations show 4*10^10 addresses per atom.
mass of a person: 80kg
molecular mass of water: 18g/mole
approximate moles of water in body: 2.7e27 = 80e3 / 18 * 6.03e23
approximate atoms in body: 8e27 = 2.7e27 * 3
address in ipv6: 3.4e38
approximate addresses per atom: 4e10 = 3.4e38 / 8e27
The mass of water was used as water is a significant portion of the body.
According to my calculations, IPv6 allows us:
Over 300 million IP addresses per cubic millimeter of the Earth.
One IP address for every 5 cubic meters of the entire solar system within the sphere defined by the aphelion of the orbit of Pluto.
180,000 IP addresses per cubic light year for the estimated size of the entire universe.
Yup, I think we have enough.
Make me a friend and I'll mod you up
NAT is the ISPs way of keeping its subscribers in line, and acting as consumers rather than citizens. Given the TOS of my ISP, it just doesn't matter whether I get NATted, or not. Anything I could do that I can't do behind NAT isn't allowed.
The living have better things to do than to continue hating the dead.
IANA hasn't been handing out class A blocks "like tap water" for a long time. Sure, some organizations have too many addresses, but these were mainly organizations that pioneered the IP network and were handed these netblocks very early on.
As an AC pointed out in an earlier response, NAT is the hack, not IPv6. It breaks end-to-end connectivity, and you have to jump through lots of hoops to get many protocols to work correctly. NAT was a measure that slowed the need for IPv6, but it didn't remove it.
Do you even know anything about perl? -- AC Replying to Tom Christiansen post.
don't be silly, anyway they're talking about the net, not the web, ie, the infrastructure, not format's of files that could be transfered over it.
No. IETF spends more of their time on file content than byte-pushing "infrastructure". For example, the HTML format is IETF RFC 1866. Any file that's mainly viewed over the internet is potential IETF fodder.
(Flash is too old and too intentionally openness-hostile to ever become an IETF standard, of course. But it'd be good if it could be replaced by something which is a standard, maybe SVG)
IPv4 only supports 4bil address in a given addressible domain. With NAT, things get more interesting, and to be honest, is the BEST thing that has happened to computer security ever. People whine about NAT, but it's poor protocols that cause NAT to break things (FTP, RTSP and SIP come to mind). Otherwise NAT solves the issues.
NAT has in no way improved security. You're confusing firewalls with NAT. Firewalls would be just as effective without NAT.
Since you seem to be so informed, though, how exactly are you working to fix these ``poor protocols'' that are preventing me from doing video chat with my daughter or managing her computer? I cannot ssh, remote desktop, or ichat AV because her machine is behind a NAT outside of her control.
How does this benefit her, the customer of this service? What does it do to improve security beyond the built-in firewall or any given add-on stateful firewall?
-- The world is watching America, and America is watching TV.