Slashdot Mirror
Major Sites To Join ‘World IPv6 Day’
netbuzz writes "Facebook, Google, and Yahoo are among the major sites on board with what the Internet Society is dubbing 'World IPv6 Day,' a collective trial scheduled for June 8. 'It's an exciting opportunity to take IPv6 for a test flight and try it on for a full 24 hours,' says Leslie Daigle, the Internet Society's Chief Internet Technology Officer. 'Hopefully, we will see positive results from this trial so we will see more IPv6 sooner rather than later.'"
A site seems to be missing from the participants, but I just can't put my finger on it /.
www.eFax.com are spammers
It's precisely BECAUSE something could go wrong. A full day on a site like Facebook is more than enough time to see any major issues crop up, yet isn't long enough to deeply impact their service*.
*I know, I know..."Facebook" and "service" in the same sentence. Hurpadurp.
Living With a Nerd
I dont understand why they wouldnt just make this change permanent. If this is the protocol we're going to, make it stick. One day is just toying with us.
This is not the penguin you're looking for.
That's because the average slashdot user isn't savvy enough for this, whereas your average facebook user is... i mean, these people run their own FARMS, for chrissakes!
soylentnews.org Go there to enjoy the people!
Isn't it about time News for Nerds got a 128bit address? You know it makes sense!
Resistance is futile. Reactance buggers it up.
The operator of one of the biggest German web sites, the Heise publishing house, held its own IPv6 day on the 16th of September 2010. Their domains got AAAA records in addition to the IPv4 A records and the web servers responded to IPv4 and IPv6. Long story short: The test produced much fewer problems than expected and two weeks after the test, Heise.de enabled IPv6 permanently. The story is here (in German).
... it's because IPv6 uses UTF-8 encoded addresses.
You mean the one that has no Unicode support?
Use a tunnel broker service. There are at least 2 free tunnel brokers, SixXs and Hurricane Electric
While you're locking down your home network with the rock solid security system that is NAT, I'd like to offer you a chance to put the same level of security on your home. For a limited time only, I'm offering, direct to the consumer, the latest and greatest in home security, a little invention I like to call "curtains". Yes, now people won't be able to see into your home anymore, which obviously makes it impossible for them to rob you. Act fast though, these babies will sell out quickly.
They won't turn IPv4 off for probably many years. But if you actually want to try IPv6 without ISP support, you can try a free tunnel broker.
Dilbert RSS feed
And I'll STILL NAT everything in my house. I dont need NX10^23 script kiddies attacking every one of my appliances.
I won't, since I don't think anyone is going to port scan me.
Here's an IPv6 address: 2001:0db8:85a3:0000:0000:8a2e:0370:7334, the bold bit is the local part. How much bandwidth is your script kiddie going to have to have to find 0000:8a2e:0370:7334 in the range 0-ffffffffffffffff?
Also, a firewall is simpler than a NAT, and doesn't have the disadvantages of NAT, so you can just do that instead.
Actually, you will still be able to reach those resources just fine, with patience. What happens is (and always has when OSes started blindly enabling IPv6) the connection waits for the IPv6 connection first. If that doesn't get established, it falls back to IPv4 and you get your content. What everyone found is well, pages took forever to load as you had to wait for the IPv6 TCP session to return an error first before the IPv4 fallback.
Frankly, the problem with IPv6 is the lack of a simple drop-in router replacement that works as well as current NAT routers. I don't care to have 3 IPv6 IPs on every IPv6 capable device on my network (nevermind all the IPv4-only gear I have). Yes, 3 IPv6 addresses, because you'll have a link-local (always present), your internet IPv6 address (you get a prefix that's usually /64, so all the PCs will use that prefix and add a suffix, and that will get you to the router), and since entering random numbers and letters is annoying, and a private set of IPv6 addresses (FC00:: prefix (/64) is for private networks, akin to 10/8 and other IPv4 private space). Why can't I have a NATv6 box that can have 192.168.0.1 and FC00::1, and keep everything going the way it is? Bonus to handle IPv4-to-IPv6 translation as well (there are tricks that you can do to have IPv4-only devices support IPv6 addresses, like ipv6-literal.net virtual domain Windows has to support IPv6 CIFS and IPv6 address entry).
That's what people want - a simple box they can drop into their network without having to reconfigure their intranet immediately that works just like their existing NAT router.
Here's a hint: "No NAT" doesn't mean "no firewall".
Two days earlier and it would have been June 6, or 6/6. Rolling out IPv6 on 6/6 would have been biblically ordained to take over the heavens and the earth. Now it's just... another day, another test.
Why not?? In the *real world* everything has a public address. I know people don't "get it" when it comes to networking, but this is just FUD and is getting ridiculous.
NAT is like having a chaperone, where all communication happens through a 3rd party. It increases network traffic, it makes peer-to-peer internet impossible. And it is not security. You only need to trick inside device to connect to outside device, and there goes NAT as security! And that is quite easy.
Firewall is like having a security guard monitoring traffic. A firewall is actually designed to handle security, not illusion of security. This can actually catch and prevent unsanctioned communication. And if you want to use Skype, you can actually allow inbound connections.
Skype went down because of NAT. If the internet was IPv6, there would be no need for "supernodes". People could actually communicate, peer-to-peer instead of through their chaperones.
Finally, when I was young and stupid, I believed that NAT was a cool thing. When I asked a network admin at local university why they don't do more NAT and all departments gets /24 or larger, the answer was quite simple. Security. I didn't understand that answer for a few years, but now years later, it is as plain as night and day. NAT creates more problems than it's worth. And if someone brought some shitty SPAM relay (virus), it becomes a challenge just trying to identify where the rogue program is communication from.
Traceability and accountability and transparency and security is what public internet brings. NAT gives you an illusion of anonymity and security.
whether is has a public or private address is nothing to do with scarcity of IP but need and suitability and there a lot of IP device's that do not need a public address, my printer for starters, don't need to manage it from the outside, don't need to print to if from outside. Plain old private IP4 seems to work fine and dandy.
But using a separate address space makes your work WAY more complicated and less reliable.
All public scenario: Your stateful firewall prevents incoming traffic to your printer, just like it prevents incoming connections to anything else that you haven't specifically allowed. One address range everything reaches everything. Everything on one happy layer 2 LAN. Simple dynamic (re-)addressing.
Public plus private scenario: You still need a configured stateful firewall for all your other devices but now you have the joy of adding a statically configured LAN. How do the two networks reach each other? Route thru your slow firewall? Or multiple static and dynamic addresses on every device in your LAN? The time you spend complicating the heck out of your LAN, is time you're not spending securing it at the network and device layers.
So, sure, if you really want, you can spend a lot more time, money and effort to get a LAN that is much harder to design, configure, troubleshoot and monitor, all while being less secure, but you would be "saving" one of the 3 x 10 ^ 38 addresses, except you actually aren't because they assigned you a /64 for your LAN so its not like anyone else could use that address anyway.
IPv6 doesn't outright prevent you from shooting yourself in the foot, but its still kinda usable.
Plus if your LAN is a corporate LAN you've now gained the nightmare of merging multiple LANs using the same private addresses. Even if FC00::/8 is mostly empty, you know most clowns are going to use network=0 / host=1 for their firewall and watch the chaos when they interconnect.
There seems to be no advantage to private ipv6 space...
"Science flies us to the moon. Religion flies us into buildings." - Victor Stenger
That's like taking all the money from your bank account and throwing it on the ground across the globe. People looking for money aren't possibly going to be able to search across 200 million square miles to find all your money, so it's perfectly safe, right?
Your collateralised debt obligation investment scheme intrigues me and I would like to contribute to your hedge fund.
You are not a brain: http://books.google.com/books?id=2oV61CeDx-YC
Your 'gate' is your router/firewall. People can't magically get around the same exact piece of equipment that NATs today simply because they are independently addressable. Those devices need to just have a 'no unsolicited incoming traffic' firewall by default.
XML is like violence. If it doesn't solve the problem, use more.