Hacker News Board Hacker News, browsed like a classic message board
Live data from Hacker News

IPv6 is here

apnic.net

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

51–60 of 64 posts

Re: IPv6 is here

#51

Post by amalcon »

tomjen3 wrote: post #33
andyv wrote: post #28

Earlier quoted context omitted.

But if you only buy an ipv6 address, the people who are only on ipv4 can't get to you. By itself, the ipv6 address is nearly worthless. The only people who have them now are people who also have an ipv4 address. ipv4 isn't going away any time soon...

Take any prefix thats currently unallocated and make it so that you slap that in front on any ipv4 address. Volia now everybody has an ipv6 address.

There's a prefix allocated explicitly for that. The problem isn't getting an address, the problem is getting the software to use it.

Re: IPv6 is here

#52

Post by pyre »

count wrote: post #38
pyre wrote: post #26

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I'm implying a legacy application that only works with IPv4 addresses, and doesn't work well behind a NAT. I know those are two separate issues, but the transition to IPv6 will likely require those software packages to be rewritten anyways so the idea that it will be broken even on IPv6 is moot because it won't even work on IPv6 as it currently is.

Those most likely are not running against the internet as a whole or at random, or they would be screwed already. VPNs and IPv4 networks that exist today won't disappear...

Why wouldn't they? The IPv4 addresses would either be behind some sort of NAT, or they would be IPv4 addresses in IPv6. If the apps can't handle IPv6, then they can't handle IPv4 addresses in IPv6, and they definitely won't be able to communicate with newer hosts that have IPv6 addresses outside of the range of IPv4.

Re: IPv6 is here

#53

Post by sucuri2 »

tptacek wrote: post #6

IPv6 is in no sense here. The fiat allocators can exhaust their address space completely and the Internet will continue to function indefinitely; it will simply become more expensive (first marginally, and then significantly) to hold a static address. There are deep problems with universal deployment of IPv6 far beyond simply getting people to throw a switch; the number of popular software packages that will malfunct…

I agree. I did a quick check and only 0.19% of the top 1 million sites (according to alexa) have ipv6 enabled:

http://blog.sucuri.net/2011/02/ipv6-is-not-here-yet-in-fact-...

And the biggest issue is that very few people really understand ipv6 to make for a smooth transition..

Re: IPv6 is here

#54

Post by pyre »

ErrantX wrote: post #46
jwatzman wrote: post #45

Earlier quoted context omitted.

As I understand it, the problem for IPv6 is with existing routing hardware and with testing. So if you're going to go through all the effort to add a new octet (which requires changing the IP packet format to allow for the extra space, for example), then you might as well go all the way to IPv6 and solve the problem once and for all.

Ah, the IP packet format - hadn't considered that aspect, cheers. As you say - wouldn't make sense.

Not just the IP packet format. Most software ends up storing IPv4 ip addresses in a 32-bit integer (because it fits exactly). All of those pieces of software would need to be updated to work with IPv4's 'new ocetet' as well. As the other poster stated. If everything needs to be upgraded, then might as well do it right the first time.

Re: IPv6 is here

#55

Post by pyre »

tomjen3 wrote: post #33
andyv wrote: post #28

Earlier quoted context omitted.

But if you only buy an ipv6 address, the people who are only on ipv4 can't get to you. By itself, the ipv6 address is nearly worthless. The only people who have them now are people who also have an ipv4 address. ipv4 isn't going away any time soon...

Take any prefix thats currently unallocated and make it so that you slap that in front on any ipv4 address. Volia now everybody has an ipv6 address.

Currently IPv4 addresses fix nicely (exactly) into a 32-bit integer. How do you propose that software storing addresses as such will be able to use a larger address without an update? (Not to mention all of the other reasons, like the different packet format to accommodate the larger address space among other things)

Re: IPv6 is here

#57

Post by kbyers »

pyre wrote: post #26
kbyers wrote: post #24

Earlier quoted context omitted.

If your application doesn't work behind an IPv4 NAT box, then your application is broke already. It will likely be broke in IPv6 as well since firewalls are not going away (and many of the same protocols that break because of NAT also break with stateful firewalls).

I'm implying a legacy application that only works with IPv4 addresses, and doesn't work well behind a NAT. I know those are two separate issues, but the transition to IPv6 will likely require those software packages to be rewritten anyways so the idea that it will be broken even on IPv6 is moot because it won't even work on IPv6 as it currently is.

So the application is broke with IPv4 and NAT, it is broke with IPv6 as it currently is, and somehow in the future it will be able to be re-written in IPv6 and made to work?

Most of the problems that I encounter with NAT and applications deal with protocols that have a control channel and then spawn separate streams frequently which are UDP. H323 is a perfect example. Both ends and the intermediate NAT devices have to understand how to handle the sub-channels.

This problem won't go away with IPv6 as firewalls will still need to understand the sub-flows. Additionally, we will be living in an IPv4 AND IPv6 world with NAT so not only will you likely have to go through an IPv4 NAT you also probably will have to go through a protocol tunneling device for some large set of users.

Re: IPv6 is here

#58

Post by pinko »

If people are really interested in speeding IPv6 adoption, the fastest way might be for government and/or industry to subsidize IPv6-only broadband for consumers (via existing ISPs).

Imagine $1-5/month DSL to your home, price-locked for 3 years--except it's IPv6-only. Lots of cost-conscious people would sign up or switch to save $xx/month, even if it meant their Internet access was crippled for a while.

But it wouldn't be crippled for long, because with such an underserved user base, the major services most people care about (Facebook, Google, etc.) would very quickly start to cater to it (even if the demographics did skew low-income), because it would be a green field and a big opportunity to build longer-term user relationships to monetize down the road.

Re: IPv6 is here

#59

Post by Luyt »

bodyfour wrote: post #29
rbranson wrote: post #17

We are by no means out of IPv4 addresses. The next step is that all of the entities who needlessly snapped up /8 space early on and sat on it for so long will be selling it off. The list includes GE, Xerox, IBM, HP, Apple, MIT, Ford, Halliburton, Prudential Insurance, Bell-Northern, Merck, Eli Lilly, the DoD/military (who has 13), USPS, and CSC. Just half of this space is 234m IPv4 addresses.

Sigh... this idea has to get thrown out every time there's an IPv4-exhaustion discussion. I guess I'll be the one to do the public service of debunking it this time. * You can assume that each of the /8s have plenty of infrastructure relying on them, meaning $millions in migration costs. Do you think that the holders will just give them up tomorrow, or do you think its more likely they'll sick some lawyers on the pro…

Although the /8s have an entire infrastructure relying on their current situation, it is not unthinkable that the economical advantage of making subsets of their space available to third parties will become more attractive than just letting it sit idle. It might even justify the migration costs. So maybe we'll see parts of IBM, Apple and HP transform to IP/DNS providers.

Apart from that, it's not a question of having the /8s 'give back' IP adresses -- it's about them monetizing their available IPv4 space, out of their own volition.

Whether that relieves the IPv4 shortage for weeks or months doesn't really matter. What matters is what value they can extract from it.

Re: IPv6 is here

#60

Post by count »

e40 wrote: post #50
count wrote: post #40

Earlier quoted context omitted.

a) Eventually (most likely next year or later), if you do not have IPv6 connectivity, there will be new content and sites added to the global internet that you will have no way of accessing at all from your v4 connected computer. a2) Alternatively, in a year or so, you get service from a brand new ISP that has no v4 connectivity (so, you are v6 native), and you cannot access anything on the v4 Internet around the wor…

Why would a new ISP have no v4 connectivity? They'd be connected to someone, and they would likely have v4 connectivity. Wouldn't they be able to have a private network connection to them (10.x.x.x)?

You can't eBGP route private addresses. (well, you can, but if you do, you should be shot).

The new ISP would need it's own space to announce (it's not much of an ISP if it's got no customers to give addresses too, so it needs addresses. It's also not much of an ISP if it's only got one upstream, so it'll need PI (provider independent) space, allocated to it from it's RIR (ARIN, RIPE, etc). And that'll all be gone soon :)

Post reply on HN