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

The UK has an entire IPv4 /8 that it isn't using

blog.jgc.org

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

81–90 of 127 posts

Re: The UK has an entire IPv4 /8 that it isn't using

#81

Post by Zenst »

wmf wrote: post #24
andreasvc wrote: post #21

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I see that it would be a lot of work, but so will switching to IPv6 be. The question is: which will be worse? which will actually happen? I don't know. I'm probably forgetting a lot of things but to me it would seem doable to switch to private LAN addresses using DHCP and NAT, as long as there are no hardcoded IPs lingering around (but only hostnames which can be updated in a central location).

The problem comes when two companies using 10.0.0.0/8 decide to merge. For example, IBM acquires multiple companies every year.

Very valid point - especialy given that many text-books and other Ip education material would tend to bias you to use 10.0.0.0/8 as that is what you do, remember many companies who used the old SCO IP range as there `network chap` learned IP from a popular book that used SCO IP's in there examples.

Thing is though, if a pretty compitent company like IBM who know how to do IT have not moved to IPV6 and use public IP ranges for there internal networks albiet router blocked. Well, it just don't bode well for other less technicaly compitent people to move now does it and the cycle of procrastination with IPV4 carry's on :(.

Re: The UK has an entire IPv4 /8 that it isn't using

#82

Post by Zenst »

How many mobile phones made per day that support some form of internet access and how many of those use IPV6?

Scary thought is it not!

The first real opertunity to move to IPV6 in any way would be mobile smartphones and there like and yet that is not happening. It realy is a case of the ISP's and mobile telco's that need to start initiating the IPV6 move and until they do nobody will be dragged into following.

Maybe if it was illegal to sell devices that don't at least support IPV6. But of a messy situation when you can buy devices made brand new that still dont offer IPV6 support, criminal realy.

Still when you look into the history of British railways and the better modern alternatives you can see how some legacy designs just carry on with there limitations of capacity oversight.

Another aspect is cunsumers have in many respects forgotten how to complain to a company and let there frustrations out on the internet in area's were the companys offering the services will completely fail to notice and allow you to complain and vent of without them even knowing or indeed having to care.

How many of you have asked there internet service provider if they support IPV6 or indeed what there plans are to offer it? Reason I ask is that I can bet it's lower than 1 in 100 or indeed 1 in 100,000. I can't even recall any one of my friends or anybody I know or have dealing with ever mentioning they had made such an enquiry. I know I have, please tell me I'm not alone at least.

Re: The UK has an entire IPv4 /8 that it isn't using

#83

Post by koide »

zokier wrote: post #41
tomjen3 wrote: post #10

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Do you have an idea of how many IPv4 addresses that are unused or not really needed? Between the bunch MIT got, the bunch that the military got and the bunch that IBM got, we can implement an entirely new protocol before we run out.

There are approximately 52 unadvertised /8s. Before the addresses ran out, we were using about one /8 per month. So even if we'd reclaim all unadvertised ranges, that would still buy us maybe 4 years (probably less considering the explosive growth in Asia). The design of IPv6 began in the mid-90s, and RFCs were released in 96-98. Now, 15 years later, we are mostly still using IPv4. In conclusion I think saying that w…

I have no clue about serious networking, so I have to ask: why would you have your public, routable addresses unadvertised?

What's the benefit of using them instead of a 10.0.0.0/8?

Re: The UK has an entire IPv4 /8 that it isn't using

#84

Post by carlisle_ »

geofft wrote: post #59
jrockway wrote: post #54

Earlier quoted context omitted.

The transition has sort of already happened. Most software stacks support IPv6 now, and many server hosting companies are giving out IPv6 addresses like candy. (I think I have a /48 or something for jrock.us. That's 2 to the 48th IPv4 Internets! I have a lot of computers, but not that many.) All that's left are the clients, and the way I see that transition happening is in the low-cost sector. Sort of like an AOL whe…

"The transition has sort of already happened," he says, over IPv4. Seriously, unless you want to be posting to HN via IPv4 in 2050, there is clearly something major left undone. Don't call it a transition if you think that concept is undone, but it's not yet functionally possible to be on the Internet with no IPv4 stack or (possibly NATted) address, and I don't see that becoming the case anytime soon. See http://cr.y…

I feel like a lot of the issues raised in that article aren't as relevant anymore. The issue of IPv6 only clients communicating over IPv4 can be solved via tunneling in both directions. Reading over that article again, it really does seem like he's complaining about the transition not the protocol. The solution to what he's complaining about is being solved by a slow and gradual approach that's taken place for well over a decade. The details have been worked out as time has gone on.

The biggest issue will not be getting everybody onto IPv6. That will happen at some point, however distant. The bigger issue is that clients slow to transition to IPv6, for whatever reason, will experience IPv4 service degradation as more and more of the internet switches to an IPv6 only stack.

Re: The UK has an entire IPv4 /8 that it isn't using

#85

Post by carlisle_ »

koide wrote: post #83
zokier wrote: post #41

Earlier quoted context omitted.

There are approximately 52 unadvertised /8s. Before the addresses ran out, we were using about one /8 per month. So even if we'd reclaim all unadvertised ranges, that would still buy us maybe 4 years (probably less considering the explosive growth in Asia). The design of IPv6 began in the mid-90s, and RFCs were released in 96-98. Now, 15 years later, we are mostly still using IPv4. In conclusion I think saying that w…

I have no clue about serious networking, so I have to ask: why would you have your public, routable addresses unadvertised? What's the benefit of using them instead of a 10.0.0.0/8?

Somebody explained up above, but one example is that it can be used to mitigate collisions. If you have a company merge with another, and both are using 10.0.0.0/8 you could spend a lot of time and money renumbering or you could use unadvertised IPs to connect the networks.

Re: The UK has an entire IPv4 /8 that it isn't using

#86

Post by geofft »

jrockway wrote: post #73
geofft wrote: post #59

Earlier quoted context omitted.

"The transition has sort of already happened," he says, over IPv4. Seriously, unless you want to be posting to HN via IPv4 in 2050, there is clearly something major left undone. Don't call it a transition if you think that concept is undone, but it's not yet functionally possible to be on the Internet with no IPv4 stack or (possibly NATted) address, and I don't see that becoming the case anytime soon. See http://cr.y…

Only because HN is IPv4-only. I'm sitting in a remote office on my laptop this morning, and it has an IPv6 address. When I visit google.com, it's over IPv6. It's happening.

Why is HN IPv4-only? And why should they bother to spend any effort fixing it? Given that, e.g., techcrunch.com and github.com and everything else linked from HN is IPv4-only, you can't usefully use Hacker News from an IPv6-only connection, so why should HN care?

You're expecting altruism or geekiness on the part of every single website ever -- it's fair to expect that from Google, but not from everyone. The transition may or may not be happen_ing_, but it will never finish.

Re: The UK has an entire IPv4 /8 that it isn't using

#88

Post by omh »

sjwright wrote: post #45
CrLf wrote: post #3

No traces of this block in the public Internet doesn't mean it isn't being used. It may be in use in some internal network(s) instead of a private address range (yes, that happens).

Running NAT behind a routable IP address range AND using a totally different range for all servers, VPNs, and various sysadmin crap? I don't believe it. There's no way they would be so diligent to use that IP range internally without even a tiny bit of evidence externally.

This is the government, so it's practically guaranteed that there's at least two layers of firewalls between any internal networks and the internet. If any of those layers was installed by an average IT consultancy then they'll have used NAT (because that's what you always do, right?) and hidden 51./8 completely.

Re: The UK has an entire IPv4 /8 that it isn't using

#90

Post by FuzzyDunlop »

The argument is that if our government disposed of this 'asset' now, they'd rake in almost £1bn.

IPv6 is still not mainstream, so this figure can reasonably increase over time with the increase in IPv4 scarcity.

Thus it stands to reason not to sell out just yet.

Post reply on HN