31–40 of 134 posts
Can IPv6 become, ironically, the reason ipv4 never dies? Once a majority move to v6 wouldn't that mean a whole bunch of the ipv4 space is being free'd up. This allows those who never update to actually never update.
But if a majority move to IPv6, wouldn't the holdouts have difficulty communicating?
Earlier quoted context omitted.
While having an unique address per application can be cool, I don't like the premise that this is used as some sort of security layer. We have firewalls. We know how they work and how to implement them well. For all intents and purposes a typical NAT-setup is bascially wide open from the inside and out. You can do the same with a few simple rules on a firewall.
I know we have firewalls, but in the normal desktop use-case, there are some applications that you want to be able for external clients to connect to. Skype (or other VoIP clients), Bittorrent, Game servers, etc all work better with or flat-out require external connectivity. In the V4 world, we have upnp or NAP-PMP to allow applications to open a port on the router and to have the router then forward the packets to a…
Earlier quoted context omitted.
While having an unique address per application can be cool, I don't like the premise that this is used as some sort of security layer. We have firewalls. We know how they work and how to implement them well. For all intents and purposes a typical NAT-setup is bascially wide open from the inside and out. You can do the same with a few simple rules on a firewall.
I know we have firewalls, but in the normal desktop use-case, there are some applications that you want to be able for external clients to connect to. Skype (or other VoIP clients), Bittorrent, Game servers, etc all work better with or flat-out require external connectivity. In the V4 world, we have upnp or NAP-PMP to allow applications to open a port on the router and to have the router then forward the packets to a…
After I switched ISP to one that supports native IPv6 (and generally is pure awesome), I noticed that my traffic at home went to about 50% IPv6, also thanks to YouTube supporting V6. I also casually noticed that all but one address in my "Account Activity" view in Gmail are IPv6 addresses (ironically, the mobile phone got the one single IPv4 address in that list over 4G). V6 works nicely and totally transparent causi…
Is there any reason the same approach shouldn't work? All the application needs to tell the router is "please open this inbound port on this address", right? Like, in theory couldn't a router just follow the existing uPNP/nat-pmp standards and do the right thing with those messages?
> That way, I could theoretically get away without a restrictive firewall while still giving applications a way to be directly connected to. An attacker would have to scan a /48 (in my case) or a /64 (in the worst case) in order to find an open port given a known remote address.
I think that's a terrible idea. An attacker could e.g. sniff packets inbound towards your network to figure out the address. Addresses are not designed to be secret or a security feature.
I'm curious about the peaks and troughs in the graph. It seems the graph reaches a peak every week, does anyone know a reason for this?
(You can also check last Christmas, where there's a bit of an extended peak.)
Can IPv6 become, ironically, the reason ipv4 never dies? Once a majority move to v6 wouldn't that mean a whole bunch of the ipv4 space is being free'd up. This allows those who never update to actually never update.
People who adopt IPv6 addresses tend to keep an IPv4 address as well.
I'm curious about the peaks and troughs in the graph. It seems the graph reaches a peak every week, does anyone know a reason for this?
This most likely means that more people have IPv6 connections at home (weekend), than they do at their work place (throughout the week).
After I switched ISP to one that supports native IPv6 (and generally is pure awesome), I noticed that my traffic at home went to about 50% IPv6, also thanks to YouTube supporting V6. I also casually noticed that all but one address in my "Account Activity" view in Gmail are IPv6 addresses (ironically, the mobile phone got the one single IPv4 address in that list over 4G). V6 works nicely and totally transparent causi…
Unfortunately it's going to take a while until it's widely supported.