Just RTFA'd myself.. That PDF sums up 100% what is wrong with ipv6 right now.
Didn't know that XP couldn't do DNS lookups over ipv6.. that's new. They did't mention that active directory doesn't work with ipv6 (important to companies, and a biggie, because as they say.. if one part of the infrastructure can't support it, it doesn't happen).
Then you've not switched - you still have an ipv4 address (if you didn't you couldn't even see slashdot.org). By switched people mean switch ipv4 off.
Most ISPs do not route 6to4 so that's out. sixxs.net is as unreliable as hell (I had a sixxs tunnel for 6 months. The London pop was down for 4 of them)... not really an option for most.
Whilst the fact that we allocate 10/8s every year is true, that's a tiny percentage of the overall use. The figures break down that we're using 69.7% of the available addresses now, up from 64.9%. The doomsday scenario is simply not here yet.
This two year thing is yet another in a long line of doomsday prophecies, but the stats don't back it up. The space is running out, but in 2 years? No gonna happen. At the current rate of consumption try 10 years.
"January 1, 2007 we were at 64.9% utilization and a year later we're at 69.7%"
That's a bit less that 3% growth a year. For this prediction to be right we'd have to increase our growth to 15% usage a year - 5x the current allocation rate - to run out by 2010.
A pure linear growth has us running out in 10 years at that rate.. maybe it'll be a little less, maybe a little more. But saying we'll run out in 2 years just doesn't fit the figures.
No it doesn't. It breaks *servers*. Most people aren't running servers.
If you're running services behind a firewall using NAT is an extra layer - stops information leakage.. you can't target an internal machine from outside through a NAT (or even know it exists).
There's a reason why ipv6 has NAT as well. Everyone will be using it for the same reason.. I don't want anyone to know how many machines are on my network, or guess which ones are internal servers and which ones are desktop machines... even with ipv6 all my traffic will come from one address. This is even more true on corporate nets, some of which are so paranoid they have *multiple* NAT layers between departments.
If you need direct access to a machine you VPN in and authenticate yourself properly. Otherwise you don't need to know it exists, ever.
Most mobile phones are on 10/8 address space nowadays, and I don't see anyone noticing. I reckon an ISP could do that (advertising the free firewalling, etc. as you mention) and 99% of users simply wouldn't notice.
I'm surprised this isn't in the standard already.. I'm sure I've overloaded IP addresses for https before.. hmm..
For standard HTTP there should be one IP address per company of course, and for a lot there is.. it's been standard practice for a while. The days of profligate use of IP addresses have passed naturally - a normal company network will be behind a firewall and NAT (leaking IP addresses is still information leak - which is why there's provision for NAT in IPV6) so the number used has been dropping anyway.
Certainly on the home side... go into the average store, and it's easy to count how many home routers are ipv6 enabled. none at all.
Some can be adapted - my wifi router can route ipv6 but not talk it for example. No way all that hardware is going to be replaced within two years.
OTOH we've been hearing the doomsday scenarios from the ipv6 zealots for 10 years now, and I'm not seeing it - it's still easy to get a block of IP addresses (I asked for 8 and got given 16 'just in case' for example).. we're not seeing the beginnings of a shortage yet.
It's proper internet... their T&C don't even mention the usual voip and p2p limitations.
I've no idea what the earlier poster was on about unless he only asked a couple of years ago - three used to restrict data to a walled garden of filtered http, but got resoundly laughed at by everyone when they tried to sell it.
One thing to watch with them is that their pay as you go modems are *not* HSPDA which limits them to 384k. Always check the small print on these things...
Are you in a building with double glazing? That can affect the signal a lot.. in fact in some offices you can't get a mobile signal at all due to this.
I've not seen a non-HSPDA signal in a built up area in the UK for some time (on vodaphone as well), and have even had 3G on a remote hill in Wales. Dropping to GPRS is next to unheard of.
IMEI is not transmitted cleartext. In general conversation even the IMSI is only transmitted once for billing purposes and then obfuscated for the rest of the conversation (a temporary IMSI is generated from the real one which identifies the conversation without giving away any private information).
Breaking a conversation would mean calculating KI somehow, which is a 128bit key locked in the SIM and not retrievable at all. UMTS is even more secure (provides protection against MIM attacks, more keys, etc.) and AFAIK there's no theoretical attack against that, so you don't need to worry if you're using a modern phone (with one notable exception of course).
Except I haven't see a 'poorly covered area' in about 4 years and I've been around a bit. You can get standard 3G even in the middle of the countryside in this country and UMTS in any built up area (which is why laptop 3G dongles are so popular now.. it's way more ubiquitous than wifi, generally cheaper, and quite often faster - giving a constant 3.5Mbps wherever you are, rather than on some wifi point hanging of someones's 1mb DSL line).
The idea that 3G is somehow rare appears to be a US afflction.
1 million machines in a network talking to each other would probably consume more bandwidth in network overhead than useful work. Even instructing 1 million independent machines to do the same thing would take a considerable amount of time/bandwidth (eg. send a spam email to each one plus a list of targets so they can begin spamming... that's a million emails you've got to send - might as well send the spam yourself).
Sending copyrighted files to your friends over facebook is not fair use by any sane defintion of the word.. it's *all* about distribution of pirated material. The only reason it's not mass distribution is facebook sucks too much to manage it.
Actually they shouldn't be trying too hard. Knowingly infringing on a patent is triple damages. So do it unknowingly if you must.
This was actual legal advice given to me, so it's sound. In so many words he said it's far better given the current system to stick your head in the sand and pretend patents don't exist, because it's nearly impossible to write anything withing infringing something and it's better to wait for them to come after you.. and when they do being ignorant of the patent is much cheaper than knowing about it.
Abolishing patents is not a good idea. It's the only thing that protects a small inventor from having his inventions stolen by anyone who has more money.
Patents do not stop that. Getting a patent is cheap enough, but defending it against a large competitor? You'd be forced into bankcruptcy in weeks.
There's a reason why large companies like patents so much - so they can use them as bargaining chips when they get sued for using other peopple patents (or simply countersue, if necessary). The small inventor has no foothold in this process and would just get steamrollered if they tried.
Not really - we should be thinking above the postage stamp stuff of the SD era now. You measure based on your distance from the screen... 1.5x screen width (often quoted as 2x screen height but I think they're roughly equivalent). At 37" you're looking at a recommended viewing distance of 4.1 feet. You can use http://myhometheater.homestead.com/viewingdistancecalculator.html to do the calculation.
In fact a lot of stores are undersizing what they sell to consumers for two reasons (1) people have been used to TV as a little box in the corner for years, and that's a hard habit to break, and (2) there's lots of tiny TVs in stock and they have to sell them.
In fact the the average person sitting 8 feet from their TV they shouldn't be looking at around 70 inches ideally, so those 'monsters' you're talking about are the right size. Personally I'm quite happy at 92" and wouldn't go smaller (I'm thinking of going 100" at some point).
Not that it matters. 1.1 is all 99% of people will ever need... who needs online content on your bluray player? It'll all be advertising anyway.
Maybe in 5-10 years when downloads become popular.. but by then all bluray players will have some kind of 2.0 support and be able to participate in that when it happens.
Slashdot Mirror
Just RTFA'd myself.. That PDF sums up 100% what is wrong with ipv6 right now.
Didn't know that XP couldn't do DNS lookups over ipv6.. that's new. They did't mention that active directory doesn't work with ipv6 (important to companies, and a biggie, because as they say.. if one part of the infrastructure can't support it, it doesn't happen).
Then you've not switched - you still have an ipv4 address (if you didn't you couldn't even see slashdot.org). By switched people mean switch ipv4 off.
Most ISPs do not route 6to4 so that's out. sixxs.net is as unreliable as hell (I had a sixxs tunnel for 6 months. The London pop was down for 4 of them)... not really an option for most.
http://www.bgpexpert.com/addrspace2007.php
/8s every year is true, that's a tiny percentage of the overall use. The figures break down that we're using 69.7% of the available addresses now, up from 64.9%. The doomsday scenario is simply not here yet.
Whilst the fact that we allocate 10
This two year thing is yet another in a long line of doomsday prophecies, but the stats don't back it up. The space is running out, but in 2 years? No gonna happen. At the current rate of consumption try 10 years.
That's why nobody believes them any more.
I could dig up an old one that said we'd run out by 2000. There have been multiple doomsday prophecies. All wrong.
The statistics are actually a *lot* less alarming than the doomsayers make out.
http://www.bgpexpert.com/addrspace2007.php
"January 1, 2007 we were at 64.9% utilization and a year later we're at 69.7%"
That's a bit less that 3% growth a year. For this prediction to be right we'd have to increase our growth to 15% usage a year - 5x the current allocation rate - to run out by 2010.
A pure linear growth has us running out in 10 years at that rate.. maybe it'll be a little less, maybe a little more. But saying we'll run out in 2 years just doesn't fit the figures.
No it doesn't. It breaks *servers*. Most people aren't running servers.
If you're running services behind a firewall using NAT is an extra layer - stops information leakage.. you can't target an internal machine from outside through a NAT (or even know it exists).
There's a reason why ipv6 has NAT as well. Everyone will be using it for the same reason.. I don't want anyone to know how many machines are on my network, or guess which ones are internal servers and which ones are desktop machines... even with ipv6 all my traffic will come from one address. This is even more true on corporate nets, some of which are so paranoid they have *multiple* NAT layers between departments.
If you need direct access to a machine you VPN in and authenticate yourself properly. Otherwise you don't need to know it exists, ever.
It'll happen sooner rather than later.
Most mobile phones are on 10/8 address space nowadays, and I don't see anyone noticing. I reckon an ISP could do that (advertising the free firewalling, etc. as you mention) and 99% of users simply wouldn't notice.
And what is the number of step "AAAA record for slashdot.org"?
heh. Gotta love it.
(TBH though AAAA for google, MS, BBC, CNN, etc. etc. is more important).
I'm surprised this isn't in the standard already.. I'm sure I've overloaded IP addresses for https before.. hmm..
For standard HTTP there should be one IP address per company of course, and for a lot there is.. it's been standard practice for a while. The days of profligate use of IP addresses have passed naturally - a normal company network will be behind a firewall and NAT (leaking IP addresses is still information leak - which is why there's provision for NAT in IPV6) so the number used has been dropping anyway.
Certainly on the home side... go into the average store, and it's easy to count how many home routers are ipv6 enabled. none at all.
Some can be adapted - my wifi router can route ipv6 but not talk it for example. No way all that hardware is going to be replaced within two years.
OTOH we've been hearing the doomsday scenarios from the ipv6 zealots for 10 years now, and I'm not seeing it - it's still easy to get a block of IP addresses (I asked for 8 and got given 16 'just in case' for example).. we're not seeing the beginnings of a shortage yet.
It's proper internet... their T&C don't even mention the usual voip and p2p limitations.
I've no idea what the earlier poster was on about unless he only asked a couple of years ago - three used to restrict data to a walled garden of filtered http, but got resoundly
laughed at by everyone when they tried to sell it.
One thing to watch with them is that their pay as you go modems are *not* HSPDA which limits them to 384k. Always check the small print on these things...
Are you in a building with double glazing? That can affect the signal a lot.. in fact in some offices you can't get a mobile signal at all due to this.
I've not seen a non-HSPDA signal in a built up area in the UK for some time (on vodaphone as well), and have even had 3G on a remote hill in Wales. Dropping to GPRS is next to unheard of.
IMEI is not transmitted cleartext. In general conversation even the IMSI is only transmitted once for billing purposes and then obfuscated for the rest of the conversation (a temporary IMSI is generated from the real one which identifies the conversation without giving away any private information).
Breaking a conversation would mean calculating KI somehow, which is a 128bit key locked in the SIM and not retrievable at all. UMTS is even more secure (provides protection against MIM attacks, more keys, etc.) and AFAIK there's no theoretical attack against that, so you don't need to worry if you're using a modern phone (with one notable exception of course).
Except I haven't see a 'poorly covered area' in about 4 years and I've been around a bit. You can get standard 3G even in the middle of the countryside in this country and UMTS in any built up area (which is why laptop 3G dongles are so popular now.. it's way more ubiquitous than wifi, generally cheaper, and quite often faster - giving a constant 3.5Mbps wherever you are, rather than on some wifi point hanging of someones's 1mb DSL line).
The idea that 3G is somehow rare appears to be a US afflction.
1 million machines in a network talking to each other would probably consume more bandwidth in network overhead than useful work. Even instructing 1 million independent machines to do the same thing would take a considerable amount of time/bandwidth (eg. send a spam email to each one plus a list of targets so they can begin spamming... that's a million emails you've got to send - might as well send the spam yourself).
Well.. Gimp, free. Photoshop... $1000.
I'll stick to Gimp, with its limitations. For the price difference I can buy another computer!
Look for the southpark version of it.. it's very instructive - as well as being very funny.
Well yes actually... it'd be a breach of copyright and probably a few hundred patents to 'make a volvo', even if you supplied the parts.
Star trek isn't going to happen I'm afraid. The lawyers got there first.
Sending copyrighted files to your friends over facebook is not fair use by any sane defintion of the word.. it's *all* about distribution of pirated material. The only reason it's not mass distribution is facebook sucks too much to manage it.
Actually they shouldn't be trying too hard. Knowingly infringing on a patent is triple damages. So do it unknowingly if you must.
This was actual legal advice given to me, so it's sound. In so many words he said it's far better given the current system to stick your head in the sand and pretend patents don't exist, because it's nearly impossible to write anything withing infringing something and it's better to wait for them to come after you.. and when they do being ignorant of the patent is much cheaper than knowing about it.
Abolishing patents is not a good idea. It's the only thing that protects a small inventor from having his inventions stolen by anyone who has more money.
Patents do not stop that. Getting a patent is cheap enough, but defending it against a large competitor? You'd be forced into bankcruptcy in weeks.
There's a reason why large companies like patents so much - so they can use them as bargaining chips when they get sued for using other peopple patents (or simply countersue, if necessary). The small inventor has no foothold in this process and would just get steamrollered if they tried.
The joke has been old for quite some time now.
So you're claiming prior art?
Blu-Ray is so much easier on the tongue than a mouthful of acronym(s).
I'm not sure something that can be (and frequently is) pronounced 'Blurry' is a great name for an HD format either...
Not really - we should be thinking above the postage stamp stuff of the SD era now. You measure based on your distance from the screen... 1.5x screen width (often quoted as 2x screen height but I think they're roughly equivalent). At 37" you're looking at a recommended viewing distance of 4.1 feet. You can use http://myhometheater.homestead.com/viewingdistancecalculator.html to do the calculation.
In fact a lot of stores are undersizing what they sell to consumers for two reasons (1) people have been used to TV as a little box in the corner for years, and that's a hard habit to break, and (2) there's lots of tiny TVs in stock and they have to sell them.
In fact the the average person sitting 8 feet from their TV they shouldn't be looking at around 70 inches ideally, so those 'monsters' you're talking about are the right size. Personally I'm quite happy at 92" and wouldn't go smaller (I'm thinking of going 100" at some point).
PS3 isn't profile 2.0 yet either.
Not that it matters. 1.1 is all 99% of people will ever need... who needs online content on your bluray player? It'll all be advertising anyway.
Maybe in 5-10 years when downloads become popular.. but by then all bluray players will have some kind of 2.0 support and be able to participate in that when it happens.
£45,000 gross since you ask.
Why the hell would anyone consider that information private? Its on the company annual accounts FFS.