Not so simple. If someone uploads an app, and it turns out to be missing the source, or the.tar.gz is garbage or unrelated to the app, Microsoft is still liable.
Legal issues are nasty for this.
No, this doesn't work, at least with normal routing gear.
IPv6 subnets are ALWAYS exactly 64-bits, and the routers know it (actually, the IP stack in the OS usually knows this). Sure, with some linux routers you can hack things up and sort of get that to work, but it really screws up more things than it can help.
I'm not really sure why I would need multiple subnets in my home, and go through the expense of having routers to separate them and separate WiFi APs for each.
If you just want "logical separation", or something to ease your firewall rules, you don't really need a separate subnets.
Native IPv6 should work fine if you have a DD-WRT build that supports IPv6. Sure, you need to configure RADVD, but the GUI has a place to do that. 6to4 and 6RD work, I've tested them.
You are right about DD-WRT and 6to4 or 6RD: You need to write a config script that connects. It's ugly. But most Linux's are pretty ugly about IPv6.
I would be nice if they make the GUI handle this. But you can get it to work.
You can reach any site connected to your ISP via 6to4, and can connect to any site that is IPv4 capable.
But if the site is IPv6 only, and not on your ISP, there is no route known to the internet routers to send packets to your 6to4 address.
6RD fixes this issue.
The normal prefixes are assigned to RIRs, who assign them to ISPs.
But every 6to4 address has the same prefix, so you can;t tell which ISP you need to route to.
There is nothing in a 6to4 prefix that says which ISP you are using, or even which country you are in.
So routing becomes a problem for sites that are IPv6 only and are not connected to the same ISP as you are.
Not necessary. IPv6 has "privacy enhanced IP addresses". A random IP is used each time you connect outbound, and so anyone that records your IP will find it useless. And guessing IP addresses when even a home user has multiple quintillion doesn't work at all.
You are very confused. A/64 is enough space for every network device ever built or will be built in our lifetime to be part of one home network.
And you think that is too small? That you will run out in a jiffy?
IPv6 works. Subnets cannot run out of addresses in any foreseeable future. Business will get a/48 or at least a/56. They won't have a problem.
Home users don't need a/48 (which is 1024x bigger than a/64). It would be nice if they did allow for subnets , and gave home users at least a/62 (room for 4 subnets). But very few home users would use such a feature.
A/64 allows for more devices connected to your home subnet than all the network interfaces ever built, or will be built in our lifetimes. There isn't any worry about it being "too small".
It is looking more and more like Comcast waited too long to do this, and will run out of IPv4 addresss before people can make the transition.
Dual-stack still requires you to have an IPv4 address.
So they are also testing DsLite, a system where the home user only gets an IPv6 prefix, and no IPv4 address. This connects to a NAT64 router that allows you to get at IPv4 sites, by translating your IPv6 address into an IPv4 address.
NAT64 is an ugly solution, but ARIN will run out of IPv4 blocks to give Comcast and other ISPs by the end of the year.
Comcast also supports 6RD and 6to4 servers, so even if you don't have dual-stack, you can get on the IPv6 bandwagon.
6to4 should "just work", but 6to4 itself has some known issues with some kinds of routing (the IPv6 prefix doesn't have a routable prefix, so not everyone you can see can see you).
Their 6RD servers are few and far between, and that gives bad performance, but it work correctly. You just need to configure your connection properly for 6RD to their 6RD border router.
Windows or Mac OSX directly connected to the internet should work fine. You shouldn't even need to configure anything.
If you have a home router, it probably doesn't support IPv6, but you might be able to use DD-WRT (www.dd-wrt.org) or other replacement firmware that does. I do this, and it works fine
Neither are as nice as native dual-stack, but Comcast has upgraded their equipment for it in only in a few cities,and it also requires your cable modem to be DOCSYS 3.0.
Overall,
I have found right now that using HE's tunnelbroker is better for performance than Comcast's 6RD or 6to4.
Wow... FOSS fanboys seem to think everything is bad unless it conforms to their way of thinking.
H.264 was a group of companies wanting to find a common standard they could all work towards. They found that many of the important concepts were patented, so they all agreed to license those patents, and make them super cheap for people to use.
Open Source? Sure, nice that it doesn't conflict with anyones copyrights. But, if it implements the same processes as the patented parts of h.264, it is in violation of those patents.
I've looked, and I don't believe it's possible that they have an implementation that doesn't infringe on the patents.
Contribute code to H.264? Sure, anyone can write code to implement it, and share it if they want.
Use it in your software? Sure, for most uses, it's free, and you don't need to worry about patent infringement cases later.
Yes, large-scale use is an issue, but from what I see, that's for people that write encoders or distribution systems, not for the common case of decoders.\
H.264 is a published, standard, specification, like that for C, C++, Posix, etc. You can write software that conforms or not, up to you.
If you write software that infringes on patents, it doesn't matter if you looked at h.264 or not, the patents were already there before that standard existed.
You still need to get a license or conform to license requirements.
p.s. Google doesn't indemnify you for patent infringement if you use WebM... If you get sued, it's up to you to prove WebM doesn't infringe.
Except it is very likey that WebM infriges the very same patents that MPEG-LA is licensing.
Just becuse WebM was developed without looking at closed-source code, that doesn't absolve it from patents.
IPv4 is just as much a "privacy nightmare"... You need a publicly addressable IPv4 address somewhere to receive packets from the internet. These addresses can be traced back to you. Sure, dynamic IP addresses change, but on broadband, they change rarely. And businesses have static IP addresses.
IPv6 at least has the benefit that people can't guess IP addresses on your local network (64-bits of device ID is a huge space).
And with privacy enhanced IPv6 addresses, people can't get your permanent IP address at all
Privacy enhanced IPv6 addresses use a random number for the last 64-bits, and change constantly. They are used for outbound connections only, but prevent the site you are connecting to from remembering your IP address for future attacks.
But in the end, you must have a routable prefix (IPv6) or public IPv4 address associated with any connection, otherwise routing fails. And yes, that gives up some privacy, especially for home users, where you can trace activity back to specific people. rather that just "someone in this company".
Servers usually get a device number assigned manually, rather than using MAC address of the lan adapter (otherwise, a failed LAN adapter causes you real problems!).
So the last 64-bits is usually a small number, such as 1, 2, 3 etc.
that makes the IPv6 address a lot easier: 2001:db8:85a3::1
It's pretty easy to memorize your own prefix, so for machines on your own network, it isn't a problem
IPv6 machines all have to run in dual stack, which means they all need an IPv4 address, which means IPv6 is solving exactly zero problems
No, that isn't true at all. Two ways that solve this issue:
1) Use private address space for the IPv4 address, and have carrier-grade NAT.
2) IPv6 only hosts, connecting to a protocol conversion NAT that translates IPv6 addresses to IPv4 (again, at the carrier).
Either means P2P connections will have to be over the IPv6 link.
Slashdot Mirror
I'll bet that lots of enterprise use of Open Source tools is due to the price tag, not the ability to fiddle with the source code.
Well, for example, anyone using a tunnelbroker to enable IPv6 support. Since the tunnelbroker uses it.
Linksys is part of CISCO
Not so simple. If someone uploads an app, and it turns out to be missing the source, or the .tar.gz is garbage or unrelated to the app, Microsoft is still liable.
Legal issues are nasty for this.
No. You can distribute BSD apps without source, and no requirement to make the app you build "licensed for the purpose of derivitive works"
Because Microsoft, as the distributor, would need to make the source code available, and they have no ability to insure this.
yes. BSD allows relicensing, even making the app closed source if that's what is desired. And it has no reuirement that source be available.
No, this doesn't work, at least with normal routing gear.
IPv6 subnets are ALWAYS exactly 64-bits, and the routers know it (actually, the IP stack in the OS usually knows this). Sure, with some linux routers you can hack things up and sort of get that to work, but it really screws up more things than it can help.
I'm not really sure why I would need multiple subnets in my home, and go through the expense of having routers to separate them and separate WiFi APs for each.
If you just want "logical separation", or something to ease your firewall rules, you don't really need a separate subnets.
Native IPv6 should work fine if you have a DD-WRT build that supports IPv6. Sure, you need to configure RADVD, but the GUI has a place to do that. 6to4 and 6RD work, I've tested them.
You are right about DD-WRT and 6to4 or 6RD: You need to write a config script that connects. It's ugly. But most Linux's are pretty ugly about IPv6. I would be nice if they make the GUI handle this. But you can get it to work.
You can reach any site connected to your ISP via 6to4, and can connect to any site that is IPv4 capable. But if the site is IPv6 only, and not on your ISP, there is no route known to the internet routers to send packets to your 6to4 address. 6RD fixes this issue.
The normal prefixes are assigned to RIRs, who assign them to ISPs. But every 6to4 address has the same prefix, so you can;t tell which ISP you need to route to.
There is nothing in a 6to4 prefix that says which ISP you are using, or even which country you are in. So routing becomes a problem for sites that are IPv6 only and are not connected to the same ISP as you are.
Why would I want to have a router between the garage and the kitchen? Makes no sense to me.
Not necessary. IPv6 has "privacy enhanced IP addresses". A random IP is used each time you connect outbound, and so anyone that records your IP will find it useless. And guessing IP addresses when even a home user has multiple quintillion doesn't work at all.
You are very confused. A /64 is enough space for every network device ever built or will be built in our lifetime to be part of one home network.
And you think that is too small? That you will run out in a jiffy?
/48 or at least a /56. They won't have a problem.
IPv6 works. Subnets cannot run out of addresses in any foreseeable future. Business will get a
All of the IPv6 problems are in the transition.
Home users don't need a /48 (which is 1024x bigger than a /64). It would be nice if they did allow for subnets , and gave home users at least a /62 (room for 4 subnets). But very few home users would use such a feature.
/64 allows for more devices connected to your home subnet than all the network interfaces ever built, or will be built in our lifetimes. There isn't any worry about it being "too small".
A
It is looking more and more like Comcast waited too long to do this, and will run out of IPv4 addresss before people can make the transition. Dual-stack still requires you to have an IPv4 address.
So they are also testing DsLite, a system where the home user only gets an IPv6 prefix, and no IPv4 address. This connects to a NAT64 router that allows you to get at IPv4 sites, by translating your IPv6 address into an IPv4 address.
NAT64 is an ugly solution, but ARIN will run out of IPv4 blocks to give Comcast and other ISPs by the end of the year.
Comcast also supports 6RD and 6to4 servers, so even if you don't have dual-stack, you can get on the IPv6 bandwagon.
6to4 should "just work", but 6to4 itself has some known issues with some kinds of routing (the IPv6 prefix doesn't have a routable prefix, so not everyone you can see can see you).
Their 6RD servers are few and far between, and that gives bad performance, but it work correctly. You just need to configure your connection properly for 6RD to their 6RD border router.
Windows or Mac OSX directly connected to the internet should work fine. You shouldn't even need to configure anything.
If you have a home router, it probably doesn't support IPv6, but you might be able to use DD-WRT (www.dd-wrt.org) or other replacement firmware that does. I do this, and it works fine
Neither are as nice as native dual-stack, but Comcast has upgraded their equipment for it in only in a few cities,and it also requires your cable modem to be DOCSYS 3.0.
Overall, I have found right now that using HE's tunnelbroker is better for performance than Comcast's 6RD or 6to4.
Wow... FOSS fanboys seem to think everything is bad unless it conforms to their way of thinking.
H.264 was a group of companies wanting to find a common standard they could all work towards. They found that many of the important concepts were patented, so they all agreed to license those patents, and make them super cheap for people to use.
Open Source? Sure, nice that it doesn't conflict with anyones copyrights. But, if it implements the same processes as the patented parts of h.264, it is in violation of those patents. I've looked, and I don't believe it's possible that they have an implementation that doesn't infringe on the patents.
Contribute code to H.264? Sure, anyone can write code to implement it, and share it if they want.
Use it in your software? Sure, for most uses, it's free, and you don't need to worry about patent infringement cases later.
Yes, large-scale use is an issue, but from what I see, that's for people that write encoders or distribution systems, not for the common case of decoders.\
H.264 is a published, standard, specification, like that for C, C++, Posix, etc. You can write software that conforms or not, up to you.
If you write software that infringes on patents, it doesn't matter if you looked at h.264 or not, the patents were already there before that standard existed. You still need to get a license or conform to license requirements.
p.s. Google doesn't indemnify you for patent infringement if you use WebM... If you get sued, it's up to you to prove WebM doesn't infringe.
Except it is very likey that WebM infriges the very same patents that MPEG-LA is licensing. Just becuse WebM was developed without looking at closed-source code, that doesn't absolve it from patents.
By open source, you mean GPL? Yes, GPL forbids usng patented ideas, but not all open-souce liceneses do.
Actually, it looks like ISPs might go with dynamic prefixes, because it's easier for their routing as the network grows.
Back to the same situation as dynamic IPv4, as far as privacy.
But I would so much more like a static prefix, so I can access my home when I'm travelling.
IPv4 is just as much a "privacy nightmare"... You need a publicly addressable IPv4 address somewhere to receive packets from the internet. These addresses can be traced back to you. Sure, dynamic IP addresses change, but on broadband, they change rarely. And businesses have static IP addresses.
IPv6 at least has the benefit that people can't guess IP addresses on your local network (64-bits of device ID is a huge space). And with privacy enhanced IPv6 addresses, people can't get your permanent IP address at all
Privacy enhanced IPv6 addresses use a random number for the last 64-bits, and change constantly. They are used for outbound connections only, but prevent the site you are connecting to from remembering your IP address for future attacks.
But in the end, you must have a routable prefix (IPv6) or public IPv4 address associated with any connection, otherwise routing fails. And yes, that gives up some privacy, especially for home users, where you can trace activity back to specific people. rather that just "someone in this company".
Servers usually get a device number assigned manually, rather than using MAC address of the lan adapter (otherwise, a failed LAN adapter causes you real problems!).
So the last 64-bits is usually a small number, such as 1, 2, 3 etc.
that makes the IPv6 address a lot easier: 2001:db8:85a3::1
It's pretty easy to memorize your own prefix, so for machines on your own network, it isn't a problem
IPv6 machines all have to run in dual stack, which means they all need an IPv4 address, which means IPv6 is solving exactly zero problems
No, that isn't true at all. Two ways that solve this issue:
1) Use private address space for the IPv4 address, and have carrier-grade NAT.
2) IPv6 only hosts, connecting to a protocol conversion NAT that translates IPv6 addresses to IPv4 (again, at the carrier).
Either means P2P connections will have to be over the IPv6 link.