91–100 of 127 posts
Earlier quoted context omitted.
This is a hackers perspective and doesn't apply to the normal consumer.
Thats kind of my point. If you're the type of person to actually know what v6 is, you're the type of person we're all waiting on. edit: And its not a "hackers" thing, its a "technical competency" thing.
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…
When looking into unused IPv4 /8 blocks besides private companies, could somebody please explain how much of the 201,326,592 addresses (12x /8) allocated to the US DoD have ever been used
Earlier quoted context omitted.
"fiat allocation doesn't work" Sort of, and sort of not right? Fiat allocation of a fixed resource, sure, but ISO does fiat allocation of OID space and it works because folks are free to grow as much as they want below it. As I recall one of the original 'next gen' IP proposals was like a huge address translation cloud, IPs were encapsulated in yet another layer which provided 'context' for the IP address inside. Bas…
If we're talking about advertisable blocks, the Germany scenario doesn't happen. For the time being, there can't be a liquid market for /32's, at least not one that works acros multiple ISPs. I agree with you strongly that the 128 bit IP address is a huge design mistake, one that has unnecessarily retarded the deployment of IPv6 (I personally believe fatally so). Even in the '90s, a 64 bit number was still a scalar o…
The truly huge universe of code is at the application level. Sane applications use strings for remote hosts, or work with URL's, and let library- or OS-level code deal with the details of turning that into an address.
OS'es -- even Windows -- have supported IPv6 for nearly a decade. Most networking libraries I've come across also have IPv6 support.
The main problem isn't software, it's configuration. Namely the configuration of the interface between the customer network and the ISP. The ISP doesn't want to turn on IPv6 because it might break some customers, and the customer can't test IPv6 functionality since their ISP doesn't support it.
These problems are compounded for residential ISP's, since most of their customers can't be bothered to learn anything technical.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
Under all circumstances: I'm sure we've all been faced at some stage with the unplanned need to route between two RFC1918 subnets, only to find they collide, in situations as simple as a home VPN connection dialling into the office LAN, up to corporate mergers involving hundreds of thousands of desktops. A central address registry along with 'public' allocations is the only way to avoid this kind of mess. The fact th…
Sorry, I was imprecise. I meant, under what circumstances today is it the best thing to spend routable IP addresses for machines that aren't exposed directly to the Internet? I'm getting directly at the practicality of these schemes. Obviously, if routable IP addresses were easy to get, there would be lots of cases where it would make sense to use them.
Under the circumstance that you have a spare /8 you aren't using for anything.
You could argue that "the best thing" in that case would be giving, selling, or leasing pieces of the /8 to someone who needs the space. But maybe you aren't in the philanthropy business, so giving's out.
And maybe the prices aren't high enough for your taste, so selling or leasing are out. Or maybe there's simply not enough demand on the market to absorb 16m addresses. Or maybe the terms of the allocation agreement say you're not allowed to transfer them, and you're afraid that trying to do so will give the Internet people a justification to give them to someone else.
> if routable IP addresses were easy to get, there would be lots of cases where it would make sense to use them
If your organization has a spare /8, routable IP addresses are easy to get for you, so these cases do make sense, for you.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
...and, anyone who didn't have $1bn to spend would be SOL. There's plenty of numbers to go around; the sooner we get to v6 and get around this mess, the better.
What an embarrassing failure of economic reasoning. IPv4 addresses are a scare resource. Acknowledging that, and allowing them to be traded at a price that reflects their value, is the surest way to get them out of the hands of those who are wasting them in the way tptacek and the article describe and into the hands of those who will do something more productive with them. Pricing IPv4 addresses would hasten adoption…
1. IPv4 addresses are overdemanded and undersupplied.
2. IPv6 addresses are practically limitless and will serve the same purpose once we switch over.
3. We should switch to IPv6 ASAP.
Where's the economic flaw?
(Also, it should be pointed out that allowing trades on IPv4 would not decrease availability, it would only increase it: Right now, you can't switch the owner of /x blocks without IANNA approval, so right now you have no choice but to push for switching to v6, whereas with trading you could waste money on v4 instead. Moreover, this would encourage the companies with the most money to buy IPv4 blocks rather than invest in switching over to v6, which would slow down the process for everyone since they're the biggest companies. TLDR -- force investment in IPv6 not IPv4. There's also a fairness issue since these IPv4 blocks were originally allocated for free -- should MIT be able to make billions on their block?)
Earlier quoted context omitted.
"fiat allocation doesn't work" Sort of, and sort of not right? Fiat allocation of a fixed resource, sure, but ISO does fiat allocation of OID space and it works because folks are free to grow as much as they want below it. As I recall one of the original 'next gen' IP proposals was like a huge address translation cloud, IPs were encapsulated in yet another layer which provided 'context' for the IP address inside. Bas…
If we're talking about advertisable blocks, the Germany scenario doesn't happen. For the time being, there can't be a liquid market for /32's, at least not one that works acros multiple ISPs. I agree with you strongly that the 128 bit IP address is a huge design mistake, one that has unnecessarily retarded the deployment of IPv6 (I personally believe fatally so). Even in the '90s, a 64 bit number was still a scalar o…
what if IP addresses were allocated / confirmed by a bitcoin-like network?
Amateur radio also has an unused IPv4 /8 block as well. That $500 mil could go quite a ways towards building a few amsats.
Hey, some of us HAMS are still using AMPRNet ... not many, but some. That being said, here is a list of people in charge of allocations: http://www.ampr.org/oldsite/amprnets.txt
If I knew now what I knew then, I would've gone for a class B block. lol.