Slashdot Mirror
Free IPv4 Pool Now Down To Seven /8s
Zocalo writes "For those of you keeping score, ICANN just allocated another four /8 IPv4 blocks; 23/8 and 100/8 to ARIN, 5/8 and 37/8 to RIPE, leaving just seven /8s unassigned. In effect however, this means that there are now just two /8s available before the entire pool will be assigned due to an arrangement whereby the five Regional Internet Registries would each automatically receive one of the final five /8s once that threshold was met. The IPv4 Address Report counter at Potaroo.net is pending an update and still saying 96 days, but it's now starting to look doubtful that we're going to even make it to January."
Last IP!!
I Have 2 that I'm not using anymore, perhaps I should put them on ebay? ;-)
ipv6 is my vpn
So, I keep hearing all this news about them running low... What happens when we run out?
-Taylor
Worldwide Military budgets: $2100 billion. Worldwide Space Exploration budgets: $38 billion. Really, world? Really?
... since the unexpected end of the century in '99.
(What is actually surprising is that the internet still hasn't widely adopted IP6, and ISPs are now turning to ludicrous measures - NAT - to keep avoiding what makes sense.)
IPV6 anybody? (new meme anybody?)
Do not mock my vision of impractical footwear
where is ATT and comcast with IPV6?
Class E? That "reserved" block, for "future expansion"? That "future expansion" would be now.
There you go, another 16 blocks to break out. Plus the 7 we already have, that makes 385,875,968 addresses left still unallocated. Still over a third of a billion to go, which should be more than enough time for everyone to replace equipment that doesn't support IPv6, and deal with applications like Teredo that leak IPv6 address space across NATs and through VPNs.
end of line
Another non-functioning site was "uncertainty.microsoft.com."
The purpose of that site was not known.
NAT Time!
Granted, it is not a solution for everything, but there are just TONS of networks that could be behind NAT's and don't need anywhere near the IPV4 space they have. I have a feeling NATing will suddenly become a lot more popular.
Let it burn to the ground and start fresh. IPv256! Decentralized DNS! All the good stuff. Oh well.
Remember before Y2k almost all computer manufacturers placed "Y2k Compliant" or "Y2k Ready" logos on everything from bare computer cases to speakers? Well I cant wait for my "IPv6 Ready" USB keyboard...
How will I ever be able to use my twittering armchair fart detector?
Well, you'll have to choose between a NAT twittering armchair fart detector and an IPv6 twittering armchair fart detector!
Take em back! If we run out just reassign them. Do we really need an internet connected refrigerator to tell us that we need milk and $grocer has the best price?
Does anybody wanna buy an......eight? http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=rfelvI_ikf4
Whens slashdot going to go ipv6?
I thought the network portion of the address (the first 64 bits) had bits allocated for region. Couldn't you just filter out those regions? Or deny all and then load allow filters. I don't know, I'm not a network guy.
(see subject)
IPv4 is dying - Netcraft confirms it, bla bla...
In the mean while, why not simply create some IP addresses? As long as you keep them to yourself, no-one will complain...
Because I'm on it right now yet I see no AAAA record. Pretty much anyone on Comcast can get a 6rd address at the drop of a hat; native dual stack is coming. Other providers will have to get on the bandwagon soon I gather. Whine endless about the end of ipv4 after you've already made arrangements to join the modern age.
For years now I have had this netbsd box as my front end. The DSL modem plugs into an ethernet port on the PC which NATs in two directions: a local hard wired network and wifi. So after y'all slashdotted by server I stated looking at a rebuild around this nice fast AMD64 machine but it is light on PCI slots so I can't have the two ethernet cards plus atheros wifi plus serial that I need.
So last night I splashed out on a Netcomm wifi router and the plan I formulated later in the evening was to use it as my front end with the DMZ trick pointing to the BSD box.
Then this morning the penny dropped. NetBSD supports IPv6 perfectly well but the netcomm configuration pages don't mention it. But most people use these little wifi routers. Are they screwed? Am I screwed if I rely on this router?
http://michaelsmith.id.au
what needs "public" IPs? What /really/ needs them? routing interfaces between networks, and websites using ssl. Since a very large percentage of the web surfing population is still using windowsXP or older, we can't use TLS (which has been around for ages). So instead, every single ssl-enabled site needs it's own IP. I work at a small company, and even we could release hundreds of public IPs if WindowsXP could use tls instead of ssl.
Will everyone using Hamachi be unable to reach whoever gets a 5/8 address?
No that did not happen.
Their is no IPv6-regions you speak of, this was an idea which was never implemented.
New things are always on the horizon
But can someone explain to me why IPv6 didn't just extend the IPv4 format logically and stylistically? Why not just tack on more numbers? And all existing numbers could be assumed
For instance,
209.85.225.147
becomes
1.1.209.85.225.147
Instead, we break convention to use colons and hex, ie. 3ffe:1900:4545:3:200:f8ff:fe21:67cf
It seems to me adoption could have been a lot quicker and less painless.
All kidding aside, they probably _should_ have just increased the address space of IPv4.
IPv6 may be better.. sure.. but it is too different for its own good.. and requires too much of a drastic change for most networks to implement it.
... That ... that wouldn't work. For the same reason we can't just magically convert to IPv6. It would take massive replacements of hardware to do even that. So why not just overhaul the entire thing and apply years of knowledge if we have to overhaul everything anyway?
If you examine the currently alloted /8 addresses it seems really silly to say they are exhausted.
I would rather say the current assignment is being poorly used at the moment.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_assigned_/8_IPv4_address_blocks
This is about 1/5th of our total pool being thrown around rather carelessly. It would probably on buy a few more years to reclaim these addresses and chop them up, but surely the problem is just poor usage as opposed to exhaustion.
Not that I think any type of recycling or waste management will actually happen in the IP space, but I do like complaining about it.
"You should always go to other people's funerals; otherwise, they won't come to yours." -- Yogi Berra
I thought the network portion of the address (the first 64 bits) had bits allocated for region. Couldn't you just filter out those regions? Or deny all and then load allow filters. I don't know, I'm not a network guy.
That's what I do with ipv4. Are they going to keep the same ARIN etc. setups? Even if they do, the gazillion address space means that the number of ranges will be huge. I deal with 255 x 255 as currently exists, but basically this is giving the commie criminals free range to attack from so many addresses that no one will be able to block them. You ought to see the ranges they attack from in 255 x 255.
rd
How long before I can get the address 255.255.255.255? I wanna set up a website called 'endoftheinternet.com'!
"I like to lick butts!" by MobileTatsu-NJG (#32700246) (Score:5, Informative)
Can we PLEASE make a concerted effort towards ipv6 now please? Microsoft are even encouraging use of it via DirectAccess ("vpn less" ipv6 secure tunnel), and god knows they're nowhere near leading edge as far as standards support goes.
I fear that ISPs are just going to do retarded shit like NATing their entire customer base though, but it really is just delaying the inevitable and causing breakage anyway...
I run: Windows, OS X, Linux, FreeBSD. Just because you have a hammer, doesn't mean everything is a nail.
Hardware is easy at the large company level. "Hey, we need to spend $xxxxxx to stay in business". Getting people to use something when they don't absolutely have to isn't.
People are used to the way IPv4 works.. and specifically the way NAT works.
IPv6 requires people to figure out how to have what they used to have with something different. Some people love this, some people don't.
I understand that now seemed like a good time to "fix everything". The internet really is the definitive legacy problem.. you can't just roll out a new patch every month.. and this is probably the only chance they'll ever have to make sweeping changes.
But the other side is that we are hitting the reset switch on maturity. As buggy as stuff is, I don't think it's gonna compare to the years of exploits that IPv6 is going to bring. IPv4 grew with the hackers.. IPv6 is going to be transplanted..
No that did not happen.
Their is no IPv6-regions you speak of, this was an idea which was never implemented.
Thanks for the answer.
rd
The idea was that if regions had their own range you could just agregate everything in that region (use 1 large IP-block to represent many smaller ones). For example an other continent.
This would safe memory and CPU-time on routers.
It was a nice idea, but it doesn't work in real life. In real life large networks span the globe and similair problems.
New things are always on the horizon
Don't be such a NATing nabob of negativity.
If you disagree with me on social issues, then it's pretty clear that you are a narrow-minded bigot.
Who cares if people use more addresses ? We are going to run out of IPv4 anyway and it will happen 'fast' or faster.
New things are always on the horizon
Please tell me how transition to your larger ipv4 is substantively different from transition to ipv6. Is it the case that you want to increase address space while still being able to use addresses from the smaller address space? How will that work?
(continue this discussion for years, and you will have reproduced a chunk of the ipv6 design process)
4096R/EF7BAFA6 79E1 DF98 D09D 898F 9A11 F6F0 DDDC 23FA EF7B AFA6
I don't know, but I sure hope someone starts working on a solution soon! It sounds like solving this problem might take a while!
Guns don't kill people; Physics kills people! - John Lithgow as Dick Solomon on Third Rock From The Sun
Less "new shit" to learn.
I would bet good money that IPv6 NAT is going to emerge, because people are used to thinking in the NAT way. Even though this is what a large part of IPv6 is meant to avoid.
> I would bet good money that IPv6 NAT is going to emerge
It already has.
Warning: this article may contain humor, sarcasm, parody, and perhaps even irony. Read at your own risk.
Well, that was fun while it lasted. Time to shut down the Internet.
Why is IPv6 not based on MAC adresses? I've never understood this. Every piece of electronics capable of connecting to a network has at least one unique hardware id already. Why do we need a new one? Is there are reason not to just use this number? Or have I misunderstood, and this actually IS the plan.
Damn! I wanted 37/8!
http://alternatives.rzero.com/
Honestly, by reading your first two bullet points I really thought your post was a good joke. But when I consider the entirety of what you've written, there is a distinct possibility that it may be instead a sad story.
One particular issue is web host control panels - of the major control panels (cPanel, DirectAdmin and Plesk), only DirectAdmin has IPv6 already, and many web hosts aren't willing to deploy a different control panel just to get to IPv6. Hence many websites simply can't go IPv6 easily until the ISP upgrades to the control panel, and in the case of cPanel, which is by far the most popular one, there is not even a roadmap date for v6. Same goes for Plesk apparently.
If you use cPanel, see http://forums.cpanel.net/f145/case-10334-make-cpanel-ipv6-compatible-35453.html and comment if you want to see IPv6.
If you use Plesk, see http://forum.parallels.com/showthread.php?t=102770
What about now Hamachi and big ISPs (like Fastweb, in Italy) who happily use 5/8 ip addresses?
-->keep the frequency clear
5. If only people that designed IPv6 "by committee" though a bit about real world and technology, IPv6 would have been much easier to implement. 128 bit addresses are a *wrong* size. They should have set the size at 64 bit. 64 bit values are now natively manipulated by much of computer hardware, so just as the new protocol would come into wider use, it would be conveniently supported by many algorithms relying on hardware. Now go build a radix tree for a routing table of 128 bit IPv6 addresses - let's see how well that works.
6. IPv6 in default implementation wants to use your MAC address as part of the IP. I don't know, perhaps a few of those big companies that like tracking people so much may be interested in that. I am not.
In conclusion - I'll wait till stuff begins crashing around. May be then someone will come up with a better solution than a deadborn poorly designed IPv6 we have now.
I think the 64bit size was planned for. The network part of the address is 64bits. Anything doing routing isn't going to concern itself with the host part. Anything doing the last hop part of the processing isn't going to be doing much with the network part but doing its look ups on the host part.
I agree that the MAC address based network address is scary but I wonder how much of a signature they already have from other properties of my computer.. I wonder how long before the IPv6 address is used to try and prove that it was a specific computer that generated some traffic.
Good idea, I'm sure once the legal cases are finished on getting those IPs back it'll all be worth it. Typical court case is, what? 3+ years?
FTFY
IPv5 was the experimental ST2 protocol ( http://www.faqs.org/rfcs/rfc1819.html ). It was sort of a connection oriented IP designed for multimedia stuff. Nobody seemed to want that either. RSVP was a protocol designed to reserve bandwidth on the Internet, but ran on good old IPv4. That tanked as well.
The European Telecom research agency, ETSI, is working on yet another attempt to provide resource reservation through the Internet for VOIP. We'll see how that one goes.
Schroedinger's Brexit: The UK is both in and out of the EU at the same time!
There's still plenty of space available if the various registries were proactive and found out what space was no longer used, never used, or used in networks which don't directly connect to the Internet (i.e. US military). I have more IP space than I can ever use ( class B and a bunch of class Cs) so I'd profit greatly if this space become a fungible commodity. But really, this is a solvable problem.
Yes, I've got it and it's completely legit. I am not going to reveal the IP space here because it will end up being attacked by jealous nerds. Yea $1/IP/mo, and you ISPs know you can charge twice that to your customers and they'll pay, because they have to. Around 66,500 addresses available, in a variety of sizes.
Oh, yes, I should add, this is not a joke.
It was, so technically there is no problem now. Thanks for reassuring me!
Change is certain; progress is not obligatory.
It seems to me adoption could have been a lot quicker and less painless.
Whether we write down numbers in base 16 or base 256 (each digit in base 10) doesn't make one iota of difference to the upgrade difficulties.
The real problem, one of them at least, as far as I understand, is the lack of incentive for individual people and organizations to move towards IPv6: it's all cost no gain, because none of the parties you want to talk to are on IPv6, and the IPv4 address space isn't embedded in the IPv6 space.
What is the difference for IPv6 ?
Their currently is one IPv6-DNS-blocklist, they use something like: 5 bad IP's in one /64, block the whole /64, 5 bad /64 block the whole /48. Or some system like that.
Or do you mean their isn't enough tooling yet ?
New things are always on the horizon
... since the unexpected end of the century in '99.
(What is actually surprising is that the internet still hasn't widely adopted IP6, and ISPs are now turning to ludicrous measures - NAT - to keep avoiding what makes sense.)
NAT actually *makes* sense for many interested parties. You get some protection from consumers using their connection to actually (*gasp*) serve stuff which, along with asymmetric connections and anemic upload bandwidth, keeps the ability to offer and publish and distribute things out of the hands of the masses and in the hands of the deserving few. Allowing consumers to reach out and consume stuff is good, allowing them to serve things and to be able to connect to each other isn't.
IPv6 is a technical solution to problems nobody who counts likes to see solved. NAT'ing the hell out of the consumer-facing side of the Internet creates something that is good enough for consumers and so much more suited to stuff that ghost called "Internet with billions of servers and peers on desks and in bags and pockets" back into the bottle.
Now go build a radix tree for a routing table of 128 bit IPv6 addresses - let's see how well that works.
No problem. IPv6 uses, canonically, 64 bits for network routing and 64 bits for host identification. Routers have a forwarding tree and a separate local delivery tree for locally attached hosts. Contrary to your statement, a 64+64 bit address scheme makes for efficient router implementation.
I love how people on Slashdot like to throw around migrating to IPv6 like it can be done in a fortnight.
Migrating to IPv6 will cost ISPs BILLIONS. It is not simply a matter of flipping a few routers. It is tens of millions of lines of company code all geared around IPv4.
It is hundreds of millions of lines of third-party code that they have bought all geared around IPv4. You know, the software that RUNS THE INTERNET.
It is something that will take years to fully be completed, even though it has already been going on for years.
It is not the flip of a switch.
I work for one of these third party software companies so I know what I am taking about. To put it simply, the migration of our software 100% to IPv6 will take years to be fully done - and that is given a very large and capable team. This is not simply a matter of changing an int to two doubles and recompiling, it is a lot more complicated than that.
...runs on many cheap router platforms and allegedly is happy to do IPv6. The current Apple base stations also have two DNS entries set aside for IPv6 and another two DNS entries for IPv4 hosts. Another option is to repurpose an old laptop or mini to run any number of the open-source DNS servers out there and use that machine also to NAT, etc. Running your own DNS server has the additional benefit of speeding up lookups tremendously. But it is work and it consumes power... hence of marginal benefit unless you have a media server already running 24/7 and/or a craptastic provider like Comcast, whose DNS servers aren't all that reliable.
So, I keep hearing all this news about them running low... What happens when we run out?
At that point essentially anyone wanting a new block of IPv4 addresses for their domain is out of luck. In this case they are left with two choices:
- Move on to IPv6 for their servers
- Get someone else to host their services - with HTTP you can share an IP, but have a different name (requires virtual domains with the same server instance)
Both have limitations, since in the first scenario you are limited to IPv6 clients and in the second you are limited to what can be hosted.
In both scenarios you could get a single IPv4 address for you network and then just NAT the PCs.
As you can see the real limitation is not for those accessing services, but for those providing services. There is an extra issue that comes into play, for the the entity providing the online services: you will be forced to find an ISP who already has native IPv6 support or using and IPv6 tunnel.
Jumpstart the tartan drive.
:)"Canonically" in this sense means "we screwed up in protocol design and now we'll just issue some guidelines".
Address is an address. If you can't use part of that address for routing, what you get is *gasp* NAT? Oh no!
Adding the class E addresses would add ONE /8, which is a fraction of a year of use. And which RIR gets it? Share it?
And therefore it will be a perfect day to be celebrated in future. Lets say January the 2nd can be a nice day for IPv4-exhaustion. However, I hope it will take a little longer for that as I would prefer such day in summer so I can lie drunken under a tree without serious danger to my health (other than the alcohol) .
Yes I know this is a little bit egoistic as it is northern hemisphere centric view, but most people life north of the Equator ...
And yes I know the world changes on a daily basis, so the world as we know it ends every day.
I actually thought the troll in question was so nearly pitch perfect that it had to be a parody. Look on the bright side. Slashdot has seen its first IPv6 parody troll! Oh, frabjous day!
jhw
Addresses are assigned to the RIRs by the Internet Assigned Numbers Authority, NOT the Internet Corporation for Assigned Names and Numbers. I know, all of these acronyms made up of Is, As, and Ns blur together.
Actually, adding the class E addresses would add *16* /8s. however, that would still maybe buy a year, if lucky. Not worth the effort.
If it works in theory, try something else in practice.
Like how UTF-8 was designed to be backward-compatible with ASCII, because the first block of UTF-8 characters match those of ASCII?
I listen to both RIAA and non-RIAA stuff if I like the music, tangential business/politics nonwithstanding.
> I agree that the MAC address based network address is
> scary but I wonder how much of a signature they already
> have from other properties of my computer.. I wonder
> how long before the IPv6 address is used to try and
> prove that it was a specific computer that generated
> some traffic.
Here's a computer-user IQ test. Question "what is your MAC address?"
* Typical user... I don't got a Mac, I got a Winders PC.
* Competent user... checks his network config and supplies answer.
* l33t h@x0r d00d... what do you want it to be?
I'm not repeating myself
I'm an X window user; I'm an ex-Windows user
The summary sounds like the minutes from a Cylon board meeting
(1.21 gigawatts) / (88 miles per hour) = 30 757 874 newtons