Slashdot Mirror
Obama Highlights IPv6 Issue
alphadogg writes "The Obama Administration bills itself as the most tech-savvy political team ever, but until now it has ignored one of the biggest issues facing the Internet: the rapid depletion of IPv4 Internet addresses and the imminent need for carriers and content providers to adopt IPv6. Today, the National Telecommunications and Information Administration (NTIA) will host a workshop on IPv6 that features high-profile executives from government, industry and Internet policymaking organizations. Some observers are hoping the Obama Administration will use the workshop to issue a deadline for all federal agencies to support IPv6 on their public-facing Web sites."
And why would you need nat for that? Inbound scans can be blocked by the firewall on the router. Outbound traffic sniffing needs to approximate anyways either by looking at the IP's in use or how fast the ports change in NAT (PAT really). NAT has never been anything but security through obscurity over a standard firewall.
No sir I dont like it.
Actually on the current 6rd deployment of comcast they are giving out more ip addresses for free. Mostly because they have to or you can't use the privacy extensions of ipv6.
To be honest the whole "addresses are running out" thing is just a way to sell IPv6 to laypeople, because "we have 4 billion addresses and over 6 billion people" is so easy to understand.
In reality it's about getting rid of the restrictions of needing network address translation, allowing devices to be accessible by one address anywhere, unifying different forms of addressing like phone numbers, IPv4 addresses, multicast/anycast addresses, etc all into one address space, making routing more efficient, making autoconfiguration more seamless, getting built-in cryptography, etc, etc, etc.
Addresses running out is, for the reasons you give and more, really not what it's about, but it is a bit heart-wrenching to see tech-savvy people say we shouldn't go for IPv6 because we're not really running out; we aren't, but we still need to go for IPv6, and if tech-savvy people don't have one mind on this issue it'll take far longer than it should.
// MD_Update(&m,buf,j);
You didn't pay attention in school, did you.
Living With a Nerd
FOX is Republican (or Libertariaan) leaning and people don't like Republicans/Libertarians.
Please.
People don't like FOX because FOX is populated by lying sacks of shit. Just look at how the mosque situation in NYC was handled: they attempt (badly) to link the Imam to a Saudi who supposedly funds terror, with no basis for their claims. And on top of it, their fucking hypocrites, conveniently neglecting to point out that that very same Saudi owns the second largest share of FOX corporate.
If they were just partisan, fine, so be it. But they actually *manufacture* news out of whole cloth... and in fact went to court (and won) to defend their right to do so!
I was visiting my father-in-law in Canada, and we were driving through northern Ontario. I'd gotten used to all the street signs in metric by then, and I was surprised to see an old highway sign with a distance in miles. My father-in-law pointed out that Canada had converted to the metric system in 1977, based upon the US plan to convert to the metric system in 1976.
I worked for a blueprint printing company for several years. One issue that often came up was difficulties in rescaling blueprints for different page sizes, as the arbitrary sheet sizes that were standard each had different ratios of length to width. As a political activist, I also often designed flyers; scaling flyers to half-size always came out ugly. One day, I happened to read up on ISO paper sizes, and how they were all based upon ratios of one to the square root of two, which meant that ratios were uniform and rescaling was easy. Apparently, ISO paper sizes are the standard used everywhere but in the US and a few countries in Latin America; Canada prints in US sizes because of the scale of the US market. The ratio of one to the square root of two was proposed early in the history of printing, centuries ago.
As I understand, all modern operating systems have native support for IPv6, and have had such support for years; part of the impetus is that the US Federal government had, at some point, announced a policy requiring any software it used to support IPv6. From what I can make out, it's the ISPs that are dragging their heels on implementing technology that's been tested and ready to deploy for years.
I can understand hesitancy to deploy radical new ideas. However, I don't understand the hesitancy to deploy ideas that have been tested exhaustively, deployed, and used widely.
I was making a point. During the Bush era I saw Democrats/liberals carrying Hitler signs.
[citation needed]
But now suddenly, that's not allowed. Hypocrites.
Pending your above [citation needed], clearly two wrongs make a right, so you're now allowed to do it? Is that how that works?
By the way fascists ARE socialists.
Incorrect.
"socialist" was in the name of the 1920s-40s fascist parties of Spain, Italy, and Germany. And the parties of Eastern Europe, USSR and China.
[citation needed]
Nazism is a politically syncretic variety of fascism, which incorporates policies, tactics and philosophic tenets from left and right-wing politics. Italian fascism and German Nazism reject liberalism, democracy and Marxism.[67] Usually supported by the far right (military, business, Church), fascism is historically anti-communist, anti-conservative and anti-parliamentary.[68] The Nazis' rise to power was assisted by the Fascist government of Italy that began to financially subsidize the Nazi party in 1928.[69]
Of course not all socialists are fascists.
If I am willing to consider that "No" and "Not all" are close-ish, this is the first thing you've said that borders on being marginally correct.
sig?