Slashdot Mirror
ARIN Letter Says Two More Years of IPv4
dew4au writes "A reader over at SANS Internet Storm Center pointed out a certified letter his organization received from ARIN. The letter notes that all IPv4 space will be depleted within two years and outlines new requirements for address applications. New submissions will require an attestation of accuracy from an
organizational officer. It also advises organizations to start addressing publicly accessible assets with IPv6. Is ARIN hoping to scare companies into action with the specter of scarce resources? This may be what's needed to spur adoption since there appears to be no business case for IPv6 deployment."
Nothing gets fixed until it breaks so fully that people can't ignore it any longer. ARIN should just hand out the last of their IP assignment already and then we can move on with actually deploying IPv6.
...because whoever is in charge of it does such a crummy job of explaining what it is and why I should care, and more importantly, why my folks should care.
I got my router set up to use IPv6 (an Apple Time Capsule), and I went searching for some IPv6 love and found practically none. Yes I got to Google, and yes I found a few websites that seemed to do little more than blink(!) "hooray, you are connecting using IPv6! Your address is ..."
IPv6 needs both a killer app (IPv6-only Twitter, anyone?) and some ready-to-explain-why-you-can't-get-to-it documentation that will get the people to *demand* that they have IPv6 addresses.
Until then, it's a 32-bit address space world.
Case in point. Thought it was supposed to be 2010? Now it's 2011.
IPv4 addresses won't magically be exhausted one night. They'll just start getting more expensive.
Advice: on VPS providers
As I keep pointing out on each IPv6 story, there will be little motivation to move to IPv6 until you can hit major sites, like cnn.com and slashdot.org, using nothing but IPv6 packets.
We've made a bit of progress, in that now, if you have IPv6 connectivity to "the Internet", you can in theory do the name resolution entirely by IPv6 packets, now that the root name servers support IPv6.
Note to the "a little knowledge is a dangerous thing" crowd: yes, you can form an IPv6 packet with an IPv4 address, but that doesn't mean the target machine will actually be able to understand it - it is still a completely different packet type than an IPv4 packet.
So, does slashdot.org have IPv6 enabled? Does the colo housing slashdot.org's servers route IPv6 packets from the Internet to the slashdot.org servers? Can "the Internet" route IPv6 packets to the colo?
If a tech site like slashdot.org doesn't have the ability to handle IPv6 traffic, then why should I get all hot and bothered about trying to get IPv6? And if I'm not going to demand it, then why should my ISP spend the effort to supply it?
www.eFax.com are spammers
They're already more expensive. The expense increase has been down in the noise for customers - that will no longer be true by the end of the year, and it will hurt by mid 2010.
IPv4 is no longer too cheap to meter. If that's not a business case for IPv6 I don't know what is.
That 6to4 support is bundling IPv6 packets and transmitting them inside an IPv4 packet. So technically, the poster is still using IPv4 with his linksys router.
I think the home router issue is the one that matters. I want IPv6, but simply cannot have it (unless I cough up lots of cash for a serious router). I think the home router manufacturers are missing something here, they just need to say they cannot release firmware updates, and that you need to buy a new router to get IPv6, which is obviously better. They then sell loads more routers.. I don't understand why they don't do this.
Mind you, a firmware update would be better for me :)
Fortunately, nobody in their right mind would let Slashdot design a new network protocol.
If we had a measurement that said that only 25% of the entire address space is in use at any one time, then maybe would would rethink our choices.
Why couldn't we just add another octect.
Because if we're going to completely break networking, we might as well switch to something that fixes a lot of IPv4's problems (such as, say, IPv6).
Dewey, what part of this looks like authorities should be involved?
Again, the problem is hoarding of unused IPv4 addresses.
We'd be just fine if it weren't for folks like MIT that have way more IP's than they need.
Of course, when a resource gets tight, the folks who have it become kings. You can bet your behind no company is going to give up it's v4's without a fight.
I'm glad that IPv6 is based upon a stewardship model rather than an ownership model. And also that the v6 guys are leaving 87 percent of the potential v6 namespace unallocated
Not true, and you mentioned the killer app in the very next sentence: end-to-end connectivity. Having real, working end-to-end connectivity is a big deal, but most people don't know it because they're accustomed to living on a network where there is no end-to-end connectivity.
So if you want to see more IPv6 deployment, start developing apps on top of Miredo/Teredo that really make use of it. When there's enough encapsulated IPv6 running across your ISP's network, it'll actually save them money to switch to native IPv6.
DD-WRT. Of course, this assumes you aren't running one of the crippled Linksys routers that don't have enough memory to support a Linux kernel...