Beta
×

Welcome to the Slashdot Beta site -- learn more here. Use the link in the footer or click here to return to the Classic version of Slashdot.

Thank you!

Before you choose to head back to the Classic look of the site, we'd appreciate it if you share your thoughts on the Beta; your feedback is what drives our ongoing development.

Beta is different and we value you taking the time to try it out. Please take a look at the changes we've made in Beta and  learn more about it. Thanks for reading, and for making the site better!

ARIN Letter Says Two More Years of IPv4

timothy posted more than 5 years ago | from the no-more-mister-nice-registry dept.

The Internet 266

dew4au writes "A reader over at SANS Internet Storm Center pointed out a certified letter his organization received from ARIN. The letter notes that all IPv4 space will be depleted within two years and outlines new requirements for address applications. New submissions will require an attestation of accuracy from an organizational officer. It also advises organizations to start addressing publicly accessible assets with IPv6. Is ARIN hoping to scare companies into action with the specter of scarce resources? This may be what's needed to spur adoption since there appears to be no business case for IPv6 deployment."

cancel ×

266 comments

Sorry! There are no comments related to the filter you selected.

What about my toaster? (5, Funny)

MrEricSir (398214) | more than 5 years ago | (#27779263)

When IPv6 was announced, one of the benefits was that everything could have its own IP address; even your toaster!

So as for a business case, what about the internet toaster business? If we don't switch to IPv6, what will they do?

Re:What about my toaster? (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 5 years ago | (#27779359)

Now to wait for the day that people hack into toasters because they're bored or mad at their neighbors.

Re:What about my toaster? (2, Funny)

Burkin (1534829) | more than 5 years ago | (#27779449)

Why would you be running Windows on your toaster?

Re:What about my toaster? (2, Funny)

Anonymous Coward | more than 5 years ago | (#27779535)

He likes his toast burnt to a crisp?

Re:What about my toaster? (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 5 years ago | (#27779659)

Because chances are the toaster companies won't be smart enough to choose Linux for their Toaster Operating Systems, meaning that most toasters will unfortunately come with Windows Toaster Edition rather than Ubuntu Toaster Remix. ;)

Re:What about my toaster? (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 5 years ago | (#27779363)

I for one won't be satisfied until each of the pixels on my monitor has its own IP address.

Re:What about my toaster? (5, Informative)

omnichad (1198475) | more than 5 years ago | (#27779545)

IPv6 has 3x10^38 addresses.

Assuming that everyone in the world owns a 1080p monitor, that's about 1x10^16 pixels.

There would be enough IP addresses for each pixel, and still have more than enough IP addresses left to give every man, woman, and child's toaster an IP and also to replace IPv4 in its entirety.

Re:What about my toaster? (0, Offtopic)

aynoknman (1071612) | more than 5 years ago | (#27779863)

There would be enough IP addresses for each pixel, and still have more than enough IP addresses left to give every man, woman, and child's toaster an IP and also to replace IPv4 in its entirety.

Yeah, but do the toasters get their own pixels with IP addresses?

Re:What about my toaster? (0)

omnichad (1198475) | more than 5 years ago | (#27779925)

in HD!

Re:What about my toaster? (3, Funny)

Bandman (86149) | more than 5 years ago | (#27780193)

HDoverIP

Remotely address the individual pixels of a monitor.

Talk about a thin client...

Re:What about my toaster? (2, Interesting)

jd (1658) | more than 5 years ago | (#27779889)

That's assuming packed addressing. IPv6 is hierarchical, which means that it's largely sparse addressing, so your theory doesn't hold up. However, since each home network has 48 bits of address space, you still have enough addresses for your monitor - you just won't be able to use the mobility option.

Re:What about my monitor? (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 5 years ago | (#27780321)

According to my maths, 2^48 addresses on a home lan is enough to individually address every pixel on 32 million 4096x2048 HD displays...

Now what am I going to do? (2, Funny)

bobbuck (675253) | more than 5 years ago | (#27779625)

With this junk IPv4 toaster?

Re:What about my toaster? (4, Funny)

shadow349 (1034412) | more than 5 years ago | (#27779653)

So as for a business case, what about the internet toaster business? If we don't switch to IPv6, what will they do?

They can receive bailout funds from the stimulus bill under the guise of a "smart power grid" appliance.

You think I'm kidding, don't you?

Re:What about my toaster? (1)

timeOday (582209) | more than 5 years ago | (#27779943)

Bailout and stimulus are different things, but I am all in favor of networked appliances to cut down on energy costs. I would start with heat, AC, and fridge rather than toaster though. I would like to get an email from my appliances each month saying how much power each one is using, since a broken appliance can end up running around the clock and wasting power.

At some point I would also like to get a plug-in hybrid that can talk to the power grid and charge up when energy is cheapest, which may be somewhat unpredictable as solar and wind power come online.

Re:What about my toaster? (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 5 years ago | (#27780545)

Bailout and stimulus are different things

Perhaps you could tell the Administration that.

President Obama was introduced at his first speech after the stimulus package passed by the president of a solar power company.
His company is getting "stimulus" money from the package to stay afloat.

In my world, that's called a "bailout".

Re:What about my toaster? (1)

angelwolf71885 (1181671) | more than 5 years ago | (#27779907)

would anyone like some toast ( TALKY TOASTER RED DWARF )

Re:What about my toaster? (1)

palindrome (34830) | more than 5 years ago | (#27780007)

You know you're on to a loser when you have to state your pop culture reference in capitals.

Re:What about my toaster? (1)

Joe The Dragon (967727) | more than 5 years ago | (#27780199)

ISP like comcast will love to make you pay $5/m per system on top of $30 - $50 /m fee.

Re:What about my toaster? (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 5 years ago | (#27780493)

You use NAT. Same as you do for your pc and your gaming console and your mobile devices and etc. :)

Nothing gets fixed until it breaks (4, Insightful)

madbavarian (1316065) | more than 5 years ago | (#27779267)

Nothing gets fixed until it breaks so fully that people can't ignore it any longer. ARIN should just hand out the last of their IP assignment already and then we can move on with actually deploying IPv6.

Re:Nothing gets fixed until it breaks (5, Funny)

SnarfQuest (469614) | more than 5 years ago | (#27779365)

Just do a HDTV conversion. Give a specific date when IPV4 support will be dropped, then extend the date when the timeout gets close.

Re:Nothing gets fixed until it breaks (2, Insightful)

Anonymous Coward | more than 5 years ago | (#27779445)

A nit, I know, but DTV conversion had little to do with HD...

That's partially why so many idiots were confused.

Re:Nothing gets fixed until it breaks (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 5 years ago | (#27779963)

TRUE!! Japan(the people who developed HD over 20 years ago) still doesn't do digital.

Re:Nothing gets fixed until it breaks (4, Informative)

vivin (671928) | more than 5 years ago | (#27779509)

There are a number of corporations and organizations that own /8's

Here is a list [iana.org]

Here's a few from the list:

003/8 General Electric Company
004/8 Level 3 Communications, Inc.
008/8 Level 3 Communications, Inc.
012/8 AT&T Bell Laboratories
013/8 Xerox Corporation
015/8 Hewlett-Packard Company
016/8 Digital Equipment Corporation
017/8 Apple Computer Inc.
019/8 Ford Motor Company
034/8 Halliburton Company

Seriously... why does Ford Motor company need a /8?

The US government also owns a whole bunch of /8's

Instead of hogging these, they should just give them up. They don't need all these addresses.

Re:Nothing gets fixed until it breaks (4, Funny)

Anonymous Coward | more than 5 years ago | (#27779761)

Seriously... why does Ford Motor company need a /8?

They've been keeping it in reserve for a rainy day.

Do you know how much a /8 is worth in today's market? It could pull Ford out of its financial problems!

Re:Nothing gets fixed until it breaks (2, Funny)

jd (1658) | more than 5 years ago | (#27779909)

Nah. Ford already uses most of their /8 in assigning each nut and bolt in each of their cars its own IPv4 address.

Re:Nothing gets fixed until it breaks (4, Insightful)

Blue6 (975702) | more than 5 years ago | (#27780113)

A lot of the companies that have class A networks had them issued before CIDR. Also don't underestimate the size of some of these networks. Ford has a half dozen datacenters spread out around the world thousands of VOIP phones, Desktops / Laptops, routers, switches, AP, servers. Not to mention most modern manufacturing plants PLC's run on a IP network sure you will never use the whole space but do you really think they are going to re-IP a network that size. Ford also owns a class B network :)

Re:Nothing gets fixed until it breaks (4, Insightful)

Bandman (86149) | more than 5 years ago | (#27780225)

And there's absolutely no reason that those devices can't be assigned an address from the 10.x portion of RFC 1918. None at all, except for the magnitude of the problem.

They should have planned for that so, so long ago.

Re:Nothing gets fixed until it breaks (1)

tchuladdiass (174342) | more than 5 years ago | (#27780537)

What about when companies merge, or otherwise have to connect networks? Two companies using 10.x could have overlapping IPs.

Re:Nothing gets fixed until it breaks (2, Interesting)

Anonymous Coward | more than 5 years ago | (#27780245)

..do you really think they are going to re-IP a network that size.

If given proper notice that they will be losing the class A license, then I'm sure they would. There is almost no justification for a corporation to have public IP addresses for VOIP phones, Desktops, Laptops, and many network components (switches, routers, etc) which strictly reside on their internal network.

Re:Nothing gets fixed until it breaks (1)

Blue6 (975702) | more than 5 years ago | (#27780383)

execpt they are paying the fees for the range so they can use it as they see fit. Why should these companies be punished for ARIN's lack of planning.

Re:Nothing gets fixed until it breaks (1)

dew4au (804562) | more than 5 years ago | (#27779827)

Level 3 Probably uses a good bit of those /8s. I mean, they do have one of the largest backbone nets, and they use allocate their IPs to content providers on their networks.

Re:Nothing gets fixed until it breaks (3, Informative)

morcego (260031) | more than 5 years ago | (#27779865)

IBM used to use 9.0.0.0/8 address for their internal network. Computers that didn't have access to the internet or anything.

This was back in 1995, so I can't guarantee it is still true, but it is likely.

Re:Nothing gets fixed until it breaks (2, Insightful)

aynoknman (1071612) | more than 5 years ago | (#27779885)

Seriously... why does Ford Motor company need a /8?

They need it so they can sell it when they go into Chapter 11

Re:Nothing gets fixed until it breaks (3, Insightful)

timeOday (582209) | more than 5 years ago | (#27780305)

It's like land - what was initially given away to ranchers and farmers in vast swaths will now be sold back to us in ever-smaller and more expensive blocks.

Re:Nothing gets fixed until it breaks (5, Insightful)

Anonymous Coward | more than 5 years ago | (#27780507)

Go ahead, yank 'em all back. Worldwide, the five RIRs (AfriNIC, ARIN, APNIC, LACNIC, RIPE) go through 12-14 /8s per year. Don't give yourself a charley-horse patting yourself on the back because you managed to move out the exhaustion date by 8 months.

BTW, the US Government *gave back* several /8s.

IPv4 is terminal. Get over it and get your IPv6 on.

Re:Nothing gets fixed until it breaks (3, Insightful)

idiotnot (302133) | more than 5 years ago | (#27780807)

THIS. Mod A/C parent up.

Reclaiming class As only delays things slightly, and doesn't fix the inescapable math.

But it's much easier to bitch and point fingers at evil corporations like Ford, than it is to pick up a damn book and learn how IPv6 works.

Re:Nothing gets fixed until it breaks (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 5 years ago | (#27780631)

There are a number of corporations and organizations that own /8's

Here is a list [iana.org]

Here's a few from the list:

016/8 Digital Equipment Corporation

Must be an old list. DEC was purchased by Compaq a decade ago. Compaq has since been purchased by HP.

Re:Nothing gets fixed until it breaks (1)

DaleGlass (1068434) | more than 5 years ago | (#27780779)

Instead of hogging these, they should just give them up. They don't need all these addresses.

"Should"? Why exactly should they?

I thought America was the land of Capitalism, and as good capitalists of course they will keep them until the address space runs out, then make big bucks reselling the unused chunks.

Re:Nothing gets fixed until it breaks (1)

Just Some Guy (3352) | more than 5 years ago | (#27780811)

Here's a few from the list:

[snip 10 /8s]

OK, that takes care of 4% of the IPv4 address space. What's your next great idea?

I agree (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 5 years ago | (#27780503)

People have had plenty of warning already, they should just one Saturday give away the remaining IPv4 addresses. And perhaps several key organizations should turn off IPv4 on all equipment they control. Yes, it will cause plenty of havoc and people only have themselves to blame, and moreover can't expect the people who actually implement things (do actual work, as opposed to the PHB's) to work around the existing crap forever.

It's to try to get some attention (5, Interesting)

kevmeister (979231) | more than 5 years ago | (#27779409)

I just got back from the ARIN meeting this week and the letters are, indeed, a "scare tactic". Network providers keep reporting that PHBs won't spend any money on IPv6 even though engineers are begging for it. Most corporate officers probably think IP is only Intellectual Property and this is an attempt to draw their attention to the fact that the network world as they know it is going to end soon and that the only way to avoid serious problems is to either stop growing or to start IPv6 deployment. PHBs sometimes get the idea when they realize that not spending some money will lead to big problems in a few years. Others figure that if it's over a year away, it really does not matter because it won't impact their bonus this year, so it may not work, but we can hope.

Re:It's to try to get some attention (1)

jd (1658) | more than 5 years ago | (#27779941)

That makes sense, but really they would be better off just saying to customers "sorry, we have no bananas today" and telling them that they can get a great deal on IPv6 addresses instead.

(If the PHB's need to know more, IPv6 is like the GruntMaster 5,000 - including all necessary wormholing technology.)

Re:It's to try to get some attention (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 5 years ago | (#27780455)

kevmeister (979231)
...
I just got back from the ARIN meeting this week
...
the network world as they know it is going to end soon

Mitnick, is that you?

I want IPv6 support, but ... (3, Informative)

Midnight Thunder (17205) | more than 5 years ago | (#27779427)

I want IPv6 support, but there are lots of pieces still not in place. I am actually using Miredo (Teredo implementation) when I am on the move and Sixxs when I am at home. These are more stop-gap solutions and until the necessary entities start allowing to get on board properly.

My parents live in France and they are with Free.fr who offers IPv6 as a standard option. On the other hand I am living in Canada and not one of the service providers offer IPv6 in any shape or form. One questioned about it they blame their up-stream provider. Even if they are ready the only IPv6 ready router for the home is the Apple Airport Extreme, and even then there is a blocker issue for connecting to Sixxs.net (Apple's bug). Linksys, D-Link and Buffalo are still not ready with a public release and you are left trying to see if the version of DD-WRT you need for IPv6 supports your router. Chances are you will be looking at eBay for a router that has enough flash to support it.

Like the Swine Flu outbreak, I get the feeling that few entities are going to be rushing to do any work until there is media frenzied panic.

There is no killer application for IPv6, since its just infrastructure. On the other hand the lack of a NAT can make certain application solutions easier to implement, since you don't need to do any NAT busting or other fancy tricks. Of course since internal addresses are now all routable, you will certainly need to make sure that you have a real firewall on the gateway device.

Once you are on IPv6 you can start playing around with IPv6 torrent and http://ipv6.google.com/ [google.com] , if you are curious.

Re:I want IPv6 support, but ... (1)

entrigant (233266) | more than 5 years ago | (#27779505)

So then my linksys router with built in fully functioning out of the box 6to4 support is what... ? I didn't even know about it until I noticed I was connecting to ipv6 irc servers.

Re:I want IPv6 support, but ... (1)

Midnight Thunder (17205) | more than 5 years ago | (#27779637)

So then my linksys router with built in fully functioning out of the box 6to4 support is what... ? I didn't even know about it until I noticed I was connecting to ipv6 irc servers.

What model is that? Engineering probably didn't tell sales, since when I contacted them they said none of their routers support IPv6.

Re:I want IPv6 support, but ... (3, Insightful)

gbjbaanb (229885) | more than 5 years ago | (#27779853)

That 6to4 support [wikipedia.org] is bundling IPv6 packets and transmitting them inside an IPv4 packet. So technically, the poster is still using IPv4 with his linksys router.

I think the home router issue is the one that matters. I want IPv6, but simply cannot have it (unless I cough up lots of cash for a serious router). I think the home router manufacturers are missing something here, they just need to say they cannot release firmware updates, and that you need to buy a new router to get IPv6, which is obviously better. They then sell loads more routers.. I don't understand why they don't do this.

Mind you, a firmware update would be better for me :)

Re:I want IPv6 support, but ... (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 5 years ago | (#27780185)

Not sure about his but my friend has a RVS4000 [cisco.com] and it seems to have it, LAN does anyway.

Re:I want IPv6 support, but ... (1)

madbavarian (1316065) | more than 5 years ago | (#27779621)

If you are truly using IPv6 couldn't you just plug a plain old Ethernet switch into your cable modem or dsl modem?

(Well, I guess that assumes one is running an OS that has a firewall just as capable as the ones in home "routers".)

Re:I want IPv6 support, but ... (1)

jd (1658) | more than 5 years ago | (#27780001)

A layer 2 or layer 3 switch, yes. A router or a switch/router would have problems unless IPv6 is supported OR you are tunneling over IPv4.

Re:I want IPv6 support, but ... (1)

Bandman (86149) | more than 5 years ago | (#27780253)

I think your layer 3 switch would have problems unless it supported ipv6, too.

Re:I want IPv6 support, but ... (1)

jd (1658) | more than 5 years ago | (#27779981)

IPv4 is still gaining features that should have been in place to start off with. IPv6's biggest selling point is that it's designed to be retrofitted, whereas IPv4 is not.

Besides, if people were forced to use IPv6, how long do you REALLY think it'll take for the network companies to finish the protocol? A weekend at most, at this point. They're dragging their feet because R & D sees this as a cash cow they can milk forever if they never actually complete anything.

IPv6 is depressing... (3, Insightful)

wandazulu (265281) | more than 5 years ago | (#27779435)

...because whoever is in charge of it does such a crummy job of explaining what it is and why I should care, and more importantly, why my folks should care.

I got my router set up to use IPv6 (an Apple Time Capsule), and I went searching for some IPv6 love and found practically none. Yes I got to Google, and yes I found a few websites that seemed to do little more than blink(!) "hooray, you are connecting using IPv6! Your address is ..."

IPv6 needs both a killer app (IPv6-only Twitter, anyone?) and some ready-to-explain-why-you-can't-get-to-it documentation that will get the people to *demand* that they have IPv6 addresses.

Until then, it's a 32-bit address space world.

Re:IPv6 is depressing... (1)

jd (1658) | more than 5 years ago | (#27780021)

There's apparently free porn on offer in New Zealand for those who are using IPv6 as an incentive to switch.

Re:IPv6 is depressing... (1)

poopdeville (841677) | more than 5 years ago | (#27780353)

URL?

Re:IPv6 is depressing... (1)

gbjbaanb (229885) | more than 5 years ago | (#27780231)

IPv6 killer app... how about video-on-demand phone calls that appear on your TV set?

TVs are becoming internet-enabled, if each could be addressable, then you could add a webcam and use it as a scifi-style video phone, for free calls anywhere in the world.

You could also have your ISP push programmes to your set-top box instead of you going and fetching them.

The only 'killer apps' I can think of that'd make sense are for entertainment purposes; that are your ISP refusing to connect you to the internet because they have no IPs to hand out anymore.

Re:IPv6 is depressing... (1)

compro01 (777531) | more than 5 years ago | (#27780549)

. [ipv6experiment.com]

No killer app needed, just sensible migration path (2, Interesting)

Estanislao Martnez (203477) | more than 5 years ago | (#27780601)

IPv6 is depressing, because whoever is in charge of it does such a crummy job of explaining what it is and why I should care, and more importantly, why my folks should care.

Actually, I would claim that that's not a big deal. The big problem is that IPv6 just doesn't provide a sensible migration path from IPv4. The idea that we're all going to wake up one day and switch off IPv4 at once just doesn't cut it. More precisely, an IPv4 node just has no way of talking to an IPv6 node. If we built some sort of standardized IPv4-to-IPv6 NAT technology that was invisible to existing IPv4 nodes, then IPv6 could be adopted gradually and incrementally with minimal cost (the cost could be rolled into the cost of general network gear upgrades).

IPv4 Address Exhaustion Is Always Be 2 Years Away (4, Insightful)

afabbro (33948) | more than 5 years ago | (#27779443)

Case [slashdot.org] in point [slashdot.org] . Thought it was supposed to be 2010? Now it's 2011.

IPv4 addresses won't magically be exhausted one night. They'll just start getting more expensive.

Re:IPv4 Address Exhaustion Is Always Be 2 Years Aw (4, Funny)

Lord Ender (156273) | more than 5 years ago | (#27779541)

ARIN really is the most trustworthy source you could have for a claim like that, though. Sure, many have made the claim before, but this is the next best thing to having Jesus, Moses, Mohamed, Buddha, and Thor all sit down with you around a burning bush and explain the importance of implementing IPv6.

Re:IPv4 Address Exhaustion Is Always Be 2 Years Aw (1)

Blakey Rat (99501) | more than 5 years ago | (#27780075)

Which one of them set fire to the bush? I wanted to eat those blueberries!

Re:IPv4 Address Exhaustion Is Always Be 2 Years Aw (2, Funny)

characterZer0 (138196) | more than 5 years ago | (#27780627)

If the Pope declares ex cathedra that thou shalt use IPv6, I will convert to Catholicism immediately.

Re:IPv4 Address Exhaustion Is Always Be 2 Years Aw (3, Insightful)

georgewilliamherbert (211790) | more than 5 years ago | (#27779559)

They're already more expensive. The expense increase has been down in the noise for customers - that will no longer be true by the end of the year, and it will hurt by mid 2010.

IPv4 is no longer too cheap to meter. If that's not a business case for IPv6 I don't know what is.

Re:IPv4 Address Exhaustion Is Always Be 2 Years Aw (1)

fbjon (692006) | more than 5 years ago | (#27780605)

This all sounds like peak oil. Addresses won't run out, but the business case will magically spring up when IPv4 addresses become more expensive than implementing alternatives.

Re:IPv4 Address Exhaustion Is Always Be 2 Years Aw (1)

Ironchew (1069966) | more than 5 years ago | (#27780849)

To a monopoly, IPv4 is a better business case. The artificial scarcity of less than 2^32 addresses will keep the cash rolling in.

Re:IPv4 Address Exhaustion Is Always Be 2 Years Aw (1)

oojah (113006) | more than 5 years ago | (#27779691)

You're right. The ipv4 address report [potaroo.net] at potaroo is a prediction based on modelling and it does change. A while back I started recording the reports and plotting the changes in predictions. It's a bit disappointing that I didn't start before the world began to end because I bet the graph would be a much more interesting shape. Anyway, current predictioned date are getting further away - the number of days remaining at the time the report is made remains roughly constant.

Graphs at http://atchoo.org/ipv4/ [atchoo.org]

Re:IPv4 Address Exhaustion Is Always Be 2 Years Aw (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 5 years ago | (#27780209)

What would most likely happen is the backbones switch to IPv6, and then the whole IPv4 range can be NAT'd to end users. Most home routers all have the same IP address, 192.168.10.1, and they all run fine. The only difference is your "real" outside IP will be IPv6. Each ISP could assign the whole IPv4 range to their customers.

I would be more worried about IP ports, when computers and networks get fast enough to handle 65,535 connections at a time.

Re:IPv4 Address Exhaustion Is Always Be 2 Years Aw (1)

Bandman (86149) | more than 5 years ago | (#27780277)

Peak Oil for the internet :-)

As I keep pointing out (5, Insightful)

wowbagger (69688) | more than 5 years ago | (#27779479)

As I keep pointing out on each IPv6 story, there will be little motivation to move to IPv6 until you can hit major sites, like cnn.com and slashdot.org, using nothing but IPv6 packets.

We've made a bit of progress, in that now, if you have IPv6 connectivity to "the Internet", you can in theory do the name resolution entirely by IPv6 packets, now that the root name servers support IPv6.

Note to the "a little knowledge is a dangerous thing" crowd: yes, you can form an IPv6 packet with an IPv4 address, but that doesn't mean the target machine will actually be able to understand it - it is still a completely different packet type than an IPv4 packet.

So, does slashdot.org have IPv6 enabled? Does the colo housing slashdot.org's servers route IPv6 packets from the Internet to the slashdot.org servers? Can "the Internet" route IPv6 packets to the colo?

If a tech site like slashdot.org doesn't have the ability to handle IPv6 traffic, then why should I get all hot and bothered about trying to get IPv6? And if I'm not going to demand it, then why should my ISP spend the effort to supply it?

Re:As I keep pointing out (3, Insightful)

Ceiynt (993620) | more than 5 years ago | (#27779721)

Exactly. Just like the conversion from radio to television. Once enough stuff started to get snipped from the radio, like a lot of the serials and soaps, and started to be put on television, television took off. Start making Yahoo.com and Google.com junk with IPv4, and advertise on the page why you get such crappy service and why they should upgrade, in plain enough English to the non-tech people to understand. Then wait a few years for OEM computer to ship with IPv6 compliant NICs, and offer rebates or whatnot for IPv6 routers.
Or just do like the entertainment industry does, wait for the porn to be IPv6 enchanced, then IPv4 will be dead over night.

Re:As I keep pointing out (2, Funny)

gbjbaanb (229885) | more than 5 years ago | (#27779931)

Start making Yahoo.com and Google.com junk with IPv4

so *that's* Microsoft's plan to get some users for their search engine!

Re:As I keep pointing out (3, Insightful)

Bandman (86149) | more than 5 years ago | (#27780325)

I'm not sure you could get the tail to shake the dog like that.

Those sites are important because they are easy to use and good at what they do (ok, Google is, anyway).

Users typically follow the path of least resistance. If Microsoft Live Search was the only search engine available to people who had ipv4 and ISPs were still only handing out /32 addresses, guess which search engine those people would use.

Of course, that wouldn't happen, because Google and Yahoo would retain their /32 addresses, because they're businesses designed to get money, not force social or technological change.

ipv6 (1)

robpoe (578975) | more than 5 years ago | (#27779615)

I can get IPV6 from my co-lo provider, but my server control panel (Plesk) doesn't support it ..

So I can serve up "You see this page because you just installed Apache" ... in IPv6..

(wooo!)

We've heard this same song for years (0, Redundant)

flipper9 (109877) | more than 5 years ago | (#27779617)

Every few months, another prediction comes out that IPv4 is doomed and that we are going to run out of addresses. Those dire predictions never come true, and the predicted date keeps getting extended. When are we truly going to run out? Nobody knows. What will happen is that IPv6 won't become a priority until things start breaking. That's just how it goes.

Class A Address Space (3, Interesting)

Anonymous Coward | more than 5 years ago | (#27779675)

How about they take back the Class A address space owned by companies who probably aren't even utilizing it. Here's a list of a few companies who have class A licenses and you wonder how much of it they are even using:

General Electric 3.0.0.0 - 3.255.255.255
IBM 9.0.0.0 - 9.255.255.255
Xerox Palo Alto Research Center 13.0.0.0 - 13.255.255.255
Hewlett-Packard 15.0.0.0 - 15.255.255.255
Hewlett-Packard (originally DEC, then Compaq) 16.0.0.0 - 16.255.255.255
Apple Inc. 17.0.0.0 - 17.255.255.255
Massachusetts Institute of Technology 18.0.0.0 - 18.255.255.255
Ford Motor Company 19.0.0.0 - 19.255.255.255
Royal Signals and Radar Establishment 25.0.0.0 - 25.255.255.255
Halliburton Company 34.0.0.0 - 34.255.255.255

Why the hell do some of these companies even need 16+ million addresses? I can't see them utilizing the space available, but maybe someone here can enlighten me on how that is done (aside from trying to justify a public IP address for every workstation).

Re:Class A Address Space (1)

Bandman (86149) | more than 5 years ago | (#27780363)

They missed the RFC 1918 [faqs.org] memo

Re:Class A Address Space (2, Informative)

azrider (918631) | more than 5 years ago | (#27780445)

Why the hell do some of these companies even need 16+ million addresses?

Can't answer to the others, but IBM uses it's address space for all of it's equipment worldwide (desktops, labs, wireless, etc). All of the equipment is accessible via internal LAN's for each and every building IBM is in (and access can be had via VLAN if approved). The others may have similar needs.

Re:Class A Address Space (1)

LackThereof (916566) | more than 5 years ago | (#27780453)

a public IP address for every workstation

Yeah, that's right. Even if they're on a private LAN, or firewalled to hell, all the workstations are using legitimate public IPs. And back in the olden days, when most of these companies bought their blocks, if you needed more IPs than a class B there was no other option. Remember, NAT was still a long ways from being trivial to implement back then.

And it's not just workstations. I imagine for Ford, all their assembly robots have their own IP addresses. You'd need a few thousand IPs per factory. Similar situation at Halliburton, I bet there's thousands of network connected controllers in a single chemical plant.

How about they take back the Class A address space owned by companies who probably aren't even utilizing it

Sure you can say "they don't need them", but so what. They've been purchased. You can't just take back their address space.

Car analogy: That's like telling a soccer mom that because doesn't NEED her mammoth Hummer H2 to go buy a gallon of milk, that you are going to repossess it and give her a Chevy Aveo5 instead.
Sure, it might be wasteful, but it's their legal right to own and use what they have purchased.

I'm sure once we're out of IPv4 addresses, some of these companies with old class A allocations will start selling off chunks of them for a tidy profit. But until that day, they've been purchased and allocated, and are not coming back.

Re:Class A Address Space (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 5 years ago | (#27780659)

None of these companies "own" IP space because IP numbers aren't property. They have a justified need for the /8 and that is why they have it. All that is required to get and retain a /8 is proving need, and these companies did that when /8's were still available.

At the burn rate that the world's RIR's are using up /8's, even if you retrieved these /8's from these companies through the claim that they don't anymore meet the burden of proof of showing need for a /8, (which would be possible) your not going to do much more than add a few years to the deadline, then we would be out of IP numbers again. And if you were to do something like that you would merely end up causing a lot of fighting and arguing from these companies which would undermine the effort to go to IPv6.

People need to face the fact that the Internet is BIG and I mean REALLY REALLY BIG. I think it's far larger than most people's imaginations can handle, anymore.

Re:Class A Address Space (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 5 years ago | (#27780847)

Even if they're on a private LAN, or firewalled to hell, all the workstations are using legitimate public IPs.

All workstations needing Internet access might be using public IPs but you can take hundreds or thousands of workstations that will only utilize a Class C network using NAT/PAT. There are many other reasons that workstations or other devices won't don't need access to the Internet, so if they are using properly assigned RFC 1918 addresses then they aren't ultimately using public IP addresses.

I imagine for Ford, all their assembly robots have their own IP addresses ... Similar situation at Halliburton, I bet there's thousands of network connected controllers in a single chemical plant.

If they have equipment like this assigned public IP addresses, then the government would be doing everyone a favor by buying back the Class A address space. I don't care if they have firewalls in between. If someone has a network connected controller at a chemical plant with a public IP address, that is just retarded (although I wouldn't put it past government contractors to do something like that). Maybe 15 years ago that made sense - if at all.

I'm sure once we're out of IPv4 addresses, some of these companies with old class A allocations will start selling off chunks of them for a tidy profit. But until that day, they've been purchased and allocated, and are not coming back.

If there became a serious issue with IPv4 address depletion (which isn't the case right now), and these companies refuse to hand over their Class A licenses or try to charge an exorbitant fee for them, then the government can always just use the eminent domain claim and take back the address space.

Regardless of how the address space changes hands, I still think it should be done in a calculated manner so that these companies have the time to move all the necessary devices to private IP addresses.

Re:Class A Address Space (1)

gregg (42218) | more than 5 years ago | (#27780619)

Ford Motor Company 19.0.0.0 - 19.255.255.255

The addresses held by Ford might open up soon.

Re:Class A Address Space (5, Informative)

drmerope (771119) | more than 5 years ago | (#27780749)

Right. Most people are sitting on unaddressable addresses. The ANT census [isi.edu] is pretty explicit on this point. Roughly 4% of the IPv4 address space is in use, 30% is not allocated at all, and the remainder (66%) is trapped due to inefficient allocations.

Re:Class A Address Space (1)

POTSandPANS (781918) | more than 5 years ago | (#27780759)

Sure they could take them back, but there would be no point. Assuming they got back *all* the IPs from the companies on that list, they would get enough IPs to buy us maybe a few months at most.

Re:Class A Address Space (1)

DaleGlass (1068434) | more than 5 years ago | (#27780839)

How about they take back the Class A address space owned by companies who probably aren't even utilizing it. Here's a list of a few companies who have class A licenses and you wonder how much of it they are even using:

How would they take it back, after having sold it?

Should Russia just take back Alaska, because some time back they sold too much land too cheaply?

I'm afraid that giving somebody too much of something and regretting it years later doesn't entitle you to get it back.

Cool (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 5 years ago | (#27779683)

At least we got two more years. Then we can start using phone numbers. IPv6 is insane, unless everybody carries their own DNS cache. Talk about vulnerable!...

Set the Way-Back Machine 2 years... (2, Interesting)

volxdragon (1297215) | more than 5 years ago | (#27779687)

...wait, didn't they say the same thing then??!?

Why not? (1)

cmtonkinson (1307355) | more than 5 years ago | (#27779707)

It's not just some small alarmist group raising a bell over nothing. We will run out of IPv4 at some point. Some estimates say two years, some say eight. Could be more, could be less. At any rate, we WILL run out. Why not adopt a clearly better alternative while we've got time? How can it be disadvantageous?

We need ipv4.5 (1, Interesting)

Twillerror (536681) | more than 5 years ago | (#27779899)

I think ipV6 is to much of a move. IP addresses are nice and easy to remember like phone numbers. Yes IPv6 has short hand, but it is still harder.

Why couldn't we just add another octect. So my new IP is 1.24.101.1.15. That gives use 2^40 (~1 trillion) versus 2^128(unfuckincredibly big). We made way to big of a jump.

There is also virtually no need to upgrade to v6 for internal communications. We have 10, 172 and 192 which is more then enough for even the largest companies.

I guess we are going to become even more dependent on DNS for everything. I can't imagine someone actually typing a full ipV6 hex address. Mabye the easy ones ::::::b00b:8008

Re:We need ipv4.5 (4, Insightful)

georgewilliamherbert (211790) | more than 5 years ago | (#27780059)

Why couldn't we just add another octect. So my new IP is 1.24.101.1.15

Fortunately, nobody in their right mind would let Slashdot design a new network protocol.

Re:We need ipv4.5 (4, Interesting)

Bandman (86149) | more than 5 years ago | (#27780541)

Awesome idea. We'll give Google 1/40, The government can 2/40, IBM will get 3/40, etc etc etc

Same problem. The ipv6 is not a "bad" idea, it's just sort of like...imagine in 1950s if the phone company decided "we could go with area codes to subdivide numbers to prevent running out, or we could use letters AND numbers".

Can you imagine the upheaval?

In a lot of ways, that would have been even easier to deal with, because everyone's phone was owned by AT&T. New phones could have been issued without too much problem.

No, imagine it instead in the mid 1980s. Ma Bell doesn't own the phones any more, in fact there are tons of cheap phones available, cell phones are starting to come out, and there are still rotary AND push button phones.

That's more like what the IPv6 switch is like. Do you give the new people 2 numbers, so that grandma can still call them? How long is it before you stop accepting legacy phones that only have 10 dialing options? How the hell do you get DTMF to work with 36 numbers? Do we need area codes? It would be weird without them, but we don't really need them.

The equivalent of these questions are still being asked. Just a couple of months ago, there was a huge to-do about NAT and IPv6. "IPv6 is a world without NAT". The hell it is. My internal routers don't get publicly routable IP addresses, even if I have to NAT back to IPv4.

When the wrinkles get ironed out, we're going to wonder how we ever did without it. During the transition, it's going to be hell for everyone (with the possible exception of the clueless end user, who might have to buy a new router at most).

Re:We need ipv4.5 (4, Interesting)

snaz555 (903274) | more than 5 years ago | (#27780877)

Just a couple of months ago, there was a huge to-do about NAT and IPv6. "IPv6 is a world without NAT". The hell it is. My internal routers don't get publicly routable IP addresses, even if I have to NAT back to IPv4.

I agree with the sentiment - however, it's one of policy, not mechanism. NAT is a pretty poor substitute for a router that implements policy (known as a firewall). NAT has literally an all-or-nothing granularity. For instance, I might want to specify that an internal host can enable BitTorrent via UPnP, but under no circumstances can CIFS be allowed through - in either direction. An internal host sending a CIFS solicitation out does not mean a pinhole should be opened and some set of hosts (depending on cone of restriction) free to respond. NAT is just not a practical policy tool. It's an address space recovery tool. Reverse NAT, however, has some redeeming qualities for load balancing and failover - I'm not versed well enough in IPv6 to understand how they'd be implemented without NAT. (Anycast addressing, I suppose.)

But you can implement NAT in IPv6 just as much as in IPv4 if you wish. A router could appear to have a single interface ID and translate to/from that. It's largely unnecessary though since instead of a handful of IPv4 addresses you have an entire 64-bit space to yourself (and maybe even the SLN prefix, not sure about that).

IPv6 really is a major cleanup and simplification from IPv4. I'm slightly disconcerted by the increased dependency on DNS however.

How much of ipv4 is dark right now? (3, Insightful)

Marrow (195242) | more than 5 years ago | (#27780267)

If we had a measurement that said that only 25% of the entire address space is in use at any one time, then maybe would would rethink our choices.

Re:How much of ipv4 is dark right now? (1)

Wesley Felter (138342) | more than 5 years ago | (#27780597)

If there's no way to convince people to give up "dark" address space then it doesn't matter.

Why would businesses care? (2, Interesting)

OrangeTide (124937) | more than 5 years ago | (#27780375)

I have 6 IPs just for personal use. Every big networking company that controls some portion of the Internet is set for IPv4 space for a while. There just isn't room for anyone new to enter into the market. This is a huge advantage for those already established companies. I don't think they intentionally planned it this way, but the scarcity of address is a short term advantage for too many businesses for us to simply ignore that and keep pushing IPv6 as if is of some automatic benefit to everyone. Don't get me wrong, I would be thrilled if Comcast and others moved me over to IPv6. Maybe with a massive address space scanning IP blocks for SSH logins and open firewalls would no longer be as a productive use of botnet time.

Why v4 - v6? (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 5 years ago | (#27780643)

Why no IPv5?

Why? (1)

NetCow (117556) | more than 5 years ago | (#27780763)

They can pry IPv4 from my tired, RSI-affected-due-to-:-overuse fingers. I'm not about to rely on DNS when debugging and testing my networks. Sure, it's a petty, localized, small scale view, but I don't care.

Schools and universities should start now. (1)

SigNuZX728 (635311) | more than 5 years ago | (#27780777)

Most schools and universities are not affected so much by the economy, and most schools and universities don't need a business case to make this switch.
Load More Comments
Slashdot Login

Need an Account?

Forgot your password?