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

U.S. military strong-arming IT industry on IPv6

networkworld.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

11–20 of 23 posts

Re: U.S. military strong-arming IT industry on IPv6

#11

Post by ghshephard »

rm-rf wrote: post #9
jrockway wrote: post #7

Nice. I am pleased to say that even my TV has a globally-routable IPv6 address. (Unfortunately, I've never actually had physical IPv6 connectivity anywhere, so I always have to VPN to my internal IPv4 network. I have SSH'd from my server with IPv6 connectivity, though, and it worked :) Oh well, at least I'm cooler than my friends :)

A globally routable v6 network isn't too hard to do at home with tunnelbroker.net and similar services. A Dlink DIR-825 has enough v6 support to hold up it's end of the tunnel and route a /64. Clients (Mac, Windows, Unix's) 'just work'. Tunnelbroker does the hard part. To move a whole enterprise is hard.

Moving a whole enterprise turns out to be remarkably simple. Most OS stacks from the last 5+ years have support for IPv6 - even windows XP allows a pretty straightforward upgrade. Enable the client stacks, Turn it on on your routers, and voila - your enterprise is now IPv6 enabled. Add it to your SSL VPN - IPv6 from home. The Dual-Stack capability really does make it bog simple.

Re: U.S. military strong-arming IT industry on IPv6

#12

Post by tomjen3 »

wglb wrote: post #2

Sounds like arm twisting, but does anyone have an alternative plan?

Fix the spec there is no reason it shouldn't be possible to have a package with an ipv4 destination and an ipv6 source (all oses knows about ipv6) except that those who wrote the specs forgot the iron law of software - nothing, no matter how good it is - succeed without being backwards compatible. That's why c++ and Java are a success, but Lisp isn't.

Re: U.S. military strong-arming IT industry on IPv6

#13

Post by wmf »

tomjen3 wrote: post #12
wglb wrote: post #2

Sounds like arm twisting, but does anyone have an alternative plan?

Fix the spec there is no reason it shouldn't be possible to have a package with an ipv4 destination and an ipv6 source (all oses knows about ipv6) except that those who wrote the specs forgot the iron law of software - nothing, no matter how good it is - succeed without being backwards compatible. That's why c++ and Java are a success, but Lisp isn't.

there is no reason it shouldn't be possible to have a packet with an ipv4 destination and an ipv6 source

This is now possible with NAT64, but it requires a translator box and somebody has to pay for that.

Re: U.S. military strong-arming IT industry on IPv6

#14

Post by nitrogen »

tomjen3 wrote: post #12
wglb wrote: post #2

Sounds like arm twisting, but does anyone have an alternative plan?

Fix the spec there is no reason it shouldn't be possible to have a package with an ipv4 destination and an ipv6 source (all oses knows about ipv6) except that those who wrote the specs forgot the iron law of software - nothing, no matter how good it is - succeed without being backwards compatible. That's why c++ and Java are a success, but Lisp isn't.

There is one problem. The IPv6-enabled equipment that provides Internet access to the IPv6 sender knows how to route an IPv4 address, but the IPv4 equipment at the recipient's ISP might not know how to route back to the IPv6 source.

Re: U.S. military strong-arming IT industry on IPv6

#15

Post by iwwr »

meric wrote: post #3

If the US military can save us from depleting IP addresses maybe they'll save us from running out of oil, too. Damn... It seems to take a government agency to keep the world spinning.

Solar power humvees won't happen very soon.

But the US military is one of the World's largest oil consumers.

Re: U.S. military strong-arming IT industry on IPv6

#16

Post by rfugger »

tomjen3 wrote: post #12
wglb wrote: post #2

Sounds like arm twisting, but does anyone have an alternative plan?

Fix the spec there is no reason it shouldn't be possible to have a package with an ipv4 destination and an ipv6 source (all oses knows about ipv6) except that those who wrote the specs forgot the iron law of software - nothing, no matter how good it is - succeed without being backwards compatible. That's why c++ and Java are a success, but Lisp isn't.

Um, Lisp was invented in 1958. What exactly was it supposed to be backwards-compatible with?

Re: U.S. military strong-arming IT industry on IPv6

#17

Post by khafra »

iwwr wrote: post #15
meric wrote: post #3

If the US military can save us from depleting IP addresses maybe they'll save us from running out of oil, too. Damn... It seems to take a government agency to keep the world spinning.

Solar power humvees won't happen very soon. But the US military is one of the World's largest oil consumers.

He's probably referring to DoD-funded research efforts like this: http://www.google.com/search?q=algae+oil+dod

Re: U.S. military strong-arming IT industry on IPv6

#18

Post by rbanffy »

jrockway wrote: post #7

Nice. I am pleased to say that even my TV has a globally-routable IPv6 address. (Unfortunately, I've never actually had physical IPv6 connectivity anywhere, so I always have to VPN to my internal IPv4 network. I have SSH'd from my server with IPv6 connectivity, though, and it worked :) Oh well, at least I'm cooler than my friends :)

Hats off to a man who SSHs his own TV though an IPv6 connection.

Re: U.S. military strong-arming IT industry on IPv6

#20

Post by iwwr »

jrockway wrote: post #7

Nice. I am pleased to say that even my TV has a globally-routable IPv6 address. (Unfortunately, I've never actually had physical IPv6 connectivity anywhere, so I always have to VPN to my internal IPv4 network. I have SSH'd from my server with IPv6 connectivity, though, and it worked :) Oh well, at least I'm cooler than my friends :)

Why would you want a naked routable TV sitting on the global network, instead of your firewalled LAN?
Post reply on HN