Slashdot Mirror
IPv6 Tested in Space
An anonymous reader writes "Remember the Cisco router orbiting on a satellite in space? Well, it's now also the first to run IPv6 in space. Since no-one is choosing to run IPv6 on the ground, isn't this a bit pointless?"
← Back to Stories (view on slashdot.org)
If you're going to start putting Interplanetary WAN infrastructure in place, might as well go IPv6 from the get go. Then once there are a few billion nodes scattered about the Solar System we won't have any addressing problems ;)
No, testing it in space isn't pointless! If the IPv6 stack fails catastrophically, there's no one around to be hurt by the flying shrapnel!
I mean after all it might even potentially set the Earths atmosphere on fire, if it were testing on the ground!
Do you see the FNORDS? I refuse to post anonymously, as I am fireproof!
This is nothing new. The ill fated STS-107 carried a complete CANDOS pacage offering a wealth of IP protocols. In fact UoSat-12 back in May of 2000 ran an ftp server. The only thing new here is IPV6. IPV4 has been in space for a long time. You an find more about this at our website http://ipinspace.gsfc.nasa.gov/
Thank you,
your NASA team
.. oh, wait, that'd be the Ultimate Marvel entity known as Gah Lak Tus. Not sure I'd want them to reach us easier.
Cosmic Rays cause Cisco routers to break enough on Earth, wouldn't the effect be multiplied with them being in space?
Everybody knows that satellites go round faster than earth rotates. The tubes would certainly break!
Cisco - we hold 100% of the IPv6 market*
Cisco - We circle the globe with IPv6 support.
Cisco - THE standard for aerospace IPv6 deplyment archetecture.
Cisco - Our IPv6 technology is rated "higher" than any of our competitors.
*in space
"Enjoy what you're doing! If it becomes drudgery, you're doing it wrong!" - Jim Butterfield
Why is no one running IPv6 on the ground? Well, I'll tell you why I don't run it:
Besides, who wants to deal with IPv6 when dotted quads are easier to memorize? Just wrench the class A address assignments away from the current assignees (not a single one of them needs a class A block) and reallocate them reasonably. Apple does not need a class A block, Merck doesn't, HP doesn't, GE doesn't, IBM doesn't, MIT doesn't. Halliburton doesn't, and the DoD certainly does not need multiple
The Christian Right is Neither (Christian nor right). See: Matthew 23, Matthew 25, Ezekiel 16:48-50
There are many large business models that depend on it.
Such as?
First, what does a networking potocol have to do with a business model; And second, how can any company survive with a business model dependant on something not supported by most ISPs?
Serious questions, not sarcasm.
First, what does a networking potocol have to do with a business model;
Go look up Communication clients and services, from simple IM and Voice to remote clients and client tracking.
And second, how can any company survive with a business model dependant on something not supported by most ISPs?
Go look up, "tunneling."
Since nobody runs ipv6????? Sad, that so many Americans are clueless. Asia has moved into IPv6 in a big way, esp. China. They are all hoping to get a jump on it before we do. China, Japan, and even South Korea have pushed it like there is no tomorrow.
I prefer the "u" in honour as it seems to be missing these days.
3G mobile networks utilise IPv6, AIUI; I've a feeling it's part of the specs (well, everything is specified somewhere in mobile telco land), which makes it part of the business model.
Examples:
# cat
Damn, my RAM is full of llamas.
Ever use a new cell phone? Want to watch TV? The truth is IPv4 addresses are almost gone. Not the number of hosts, but amount of allocatable new address are almost gone. Companies do not usually give back allocated addresses even when they are acquired or merge plus of course the number of hosts are ever increasing.
;-) :-) :-S :-( lol " which are poor substitutes for seeing and hearing actual emotion and reacting to it.
The practical number of usable IPv4 addresses is about 250 million. Remember there is at least one host address AND THEN gateway and broadcast when provisioning new Internet services. This is very inefficient and one reason why there is not the notion of broadcast domain in IPv6. Also companies especially early on were given large blocks of addresses. So yes there are addresses out there which can be reused, but are you going to start calling up companies and universities and ask them for addresses? Not very realistic.
It should only take just a couple of examples to see why companies already have and will have to move to IPv6:
Remembering there are about 250 million usable addresses, what if you want to IP enable 80 million cell phone customers for web, video, IM, e-mail and other services? Where are you going to get all of those addresses? How will you get about 30% of the world's useable IPv4 addresses so you can make money from the new services? You can not. This is why NTT moved to IPv6 about 4-5 years ago.
Another example could be a US cable service provider (no names - protecting the innocent) who has 40 million customers and wants/needs to roll out new IP enabled digital set top boxes so they can provide video (1 address), VoIP (1 address), and Internet data (1 address). If each customer bought all three services the ISP would need 120 million address. Do you think anyone will give up their addresses so this one provider can have about half (120 million) of all of the useable IPv4 address in the world? No. IPv6.
The fact that you do not understand how to subnet IPv6 or understand how it works is irrelevant. It is needed because of the scale of IP enabled devices and services. Should people in developing counties do without the Internet revolution because Americans have most of the addresses and we are fat, dumb, and happy (it is phase meaning complacent) because we already have the lions share of the IPv4 addresses and as such many of the services already? --Yes I know we have fallen way behind Asia and Europe in many areas.
Also, IPv6 is needed to enable more interactive use of IP enabled technologies. Sitting behind NAT devices inhibits accessibility. (I know most are saying..well duh...) But networks should be secure and accessible. Think of talking to your friend on a mobile phone and then sharing/watching with him on your and his mobile phones some of the highlights of a sports game you watched last night and are being streamed from home your home server --of course taunting him while watching because your team won.
Of course some of this can be done now, but it is more male geeks doing it manually. When it can be seamless and by the main stream, then things will really be different. We will live in a much more collaborative society. One where using technology will not create social misfits who do not know how to interact with real people anymore, but one that uses technology TO interact socially with people. When you can video conference from your mobile, PC, work, school, or living room and the clarity of visual and sound are so good it seems like the people are there, you will not longer have to do "
So what does IPv6 enable? The future.
-Andy
Bonjour does not rely on IPv6 - IPv6 autoconf was based on Appletalk autoconf, as was Apple's Bonjour (formerly Rendezvous). Bonjour works just fine with no v6 on the network.
And Apple's business model is absolutely not dependent on Bonjour: I think perhaps you are misunderstanding the term "business model." An example of a business model is:
"We give away high-quality software for free to get people to buy our hardware, where we make high margins" - that's an example of Apple's business model.
"By becoming the de-facto standard desktop environment, we encourage customers to buy applications from us which are specifically geared for that environment" - that's an example of Microsoft's business model.
Notice that neither of those models require calling out a specific technology. Any company which is completely dependent on a single technology will find itself obsolete when the next big thing is created.
Need Geek Rock? Try The Franchise!
For this configuration exploit, this SNMP vulnerability, this IP sequence generation problem, this ICMP vuln, this H.323 problem, and this buffer overflow.
NOTE: Some of the listed problems indicate a "Cisco 3200 Catalyst", which may not be the same as the orbiting "Cisco 3200 Mobile Access Router". IANACG (I am not a Cisco geek).
The Russians have won. They have made the world a cesspool of distrust, greed, fear and hate.
Slightly off topic, but if there was some way I could figure out how to connect to and hack the ISS computers, I'd love to get in there and replace whatever is on the display to read simply "All of these worlds are yours except Europa. Attempt no landing there".
It'd have a fun effect, to be sure.
The Internet is generally stupid
Start an open site dedicated to CONTENT providers who have made their content available for IPv6 and give blue ribbon graphics to IPv6 only sites. Then.. and this is the biggest one.
Make getting address space cheap and easy!!! IPv6 is huge, why do I have pay ridiculous recurring fees to get a block? Make small allocations free, registration free and online, then just make me return a confirmation letter/call/email once every 5 years to renew. IPv6 space is monstrous, it is terrible that you have to pay outrageous fees to become a member organization and then huge recurring fees for addresses. Why do ISP's have to go through the same backflips and outrageous pricing schemes that served to reduce demand for IPv4 addresses.
Once you have major content providers onboard and make it free and easy to get address space, then ISP can advertise access to the 'NEW AND IMPROVED' internet.
Cellular carriers have looked at it very seriously for the next generation (4G?) networks, as one potential idea is to do packetized voice, and the number of addressable devices is potentially huge, and depending on how mobility is done, each device may need several addresses.
The U.S. federal government has mandated it, so anyone wishing to get into that business needs it.
That being said, my university has been running IPv6 for a few years now -- we luckily have native IPv6 feed from I2 -- and all of our routers (Cisco IOS), servers (various variants of Linux) and clients (MacOS X, Linux, Windows XP) have supported it just fine.
I assume by "Verio" you mean NTT (AS2914). NTT is an incumbent Japanese telco, which bought the US-based Verio some years ago. I know that NTT offers IPv6 services, and their brochure is here, which claims that they're running dual stack on all of their routers. That brochure also claims that they have 500 customers for their IPv6 services, and claims that they're the largest provider of IPv6 in the world.
As for Sprint, they often brag about their L2TPv3 core, with MPLS, and other private-IP services offered as edge services. It would make sense for them to run 6PE and just treat v6 as yet another edge service which doesn't interfere with their core. BTW, Sprint's documentation on this indicates that they have a grand total of seven IPv6 speaking routers.
So while you might have a point about NTT running v6 in the core, they're not that big an ISP in the US: the weekly routing table analysis doesn't show them in the top 20 in either the ARIN region or the APNIC region. From the map on their website, they've got all of 9 POPs in the US... Their focus seems to be on business and webhosting customers, rather than on end-users - they don't offer a TDM product below a DS3.
In any case, the idea that having 500 customers of a given technology shows the provider as the most deployed/largest in the world misses the scale of the Internet entirely: Cablevision might have more than 500 customers in a single building who are IPv4-only.
Need Geek Rock? Try The Franchise!
To quote wikipedia ..."The differences between PPP and market exchange rates can be significant. For example, the World Bank's World Development Indicators 2005 estimates that one United States dollar is equivalent to approximately 1.8 Chinese yuan by purchasing power parity in 2003. [1]. However, based on nominal exchange rates, one U.S. dollar is currently equal to 7.9 yuan. This discrepancy has large implications; for instance, GDP per capita in the People's Republic of China is about US$1,800, while on a PPP basis it is about US$7,204. This is frequently misused to assert that China is the world's second largest economy, but such a calculation would be invalid under the PPP theory..."