Slashdot Mirror
Google Over IPv6 Coming Soon
fuzzel writes "Today Google announced Google over IPv6 where ISPs can sign up their DNS nameservers so that their users will get access to an almost fully IPv6-enabled Google, including http://www.google.com, images and maps, etc., just like in IPv4. Without this only http://ipv6.google.com is available, but then you go to IPv4 for most services.
So, start kicking your ISPs to support IPv6 too, and let them sign up.
Check this list of ISPs that already do native IPv6 to your doorstep.
The question that now remains is: when will Slashdot follow?"
Wow I can finally have all the advantages of IPv6 like
Until they run out of IPv4 addresses it really doesn't matter.
There are a few obscure tunneling applications to this but who cares.
Cue people who don't understand routing and generally how the internet works saying "But why can't we just use NAT? HP don't need that many IP addresses!".
There is nothing interesting going on at my blog
it's eerily similar to google in ipv4
Or is that list of ipv6 capable ISPs depressingly short? All I see on there are a handful of tiny mom and pop shops and perhaps some larger foreign ISPs. Until Comcast, Verizon, AT&T, NTT, Telekom, or any other major ISPs start showing up on that list all of this IPv6 stuff is going to remain a research toy. I would use IPv6 now if my ISP supported it. I'm not really interested in setting up a complicated tunnel for effectively no benefit. That IPv6 porn site never even got off of the ground.
I read the internet for the articles.
What ever happened to IPv5?
Great IPv6 song! :)
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=_y36fG2Oba0
Google over IPv6 is crisp and clean, with good intensity and a hint of citrus on the nose
One BIG carrot for Universities and Labs that use google (gmail, docs, etc) is that this means that all that google traffic can be routed over their Internet2 connections which are MUCH faster and of lower latency than their commercial internet connections.
As an IPv6 user, I would LOVE to use google over IPv6.
I smell the hand of Vint Cerf at google...
The question that now remains is: when will Slashdot follow?
I heard that Taco is skipping IPv6, and going straight to IPv7.
.. that for quick and dirty use the numeric address are just too complicated. Sure it has benefits wrt security, routing and a load of other behind the scenes stuff. But for people who are used to using numeric ip4 addresses when DNS is slow or for testing purpose or setting up various IP tables or 101 miscellanious things , ip6 is a royal PITA.
Ok , thats hardly a reason for not using it but I suspect its perhaps one reason why people are relunctant to try it. Half a line of hex is not user friendly.
Sweet, so I have Google doing IPv6, my OS doing IPv6, yet there are still a finger full of gateway/routers, targeted at the home market, providing IPv6 support. The only router claiming IPv6 support in their specifications is the Apple Airport. Linksys and D-Link apparently have plans, yet nothing in the user documentation. For me, if the manufacturer doesn't document IPv6 in its user document or specification on its web site, then it is as good as not supporting IPv6 - after all I doubt their support team would be any more clued in.
Don't get me wrong, I am all for IPv6, its just that I am fed up having to deal with tunnels because certain parties are dragging their feet.
Jumpstart the tartan drive.
Maybe you should read the summary again.
I hoped that Linksys, et.al., would intro consumer routers at CES2009 with IPv6/IPv4 dual stacks.
As I wrote elsewhere, you can get IPv6 on Linksys (et al.) routers at present as well, but you have to use custom firmware, meaning OpenWRT or DD-WRT.
Unfortunately this means that it can be quite difficult to configure. OpenWRT is not really suitable for non-technical users anyway, so for their userbase it won't be much of a problem. For DD-WRT, IPv6 was supported quite well in v23, but has been having problems for some years in v24 out of the box. If you want IPv6 in recent DD-WRT versions (v24 or higher), you need some manual configuration as well as a custom build, but then it's possible.
This arguably doesn't really qualify as a consumer solution, though.
As a state gets corrupt, its laws multiply; the most corrupt states have the most numerous laws. (Tacitus, Annales 3:27)
see subject: spoken as a consumer/end-user/Joe Sixpack.
Looking at my Internet connection: it works fine.
Looking at my small office network: it works fine.
Does ipv6 bring any improvement in this? Not that I am aware of!
From a consumer pov there is no reason for the change. It's purely technical. And even technical there are obviously very few reasons (at least at the moment) to move to ipv6. It ain't broke, so why fix it? Why should I really care anyway? NAT works fine, and anyway I really don't want my networked printer to be reachable from the outside world, unless I very very specifically say so.
Until Comcast, Verizon, AT&T, NTT, Telekom, or any other major ISPs start showing up on that list all of this IPv6 stuff is going to remain a research toy.
The phrase "research toy" strikes me as an excellent opportunity for the canonical auto analogy:
Imagine that all the commercial transport vendors had "standardized" on the Ford Model T (a very good car in its day). Your chain of stores needs to deliver tons of material from suppliers to warehouses to retail outlets? Organize a fleet of millions of Model Ts, each one carrying maybe 1/4 ton of material. Worldide shipping would be done by having the Model Ts board small ferries that would carry them across the oceans. You have 1 100-tone product? You simply break it down into 1/4-tone pieces, send them via Model T fleet, and assemble them at the customer's site. Maybe there would be some special 1- or 2-ton "extended" Model Ts, for use on the few highways that could support them.
Meanwhile, in academia, they would be using "research toys" like trucks, trains, airliners and huge ships to transport 100-ton objects (or packets of smaller objects) between campuses and research stations. The commercial world would look at this, and dismiss it as untried and unreliable. They wouldn't be willing to make the admittedly huge investment on giant vehicles and infrastructure (rail lines, superhighways, airports, and container seaport facilities) that it would take to change over. Customers wouldn't be demanding it, because they wouldn't understand the technology or economics, and this would be further grounds for the corporate world to "do what the customers want".
The nerdy tech types would be off at the side, discussing amongst themselves what the world might be like if these research toys could be somehow introduced to the public. But commerce would remail slow and crippled relative to our world. The commercial system would refuse to take such wild proposals seriously, because the current system works just fine for them. After all, the Model T is so much better and faster than the horse- and ox-drawn vehicles used by previous generations.
I'm sure that others here can extend the analogy. Maybe we could work out the details and turn it into a fun "alternate history" novel or video game.
Those who do study history are doomed to stand helplessly by while everyone else repeats it.
Though DNA addresses could be the future!
Google over IPv6 is crisp and clean, with good intensity and a hint of citrus on the nose
Even more importantly, MP3s over IPv6 have an open, airy feel that is notoriously lacking over IPv4. It's even enough to compensate for the jitter they pick up when going over WiFi.
/stands back to watch audiophiles trample each other to get IPv6.
//plans to market IPv6 "enhancers" to audiophiles, both speeding adoption and lining my pockets with "stupidity tax".
Dewey, what part of this looks like authorities should be involved?
From Google:
To qualify for Google over IPv6, your network must have good IPv6 connectivity to Google. Multiple direct interconnections are preferred, but a direct peering with multiple backup routes through transit or multiple reliable transit connections may be acceptable. Your network must provide and support production-quality IPv6 networking and provide access to a substantial number of IPv6 users. Additionally, because IPv6 problems with users' connections can cause users to become unable to access Google if Google over IPv6 is enabled, we expect you to troubleshoot any IPv6 connection problems that arise in your or your users' networks.
Simply said, some networks may have borked IPv6 which would mean that users will be unable to access Google. I can understand that they're doing this before rolling it out to everyone. Maybe there could be something like OpenDNS for IPv6 so that more advanced users have a choice?
I'm still running a 32-bit operating system
It's an extension and graphical shell to a 16-bit patch to an 8-bit operating system...
(Wait, this is a joke sub-thread, right?)
If this is too full of 'technical jargon' for you, here are some definition:
A subnet is a part of a larger network (borrowing some conventions from set theory, the whole network is also sometimes called a subnet, just to be confusing). IP addresses are a string of bits, 32 with v4 and 128 with v6. For routing purposes, each subnet is identified by a subnet mask. The first n bits of an IP address identify the subnet and the last 32-n or 128-n identify the machine on that subnet. When you see something like 10/8, this means the subnet that starts 10.x.y.z, where the first 8 bits identify the subnet. Sometimes the subnet doesn't fit on a byte boundary. The medium-sized private address range is 172.16.0.0/12. In hex, this is AC100000 - the AC1 is the subnet, and all of the zeros ignored until the packet is on the subnet.
Subnets can be hierarchical. For example the 10/8 subnet might be used by a big site with the 10.1/16 subnet used by one building, 10.2/16 by another, and so on. The first building might use 10.1.1/24 for one floor, 10.1.2/24 for the next floor, and so on. When you send a packet from the second building to 10.1.1.12 it will be routed to the 10.1/16 subnet, then to the 10.1.1/24 subnet, and then delivered within this subnet by ethernet (the router will use ARP to look up the MAC address that corresponds to that IP address and the ethernet switches will handle delivery on the last segment).
Bak to your question, you can use a publicly-routable address on a LAN, using v4 or v6. This doesn't mean that data will go over the Internet. If both machines are on the same subnet then packets will never make it to the router, they will be delivered by the local ethernet (or whatever) directly. IP routing is only needed when packets go outside the local subnet.
In summary, yes it's a ridiculously simple question, it's only the answer which is complicated...
I am TheRaven on Soylent News
Why only respond to an AAAA DNS request if it comes from a DNS resolver whose IPv4 address is on a whitelist? Surely it would make sense to allow any connection capable to IPv6 to make use of it.
Some clients may erroneously think they have working IPv6, get an AAAA address and timeout trying to use it before falling back to IPv4. This really annoys users. It wouldn't be Google's fault that this happens, but their sites would be perceived as very slow and they'd lose users.
I am lucky in that my ISP is on the list of those providing IPv6, but I use my own DNS resolver which will not be on the Google whitelist.
It is not clear to me exactly what they're doing. They might be whitelisting networks and not individual resolvers. If so then your home resolver may work when your ISP signs up with them.
If you think that's good, you should try using a network cable designed for IPv6. A proper cable will allow you to enjoy the full richness of IPv6 sites without the harshness that results from using inferior cables. I'm developing one such cable, which demonstrates proper directional signal alignment with minimal crosstalk, providing the full digital experience so that you can finally see websites the way their creators intended them to be viewed.
Originally designed to provide maximum quality for streaming media, these cables offer an uncompromising blend of digital audio, video, and data transfer capabilities in an IPv6 protocol. They are also fully backward-compatible with IPv4, so you can use them to view websites replete with the aliveness and snap that you expect, with none of the soggy, diffuse, syrupy qualities that are a plague among cheaper imitation cables. Imagine a pure white background with the full flavors of the multispectral Google logo, each delicate cherry, azure, and emerald letter almost coming alive before your eyes.
My cable utilizes the latest in hermetically sealed insulation to provide years of reliable service with minimal degradation of the pure, solid silver conductors. As a bonus, our cables have already been put through a specially tailored burn-in process, ensuring that you receive maximum signal integrity from day one. These cables are not yet available to the general public, but through a special offer, I'm allowing a limited number of people to sign up for the beta-testing process. Rest assured that these cables have already been tested to ensure 100% compliance with our exacting quality standards, but we're looking for real-world users to verify our astounding results. As part of this program, you will receive a special discount on the proposed retail price of these cables:
Solid-Core Conductor, Hermetically Sealed, with Specially Molded Connectors -- 1 Meter: $16,000
Solid-Core Conductor, Hermetically Sealed, with Specially Molded Connectors -- 2 Meters: $26,000
Solid-Core Conductor, Hermetically Sealed, with Specially Molded Connectors -- 10 Meters: $99,000
If you require longer runs, custom lengths may be ordered at the special price of $9,000 per meter, for lengths greater than 20M only. We highly recommend that you do not couple multiple cables together, as there is currently no way of compensating for any fuzziness or wishy-washiness which may be introduced by the coupler. In the future, we plan to offer 100% compatible couplers in the low 5 figure price range.
https://www.eff.org/https-everywhere
Is there something like that for IPv6 so that I don't have to go all the way out to the internet to get back to my file server?
That actually is a really stupid question, for someone who knows how Internet routing works.
Very simply, your computer is always configured to know which addresses are "link-local", which ones must go through a gateway, and what the gateway (router) is. So, for your local address, you've probably got 192.168.1.* as "link-local", 192.168.1.1 is your gateway, and everything else is "on the Internet".
But that's arbitrary. I like to use the 10.0.0.0/8 network, which is also defined as "local", for that purpose. And all of that assumes NAT -- while at college, all computers had their own, real, Internet-routable IP addresses. But of course, if you had two of them hooked up to the same switch, they would be assigned IPs on the same network, meaning they would connect directly to each other, rather than going "out to the Internet".
So, you'd build a LAN the same way. If you need to protect it from Internet access, you stick a firewall in front of it, not a NAT. And even if it's a real live Internet address, your computer will know it's local...
But all of that -- what is LAN, and what is WAN, and what is Internet -- that's pretty arbitrary. It's really more about physical lines than any network addressing. Perhaps the truest thing we could say about it is your local switch (or hub, or router) is part of the Internet, so yes, it has to go a few feet "out to the Internet", even if the signal never leaves your house.
Don't thank God, thank a doctor!
Windows is a 32-bit extension to a 16-bit graphical shell for an 8-bit operating system originally coded for a 4-bit microprocessor by a 2-bit company that can't stand 1 bit of competition.
Fact: Everything I say is fiction.