51–60 of 149 posts
http://cr.yp.to/djbdns/ipv6mess.html (circa 2003)
That was always a question I had in the back of my mind. We have this huge address space. Why not reserve a single prefix that means "look at the lower 32-bits of this address and use it as an IPv4 address"?
This article is focused on the US, a country which was never really going to feel the brunt of the IPv4 crunch. For an example of a real victim, look at Qatar, a country which only has a single IP address for the entire country (everyone sits behind a NAT): https://en.wikinews.org/wiki/Qatari_proxy_IP_address_tempora... [0] Whenever someone from Qatar decides to vandalize Wikipedia, Wikipedia is forced (temporarily)…
I get you have an interest in the Qatar/Wikipedia situation, but it seems to be unlikely due to IP address resource management issues. Probably more like tyrannical control, if anything.
It's here. IP addresses are costing more and providers are less generous with them. It used to be common to get a handful with a dedicated server, now you get one or two. I have a friend who runs a small low-cost minecraft hosting. He stopped giving his customers dedicated IPs at all. They get a range of ports and a hostname with appropriate srv records added. That's the other result, technical work-arounds. You can…
This is basically how it should work. Prices rise until alternatives become worth thinking about.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
Then don't run dual stack. Run native IPv6 and NAT64/DNS64. Or in DO's case make IPv4 access optional for smaller droplets and charge $1/month extra for it. In reality things like DB servers or backend app servers don't need public IPv4 addresses, and this would speed up IPv6 adoption considerably.
Customer applications which require IPv4 and haven't been upgraded to support IPv6 still need a v4 address, and customers probably have to support their own clients that only use v4. You still have to ship the customer both L3 protocols. So the carrier would at least need to ship a NAT'd v4 address; v6-only would basically frustrate/anger/alienate a whole lot of customers, which is dumb from a making-money-with-my-co…
For Comcast and the like, once again give me the option to either do NAT64 or a full dual stack. As a regular consumer I probably won't care. As a gamer or a developer I might.
The IPv6 transition is going to happen sooner or later. Either you are going to make it painless for your customers by providing IPv6 early and using strategies to make the transition to IPv6-only smoother or you are going to make your customers suffer.
A peak into the future of peak-oil. Let's see how this plays out and learn from it.
If only the available IPv4 address space were growing as rapidly as the available oil... 1960s: Peak oil 1995 @12.5 billion barrels/year. Today: Peak oil 2035, current production is over 2.5X the previously predicted peak. There's also an increasing expectation that rather than "peak oil" being a supply-side constraint, it will be a demand-side constraint as more efficient use and alternative energy sources become av…
Not a comment on the article, but IPv6 adoption relies on significant upgrades of existing hardware. Think of the size of the lookup table that a new bit of hardware has to be able to look up against and store compared to IPv4. Significantly more processing power is required, particularly if the hardware is a device that does inspection of some sort, even if basic! It isn't just a case of switching end machines to us…
IPv6 makes the global routing table much smaller (because there's enough space for the subnets to be logical parts of the network, rather than squeezing as many addresses in as possible), so the core routers for the IPv6 internet ought to need less hardware than the IPv4 ones.
It's here. IP addresses are costing more and providers are less generous with them. It used to be common to get a handful with a dedicated server, now you get one or two. I have a friend who runs a small low-cost minecraft hosting. He stopped giving his customers dedicated IPs at all. They get a range of ports and a hostname with appropriate srv records added. That's the other result, technical work-arounds. You can…
http://cr.yp.to/djbdns/ipv6mess.html (circa 2003)
Thanks, very interesting read. While reading his argument about all the extensions that need to be done everywhere, I thought about this: since many protocols/etc have to be reworked, will that lead to consolidations (since some protocols will be left behind)? Can we say that currently the IPv6 Internet is a place (almost) free of legacy stuff?
Earlier quoted context omitted.
How many of Qatar's 2 million people use the internet, and how many of them pay for a VPN service? ( https://www.bestvpn.com/blog/6715/5-best-vpns-for-qatar/ indicates there are a lot of internet cafes whose owners are using VPNs and passing on the access to customers.) It sounds to me like a person from Qatar wouldn't have a problem editing wiki if they wanted to, nor a vandal from vandalizing if they wanted to...
"I can bypass it" is not a solution; it's just avoiding the problem, which remains intact.
When I looked at it 19 or the 20 involved in the RFC for ipv6 where from academia plus one guy from bell labs.
Migration and Interpenetration should have been the highest priority in the design on a replacement for ip4