Slashdot Mirror

← Back to Stories (view on slashdot.org)

IPv6 Tested in Space

Posted by CmdrTaco on from the still-nobody-using-it-down-here dept.

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?"

19 of 207 comments (clear)

  1. Pointless? No. by dreamchaser · · Score: 4, Interesting

    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 ;)

    1. Re:Pointless? No. by myrdos2 · · Score: 5, Funny

      Exactly, someone has to be the first to roll it out. The first IPv6 device might as well be a satellite, since these are notoriously difficult to upgrade later.

      Even with a stepladder.

    2. Re:Pointless? No. by user24 · · Score: 4, Insightful

      He has a good point. As you all know, IPv6 allows 340,282,366,920,938,463,463,374,607,431,768,211,45 6 addresses, while IPv4 allows only 4,294,967,296 addresses (tinyurl.com/6gqkc). Nothing like planning ahead, eh?

    3. Re:Pointless? No. by thegameiam · · Score: 4, Insightful

      Because we all know that newly-implemented code never requires patching, and is guaranteed bug-free...

      --
      Need Geek Rock? Try The Franchise!
  2. Just in case it catastrophically fails.... by m0ng0l · · Score: 5, Funny

    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!
  3. IP in Space by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 5, Informative

    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

  4. This surely is bullshit! by ReinisFMF · · Score: 4, Funny

    Everybody knows that satellites go round faster than earth rotates. The tubes would certainly break!

  5. Cisco's New Marketing Campaign by JoeCommodore · · Score: 5, Funny

    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
  6. Gee, why is no one switching to IPv6? by kimvette · · Score: 3, Interesting

    Since no-one is choosing to run IPv6 on the ground, isn't this a bit pointless?


    Why is no one running IPv6 on the ground? Well, I'll tell you why I don't run it:

    • Neither of my ISPs (work or home) supports it
    • NONE of my routers support it
    • A lot of applications I run don't support it
    • Dealing with it on apache would be a PITA, wouldn't 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 /8 assignments. Besides, isn't the DoD largely on IPv6 now? Reallocate the IPv4 space reasonably, force organizations such as Apple, HP, IBM, Merck, and Halliburton justify their IP allocation request like I had to for my puny /27 block, and then there will be plenty of space for all.
    --
    The Christian Right is Neither (Christian nor right). See: Matthew 23, Matthew 25, Ezekiel 16:48-50
    1. Re:Gee, why is no one switching to IPv6? by LighterShadeOfBlack · · Score: 4, Insightful

      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 /8 assignments. Besides, isn't the DoD largely on IPv6 now? Reallocate the IPv4 space reasonably, force organizations such as Apple, HP, IBM, Merck, and Halliburton justify their IP allocation request like I had to for my puny /27 block, and then there will be plenty of space for all. - And who wants to deal with dotted quads when a single digit is even easier to memorise. Except that wouldn't be much good when the 11th person comes along and asks for an IP address would it? Same with IPv4. We will run out of IPv4 addresses. Maybe not today, tomorrow or even next year, but short of the annihilation of civilisation as we know it it will happen sooner or later. It doesn't matter if we liberate x hundred million unused addresses, that will only delay the inevitable by a few years or maybe a decade at most.

      The real PITA then, is trying to get people to do something about this problem before it really becomes a problem. People keep commenting on the slow transition to IPv6 as if it's a failure of the protocol. No, as you implied, it's a failure of the software developers who aren't implementing it, the hardware manufacturers who aren't supporting it, and the ISPs who aren't providing it. Instead of trying to free up more IPv4 address space we should be letting it become a scarce resource to force the guilty parties to make the necessary updates so that nobody's caught short on that fateful day when we well and truly are out of IPv4 addresses. We should be taking every step possible to limit the amount of software and hardware from being deployed that we already know will be useless a couple of decades from now, instead it seems like so many people are quite happy to take their sweet time with it until alarm bells start ringing.

      You'd think with things like the Y2k bug and numerous other situations which exposed the fallacies of the "it'll do for now, we'll deal with that later" ideology that the computing industry would be all too happy to see that the IP address situation was spotted well ahead of time and would be embracing the ability to future-proof their software and IT infrastructures. Instead it seems like we're going to have another case of fingers-in-their-ears-"la-la we're not listening - oh shit! we're out of IP addresses!" situation with a mad dash to half-assed implementations and slap-dash patches.
      --
      Spelling mistakes, grammatical errors, and stupid comments are intentional.
    2. Re:Gee, why is no one switching to IPv6? by vertinox · · Score: 4, Insightful

      Reallocate the IPv4 space reasonably, force organizations such as Apple, HP, IBM, Merck, and Halliburton justify their IP allocation request like I had to for my puny /27 block, and then there will be plenty of space for all.

      If I may make a car analogy...

      Let us say that IPv4 is the oil we get from the ground and all cars run off it. Then a small group of scientists do a study and say discover "Egads! We've only got 10 years worth of oil left!"

      Everyone panics and the scientists come up with a pure ethanol based car (IPv6) that has none of the limitations of oil when it comes to making new ones (In theory we could eventually use up all our natural resources in production of corn, but that would take thousands of years so that is someone eles's problem)

      However, such a switch over would cost millions if not billions of dollars spent replacing all the oil based motors, but they start the work.

      Then.... Some smart ingenious mechanic finds a way to make regular engines work off 50% ethanol and 50% oil (NAT addressing) and everyone goes "Phew! Problem solved!"

      However, that doesn't resolve the fact that oil is still going to run out in 20 years but by then that will be someone else's problem.

      But in reality, I think the US, Canada, and Europe will switch to IPv6 when their counter parts in China and India surpass us economically in 10 to 20 years. (As in Chinese companies start buying US companies and then tell their network departments to migrate so they can communicate better)

      Asia is the big pusher for IPv6 because they simply did not get any of the IPv4 to start with and NAT isn't helping them much considering they will have literally the majority of world's internet users. Unless, like you say, the big US tech companies give up the IPv4 spaces to companies in Asia I think they are on the path to complete IPv6 networks over there.

      Either way... I think most of us will get IPv6 equipment when it was cheaper for the manufacture to not disable the feature in our standard IPv4 products (think built in modem or video into the mother board trend) but this might be some time from now.

      --
      "I am the king of the Romans, and am superior to rules of grammar!"
      -Sigismund, Holy Roman Emperor (1368-1437)
    3. Re:Gee, why is no one switching to IPv6? by Znork · · Score: 4, Insightful

      "Neither of my ISPs (work or home) supports it"

      You dont need their support. Use 6to4. Or a tunnel.

      "NONE of my routers support it"

      You dont need them to. Use 6to4.

      "A lot of applications I run don't support it."

      Some do tho. It's wonderful to be able to ssh and scp directly into the boxes you have behind a NAT gateway without having to resort to two-stage jumps.

      "Dealing with it on apache would be a PITA, wouldn't it?"

      No.

      "who wants to deal with IPv6 when dotted quads are easier to memorize?"

      There's this new development called DNS you know...

      "Just wrench the class A"

      Mmm, like that's going to happen...

      Meanwhile I sit here on a bazillion addresses, merit of having one single v4 address. Get with the times, it's not like IPv6 is rocket science anymore.

    4. Re:Gee, why is no one switching to IPv6? by Ephemeriis · · Score: 4, Interesting

      While it is certainly true that there aren't a whole ton of home routers that support IPv6 yet, it's on the way. Vista installs IPv6 by default and it's a pain to get rid of it. Vista tells you you've got full IPv4 connectivity, but limited IPv6 connectivity...and I've already had one client ask me what that meant, and how he could get full IPv6. Folks will buy an IPv6 router just because it's got a bigger number...and now that Vista advertises IPv6 connectivity, people will be aware that there is a bigger number to be had.

      Plus, some stupid applications insist on trying IPv6 if it is installed and wait forever for the packets to time out... A common problem I ran into with folks who tinkered under XP was massive slowdowns with Firefox after someone had installed IPv6. Remove IPv6 and everything was fine. Of course...Vista doesn't like it when you try to remove IPv6... Haven't had any calls about slowdowns yet...maybe Vista handles the stack better than XP did...

      As far as "no-one is choosing to run IPv6 on the ground"... Well, that's just not true. Many ISPs are running IPv6 on their internal networks. You'll never see it because your modem/router/LAN live in an IPv4 tunnel...but it's there. I know I've seen Job Ads for the local hospital asking for IPv6 experience as well...though I don't know if they're actually using it yet or just preparing for the future.

      "Dotted quads" may be easier for you to memorize...but I suspect this is largely because that's what you're dealing with on a day-to-day basis. Remember when you were little and it was hard to memorize addresses or phone numbers? Now that seems incredibly simple, doesn't it? Remember when you were just learning IP and wondered why you couldn't use DNS for absolutely everything (because names are so much easier to memorize than numbers). Plus, IPv6 supports a couple different ways to abbreviate addresses...such as stripping leading 0's or replacing them with :: Which makes our old friend 127.0.0.1 something much easier to remember - ::1

      And simply re-allocating the IPv4 address space just isn't going to cut it. There aren't enough addresses out there. The only reason we've been able to stay with IPv4 for so long is NAT, which causes problems of its own. The bottom line is that we need more addresses than IPv4 has.

      --
      "Work is the curse of the drinking classes." -Oscar Wilde
  7. Re:Not true by pla · · Score: 3, Interesting

    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.

  8. Ignorance is NOT bliss by WindBourne · · Score: 4, Informative

    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.
  9. New meme by bcmm · · Score: 5, Funny
    Pretty please can we make this into a new meme?
    Examples:
    • IPv6 Tested ...in Space
    • SCO Vs. IBM Leaks Exposed ...in Space
    • O'Reilly Opens Online Tech School ...in Space
    • Microsoft Opposing California Open Doc Bill ..in Space
    --
    # cat /dev/mem | strings | grep -i llama
    Damn, my RAM is full of llamas.
  10. I wonder if that Cisco has been patched... by mnemotronic · · Score: 3, Interesting

    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.
  11. You want IPv6 adoption? Make it reasonable. by shaitand · · Score: 3, Interesting

    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.

  12. Re:Not true by Kizeh · · Score: 3, Interesting

    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.