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!

Comcast To Bring IPv6 To Residential US In 2010

CmdrTaco posted more than 5 years ago | from the more-ips-to-rate-limit dept.

The Internet 281

darthcamaro writes "We all know that IPv4 address space is almost gone — but we also know that no major US carrier has yet migrated its consumer base, either. Comcast is now upping the ante a bit and has now said that they are seriously gearing up for IPv6 residential broadband deployment soon. 'Comcast plans to enter into broadband IPv6 technical trials later this year and into 2010,' Barry Tishgart, VP of Internet Services for Comcast said. 'Planning for general deployment is underway.'"

cancel ×

281 comments

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

Proud to be a Comcast customer? (4, Funny)

csnydermvpsoft (596111) | more than 5 years ago | (#28373889)

I never thought I'd say this, but I'm glad that I'm a Comcast customer!

(Please excuse me while I go wash out my mouth with soap)

Re:Proud to be a Comcast customer? (1)

tttonyyy (726776) | more than 5 years ago | (#28374183)

Now that Comcast have bought into this whole "IPV6" thing us geeks have been falsely feeding them for years, we can all be off on the other part of the internet using our hushed-up IPV256 network (every fundamental particle in the universe needs an IP) and sniggering at their (now isolated) backwardness. ;)

Re:Proud to be a Comcast customer? (2)

Fallon (33975) | more than 5 years ago | (#28374609)

I hate to say it, but I agree. As bad as all the trash talking on Comcast is, I've never had a problem. Setup was easy. The 15-20 minute call to swap out my modem for a $15 one I found at a thrift store was straight forward and easy. The only 2 real problems I had was figuring out the modem will only send out DHCP for 1 device (when you put in your firewall/router, you just need to power cycle the modem so it forgets about your PC), and the fact my dam $1,000 Cisco 1760 was the bottleneck in my network connection (replaced with a !#@$* $150 Linksys). And only one of those can remotely be called a Comcast issue.

I've never had a single connection issue in the 4 odd months I've had the service. And now I'm looking forward to messing with IPv6.

Re:Proud to be a Comcast customer? (2, Informative)

Macrat (638047) | more than 5 years ago | (#28374873)

I hate to say it, but I agree. As bad as all the trash talking on Comcast is, I've never had a problem. Setup was easy. The 15-20 minute call to swap out my modem for a $15 one I found at a thrift store was straight forward and easy.

Don't you consider having to make that phone call in the first place a problem?

How about their "support tools" are IE based that won't work in any browser on any platform?

And my current issue with Comcast right now is being in California and Comast routing the IP network cross country to New Jersey at 1/4 the bandwidth I had when they were routing through San Francisco.

Re:Proud to be a Comcast customer? (1)

David_W (35680) | more than 5 years ago | (#28375067)

The 15-20 minute call to swap out my modem for a $15 one I found at a thrift store was straight forward and easy.

Don't you consider having to make that phone call in the first place a problem?

What's the alternative? I don't think they can just tell whose house a particular modem on their network is located in. I'd imagine they have to tie the MAC back to your account somehow, and the phone call is how they do that.

Re:Proud to be a Comcast customer? (1)

mmclean (29486) | more than 5 years ago | (#28375189)

Not the original poster, but ....

I hate to say it, but I agree. As bad as all the trash talking on Comcast is, I've never had a problem. Setup was easy. The 15-20 minute call to swap out my modem for a $15 one I found at a thrift store was straight forward and easy.

Don't you consider having to make that phone call in the first place a problem?

Nope, not in the slightest. I would expect to have to call to initialize service - as I do for cell phones, pizza delivery, etc.

How about their "support tools" are IE based that won't work in any browser on any platform?

Never need to use them, never bothered installing them. I've seen from someone else's connection what they are and it's nothing I can't do on my own without them (ping, traceroute, search comcast.com help files, etc.). Those Comcast tools exist for the non-Slashdot crowd.

And my current issue with Comcast right now is being in California and Comast routing the IP network cross country to New Jersey at 1/4 the bandwidth I had when they were routing through San Francisco.

My Jacksonville connection routes through Atlanta, my NJ connection yrs ago routed through somewhere in NY/NJ IIRC. My bandwidth has been fine in both places.

Looking forward to IP6 also (though I'll have to get rid of my $100 cheap router for a "real" one)

Re:Proud to be a Comcast customer? (1, Flamebait)

RoFLKOPTr (1294290) | more than 5 years ago | (#28375341)

Don't you consider having to make that phone call in the first place a problem?

How does that even make sense? Of course you're gonna have to call them... they don't give away internet for free, so yes you have to talk to them to have your modem registered to the account so that the DHCP server will talk to you. I think it's awesome that they let him use a third-party modem at all.

Frankly, I love Comcast. Yeah, they have a tendency to be jewish, but they're a huge corporation. Yeah, they have outages, but who the hell doesn't? Yeah, they were throttling peoples' torrents, but I never experienced them throttling mine so I don't really give a damn. I've never had any real problems with Comcast. Their outsourced phone support sucks, but you only get that about half the time, so you just have to ask the person who gives him a paycheck and tell him to transfer you to a Comcast call center.

I really don't see why so many people have a problem with Comcast. And I mean, problems with Comcast as a company, not with regards to your stupid commie philosophy big corporations are bad bullshit, because we are a nation built upon Capitalism, and we always will be, and even with all the problems of Capitalism it's way better than Communism (see also Russia).

Re:Proud to be a Comcast customer? (3, Informative)

langelgjm (860756) | more than 5 years ago | (#28375351)

FWIW, I got their business-class internet and have been pretty happy with it. You pay a small premium over the consumer-oriented service (no 6 month introductory rate, and $17 / mo higher than the standard consumer rate), but they specifically told me there's no cap (and I haven't had any issues with that). Customer service is also separate from home users, which is great - short hold times, when I once had a problem, they sent someone out the next morning to fix it.

Re:Proud to be a Comcast customer? (1)

QuantumRiff (120817) | more than 5 years ago | (#28374677)

Its a money saver for them. Why have a Cable TV infrastructure, and an IP Infrastructure. Think how much bandwidth they could offer if they used the entire coax connection for network. With IPv6, you make each tv channel a separate Multicast broadcast address in your network, and then the end users just subscribes to a multicast, then unsubscribes when they change channels.

Re:Proud to be a Comcast customer? (3, Informative)

jmilne (121521) | more than 5 years ago | (#28375207)

Because there's no such thing as IPv4 multicast... Oh, wait. That's exactly what cable companies have already been doing with switched digital. Multicast isn't the main reason a cable company would go with IPv6. The biggest problem Comcast (and other cable companies) has is that your cable modem gets two, and sometimes three IP addresses, let alone all those set-top boxes doing that switched digital. One to manage it, one to give you your "public" IP, and perhaps a third for your phone. 24 bits (10.0.0.0/8) only gives you 16 million addresses, and that's assuming you're utilizing them rather effectively. They're probably using the 172.16.0.0/12 for their internal network, but even so, that only gets you an extra million addresses. Look at the number of customers Comcast has, and you begin to see the problem they have just with addressing all those cable modems and set-top boxes.

Don't expect to be getting your own IPv6 address any time soon. Most likely, they're going to roll it out for managing all those devices first, and you'll still be assigned an IPv4 address for your Internet connectivity.

Re:Proud to be a Comcast customer? (1)

Andy Dodd (701) | more than 5 years ago | (#28375239)

I believe this already exists for cable systems w/o IP Multicast - It's called switched digital video.

That said, if they implemented multicast out to and through the backbone, it could save a LOT of upstream bandwidth from user P2P apps.

Imagine if all subscribers to a torrent could receive multicast from the seeder, as opposed to now where the seeder gives peers content and they forward it on. Most P2P is effectively "ghetto multicast", with lack of backbone participation severely reducing efficiency.

Re:Proud to be a Comcast customer? (1)

Danathar (267989) | more than 5 years ago | (#28375307)

You've got that right!

May NAT die a horrible and torturous death.

Asprin (2, Insightful)

Kid Zero (4866) | more than 5 years ago | (#28373907)

Do they make enough painkillers to deal with the headaches this'll cause?

Otherwise: Good Luck, guys! You'll need it.

Re:Asprin (2, Interesting)

Techman83 (949264) | more than 5 years ago | (#28373987)

Meh, good on 'em. Gotta start some time! The longer we leave it, the worse it will get. IPv6 isn't really a big deal at a protocol level, it's just all the stuff that isn't IPv4 ready and IPv6 -> IPv4 tunnel or Dual Stack will sort that out...

Re:Asprin (2, Funny)

Shakrai (717556) | more than 5 years ago | (#28374217)

Do they make enough painkillers to deal with the headaches this'll cause?

Maybe somebody told them that IPV6 makes it easier to inject fake RST packets into TCP connections ;)

It's Comcastic (2, Interesting)

slashtivus (1162793) | more than 5 years ago | (#28373911)

I have Comcast. Typing ipconfig into my command prompt returns IPV6 addresses.

I did not RTFA but it seems to me that they have already started with this in 2009.

Re:It's Comcastic (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 5 years ago | (#28374101)

For those in California, Surewest has been doing this, on their fiber at least for the last year or two, maybe longer. I haven't gotten much use out of it since I'm still running an older Linksys router which can only pull IPv4 addresses, but when I hooked my computer up directly a few months ago it was giving out IPv6 addresses via DHCPv6.

Re:It's Comcastic (4, Interesting)

quazee (816569) | more than 5 years ago | (#28374191)

Are you sure these are not 6to4 addresses (2002:<your_v4_IP>::xxx)?
By default, Vista and Win7 will automatically allocate a 6to4 address for each non-private IPv4 address configured on the computer.
(since you mentioned ipconfig and not ifconfig, I assume you are using Windows)

Re:It's Comcastic (1)

dascritch (808772) | more than 5 years ago | (#28374333)

Saying hi from 2a01:e35:2f1e:a290:21a:92ff:feb8:bfa8/64
thank you free.Fr

Re:It's Comcastic (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 5 years ago | (#28375319)

I just pulled this from my Linux server, which sits directly behind the Comcast Cable modem. (redacted where appropriate)

$ ifconfig
Link encap:Ethernet HWaddr 00:**:**:**:**:**
inet addr:67.***.***.** Bcast:255.255.255.255 Mask:255.255.240.0
inet6 addr: fe80::***:****:****:****/64 Scope:Link

Re:It's Comcastic (3, Informative)

bjackson1 (953136) | more than 5 years ago | (#28374329)

Are you directly on Comcast or are you behind a router?

I have a WRT54G running Tomato and Comcast gives it a IPv4, and Tomato assigns IPv6 to my internal network.

Re:It's Comcastic (1)

jonfr (888673) | more than 5 years ago | (#28374415)

Try going to Sixxs.net (IPv6 ready) and see if you connect with a Global IPv6 address or not. Local-Link IPv6 is just your standard IPv6 that comes with Windows XP/Vista, it is not good for anything that I know of.

Re:It's Comcastic (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 5 years ago | (#28374987)

Much to my surprise when I visited that site I was greeted with the message "You've got IPv6!"

For the record, I'm a Comcast user in Jacksonville, Florida. And now that I think of it, not so long ago my connection when out and when I called they said something about an upgrade.

Re:It's Comcastic (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 5 years ago | (#28374651)

Vista has Teredo adapters that allow IPV6 over IPV4

Re:It's Comcastic (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 5 years ago | (#28375265)

If the machine is internet-facing and the IPv6 address starts with 2002, that IP was automatically configured. If your IPv6 starts with 2001:, then it's most likely Teredo, (assumed-- since you said you didn't configure anything..either way it has nothing to do with Comcast and everything to do with IPv6 technologies in the Windows operating system. Thanks

Comcast Need to Suck My Dick (-1, Troll)

Anonymous Coward | more than 5 years ago | (#28373923)

Get on your knees. You know what to do.

Good news.. (1, Insightful)

Manip (656104) | more than 5 years ago | (#28373925)

That's great news for the people within the trial area. They will have much more free time to, you know, go out and meet women. Since now a ton of web-sites break when they attempt to visit them.

If it was just a matter of software updates, but alas there are mountains of sites that are literally hard-coded to store IPv4 addresses and you get a nice PHP error when you attempt to visit them.

IPv6 is the new Y2K.

[citation needed] (3, Funny)

XanC (644172) | more than 5 years ago | (#28374509)

[citation needed]

Re:Good news.. (1)

vivimage (990766) | more than 5 years ago | (#28374631)

Ipv6 would run as a dual stack so unless your retarded and set AAA records or ipv6 access there will be ZERO PROBLEMS if you do you suffer from a layer 8 problem

Re:Good news.. (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 5 years ago | (#28374801)

Could be layer 9, too.

Re:Good news.. (4, Informative)

Just Some Guy (3352) | more than 5 years ago | (#28374765)

If it was just a matter of software updates, but alas there are mountains of sites that are literally hard-coded to store IPv4 addresses and you get a nice PHP error when you attempt to visit them.

I guess I live a sheltered life, because I've been using IPv4 and IPv6 in parallel for about 7 years and I've never had a site break like that.

As a user, what do I care? (4, Funny)

BadAnalogyGuy (945258) | more than 5 years ago | (#28373933)

As long as DNS works fine, and I can access all my favorite porn sites, I don't care what is going on under the covers.

For all I know, it could be hamsters squeaking in HyperCard. As a user, it really doesn't matter.

You've got the protcol (4, Funny)

sakdoctor (1087155) | more than 5 years ago | (#28373979)

Now buy the T-shirt.
There's no place like ::1 (0:0:0:0:0:0:0:1)

Re:You've got the protcol (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 5 years ago | (#28374817)

There's no place like localhost?

Re:You've got the protcol (1)

Palshife (60519) | more than 5 years ago | (#28375157)

You. Turn in your geek card. Now.

Re:You've got the protcol (1)

Chris Mattern (191822) | more than 5 years ago | (#28375179)

Oh, for heaven's sake.

Just say, "There's no place like localhost."

You have an /etc/hosts file for a *reason*, you know.

what about caps? (5, Funny)

gandhi_2 (1108023) | more than 5 years ago | (#28373983)

Will comcast unveil a "tiered plan" whereby you only get the first 5 groups of four hexadecimal digits at the base price, with prices increasing up to 8?

I still don't like IPv6 (1, Insightful)

tjstork (137384) | more than 5 years ago | (#28373989)

IPv6 is like the phone company saying, hey, we have a (aaa) eee-nnnn system doesn't have enough room, so let's replace it with a system that has 20 digits.

It just sucks to use for consumers, making everyone else's life more complicated just to simplify it for the service providers.

I would prefer an addressing system that simplifies life for me.

Re:I still don't like IPv6 (4, Interesting)

Timothy Brownawell (627747) | more than 5 years ago | (#28374241)

IPv6 is like the phone company saying, hey, we have a (aaa) eee-nnnn system doesn't have enough room, so let's replace it with a system that has 20 digits.

It just sucks to use for consumers, making everyone else's life more complicated just to simplify it for the service providers.

I would prefer an addressing system that simplifies life for me.

What it's supposed to mean is that every computer can have a public address. So if you sign up with one of the dynamic DNS providers (which will probably be integrated with your OS fairly soon) you should be able to share pictures and things from your own computer without having to upload them to somewhere, or be able to log in remotely to look at some file (private) you forgot to bring with you, or any number of other things (fewer firewall errors on p2p networks? true p2p voip, without needing to sign up with a service that lets you punch holes in NAT?). This would also work without the dynamic DNS provider, but the URL would look uglier.

Most likely, this would also lead to relaxing the typical rule ISPs tend to have against running servers on home connections. They can't really forbid something that gets built into the OS like these sorts of features probably will.

Re:I still don't like IPv6 (5, Insightful)

characterZer0 (138196) | more than 5 years ago | (#28374489)

They can't really forbid something that gets built into the OS like these sorts of features probably will.

Of course they can, and they will.

Re:I still don't like IPv6 (1)

Timothy Brownawell (627747) | more than 5 years ago | (#28374791)

They can't really forbid something that gets built into the OS like these sorts of features probably will.

Of course they can, and they will.

Sure, they can... just like they could and did RST your bittorrent connections, or throttle/cap traffic to services that compete with their services.

Until people get pissed because they now know what's being taken away, and maybe get congress or the FCC or FTC involved.

Re:I still don't like IPv6 (1)

edmicman (830206) | more than 5 years ago | (#28374621)

So instead of going to flickr I have to know and maintain all of my friends' computer addresses? In what, an address book that I store on my computer? What if I'm at a friend's house and want to show them another friend's picture, but they don't know the address?

I agree there are good reasons to go to v6, but directly accessing every device via a public address is not the answer, unless it's made really REALLY transparent and easy to use. Who's going to manage that? The OS?

Re:I still don't like IPv6 (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 5 years ago | (#28374721)

Windows will do it through the Windows Live ID. They're already geared towards it. They want to manage your everything.

Re:I still don't like IPv6 (3, Insightful)

MaerD (954222) | more than 5 years ago | (#28374253)

It's slightly worse. It's more like the phone company going "we can only handle phone numbers from (000)000-0000 to (255)255-2555" and instead of going "Hey.. let's try making go up to (999) 999-9999 and maintain the pattern everyone knows, or even say adding another set of numbers to make 255(255)255-2555 available, let's change it all up into some long string people can only half pronounce and you have to be a telephone repairman to understand... your new phone number is now ab823:fff::324223 and your neighbor is ab823:fff:731:823:324223". Can you imagine the confusion?

I never liked ipv6 is you end up with addresses like 2001:0db8:85a3:0000:0000:8a2e:0370:7334 that can also be written as 2001:db8:85a3::8a2e:370:7334. Trying to get "what's your ip address?" when doing telephone technical support is going to be nightmarish. Not just from the fact it's now a long hex string, but also from a complete lack of understanding by users, much less some level 1's I've dealt with.

Heck, just try diagnosing a user who "can't get to the internet" and it turns out to be a wrong dns server entry. It's hard enough to get them to go to google's ip now.

Re:I still don't like IPv6 (1)

slimjim8094 (941042) | more than 5 years ago | (#28375287)

No, it's like saying there's 6 billion people in the world and 000-000-0000 through 999-999-9999 isn't enough to fit every telephone, fax, and modem in the world, so let's make it longer. At the same time, instead of dialing this crazy long phone number we'll never run out of digits for, you just pick up the dial and say "Joe Moriarity down the street, second floor bedroom" or "Comcast billing" - both of which have no lasting relation to the actual digits.

Not nearly so bad as you make out. A string of digits doesn't mean anything to humans, who you're calling does.

Re:I still don't like IPv6 (1)

Leebert (1694) | more than 5 years ago | (#28374315)

It's more than that. For example, a big part of ipv6 is trading off some degree of address portability for routing efficiency. And stateless autoconfiguration. And ipsec. Address deprecation. Mobile ipv6.

There's lots of advantages. (Granted a few of the advantages end up being disadvantages...)

Re:I still don't like IPv6 (5, Funny)

oldspewey (1303305) | more than 5 years ago | (#28374367)

I would prefer an addressing system that simplifies life for me

Agreed. What I'd really like to see is some kind of naming protocol so I don't have to remember all these long strings of numbers separated by dots. It would be awesome if internet addresses were identified by an alphanumeric name, then when I use that name there is a server somewhere that figures out what IP address that name is really pointing to.

I bet if everyone here at 216.34.181.45 put their minds to it we could even come up with something here.

Re:I still don't like IPv6 (-1)

TuaAmin13 (1359435) | more than 5 years ago | (#28374515)

I would prefer an addressing system that simplifies life for me

Agreed. What I'd really like to see is some kind of naming protocol so I don't have to remember all these long strings of numbers separated by dots. It would be awesome if internet addresses were identified by an alphanumeric name, then when I use that name there is a server somewhere that figures out what IP address that name is really pointing to.

I bet if everyone here at 216.34.181.45 put their minds to it we could even come up with something here.

You mean like DNS?

Re:I still don't like IPv6 (3, Funny)

TuaAmin13 (1359435) | more than 5 years ago | (#28374547)

Crap. That was one of those slashdot comments that don't really require a response.

Feel free to whoosh! me.

Re:I still don't like IPv6 (4, Funny)

silent_artichoke (973182) | more than 5 years ago | (#28375045)

That was one of those slashdot comments that don't really require a whoosh.

Re:I still don't like IPv6 (1)

Just Some Guy (3352) | more than 5 years ago | (#28374867)

IPv6 is like the phone company saying, hey, we have a (aaa) eee-nnnn system doesn't have enough room, so let's replace it with a system that has 20 digits.

How often do you enter IP addresses directly?

It just sucks to use for consumers, making everyone else's life more complicated just to simplify it for the service providers.

How so? I'd be surprised if most consumers ever noticed.

But there's so much space for stuff like... (1)

istartedi (132515) | more than 5 years ago | (#28375053)

...IP addresses that spell things out with the available characters and number.

When I was messing around with the tunnel brokers a few years ago to develop some stuff that was supposed to be IPv6 ready, I saw plenty of addresses that had dead:feed and of course, the ever popular dead:beef in the logs.

Besides, how often do you put IPs in anyway?

If you absolutely must use an IP, of course you still need to remember the subnet, but after that it's a blank slate for your mnemonic license-plate style amusement.

REPENT!! (5, Funny)

ObsessiveMathsFreak (773371) | more than 5 years ago | (#28374035)

Bbrrrriiiing. Bbrrrriiiing.

You: Hello?

Dependant Relative: My internet isn't working!

You: Is the modem turned on?

Dependant Relative: Yes it IS!! It even says I'm connected with eye-pee-vee-six now. But now none of my programs work!! The man from Comcast said it was an upgrade from than eye-pee-vee-four. I thought six was better than four!? Is it because I'm using Windows 7? Do I need to get Windows 6? And my internet is explorer 8? Can I still get emails? And the computer is really slow! Can you come over? ... etc. etc.

You: Curse you Comcast. Curse you!!!

Re:REPENT!! (2, Funny)

sakdoctor (1087155) | more than 5 years ago | (#28374121)

Wow. I read that as redundant relative both times.

Re:REPENT!! (5, Interesting)

thesandtiger (819476) | more than 5 years ago | (#28374325)

My brother in law used to call me up, frequently, to ask me for tech support help. He's a doctor, so I solved it by calling him up every single day to ask him some inane question about medicine.

"Hey, so I'm at the store and I want to buy band-aids. Which ones are best?"
"Hey, it's me again - so when I called up 5 minutes ago to ask about band-aids, I didn't realize they had purple ones. Are those going to work differently than the beige ones?"
"Oh, hi, me again... I was walking by the frozen food section and it was kind of cold there but it's a really hot day outside - can I catch sick from the temperature differential?"
"Yeah, it's... well, this is a bit strange. But I was at work today and one of my co-workers kind of has a limp. Can you tell me what that's from? I don't wanna ask him - let me put him on with you, maybe you can fix him..."
"So I was on a date last night and we went to a used bookstore and I started sneezing. Is that the swine flu? Well, yeah, it was dusty in there, but Oprah was talking about the Swine Flu, and I had bacon the other day so maybe I'm going to ... hello? Helloooo?"

For people who don't have a particular profession, calling them up at odd hours to ask them for tiny favors also works. My next-door neighbor used to ask me for tech support all the time, so I started asking him to pick things up at the store for me, give me rides, loan me odd random items ("Can I borrow one of your bookends?" "Do you have a shoehorn I can use for a couple of days? Mine's in the shop.")

Re:REPENT!! (2, Insightful)

garcia (6573) | more than 5 years ago | (#28374533)

If I had the ability, I would rate this "+5 You Owe Me A Dry Keyboard"

Re:REPENT!! (2, Funny)

ringdangdu (1179665) | more than 5 years ago | (#28374685)

"Do you have a shoehorn I can use for a couple of days? Mine's in the shop.")

Excellent line!

Re:REPENT!! (-1, Troll)

Macrat (638047) | more than 5 years ago | (#28374919)

Buy the Dependant Relative a Mac.

Re:REPENT!! (1)

AndrewNeo (979708) | more than 5 years ago | (#28375069)

But I only have OS 10.5, do I have to upgrade to 10.6 to use this IPv6?! Protip: Stupid users are still stupid users.

Are we serious this time? (5, Interesting)

CobaltTiger (671182) | more than 5 years ago | (#28374049)

I've been hearing that IPv4 addresses are "almost gone" for maybe 10 years now.

Re:Are we serious this time? (2, Informative)

MobyDisk (75490) | more than 5 years ago | (#28374179)

Fortunately, we have been conserving them and switching to NAT so the problem has lessened. The industry isn't crying wolf. Also, if you live in the US, then you have less of a problem than in a developing nation who didn't get a great big block allocated to them.

But if you want your cell phone, computer, XBOX, and refrigerator to have a unique IP address, then this is necessary. Of course, you probably DON'T want that, but well... that's another discussion. :-)

Re:Are we serious this time? (4, Informative)

QuantumRiff (120817) | more than 5 years ago | (#28374577)

There is alot more to IPv6 then just its IP Address space. there is lots of improvements to security, configuration, and multicasting. Also, the way it is designed will take a HUGE load off the core routers, and actually make them faster... Right now the address space is so fragmented, there are huge tables in them to parse on what subnets are down which paths...

Re:Are we serious this time? (1)

Macrat (638047) | more than 5 years ago | (#28374939)

Don't confuse the mindless tech bashing with actual FACTS!!!

Re:Are we serious this time? (4, Informative)

ColdWetDog (752185) | more than 5 years ago | (#28374205)

I've been hearing that IPv4 addresses are "almost gone" for maybe 10 years now.

It's an Illuminati conspiracy tied into fusion research (and holographic storage). Just watch the obituaries. You'll eventually see the pattern. By then it will be too late - another 10 years.

(I'm sure I read it somewhere around here).

Re:Are we serious this time? (1)

at_slashdot (674436) | more than 5 years ago | (#28374425)

I've been hearing that IPv4 addresses are "almost gone" for maybe 10 years now.

That's why we will be unprepared when it finally happens.

Re:Are we serious this time? (1)

AndrewNeo (979708) | more than 5 years ago | (#28375083)

Sadly enough this is very true. There's no good reason routers (Linksys, Netgear, etc.) shouldn't have at least disabled IPv6 support, but they don't (at least from what I've seen)

What? (3, Informative)

geekoid (135745) | more than 5 years ago | (#28374117)

Verizon has IP6.

Nobodies asked yet (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 5 years ago | (#28374149)

Just how much extra are they going to charge the customers for the privalege of of a cost of them staying in business.

services? (2, Insightful)

Neil Watson (60859) | more than 5 years ago | (#28374151)

Potentially these customers will have a small block of ipv6 addresses. Will they be allowed to run their own web or email services?

Small block? (1)

XanC (644172) | more than 5 years ago | (#28374421)

Unless Comcast is totally bucking well-established standards (which for them is possible, but I really don't see it) then every customer will be allocated a /64. In other words, every customer will have the square of the IPv4 address space to play with.

Seems like they'd have to relax rules on listening ports.

Re:Small block? (1)

AndrewNeo (979708) | more than 5 years ago | (#28375121)

I highly doubt they're going to relax any rules on listening ports (IP allocation has nothing to do with it) but that does make me wonder if they'll be dynamically allocated like they are now or if the IPs will be statically assigned. (Obviously they'll still use DHCP to distribute, but will the IP change like it does now? etc.)

Re:services? (1)

characterZer0 (138196) | more than 5 years ago | (#28374537)

No. They'll get one address. And they still will not be able to run services.

What's the big deal with IPv6 (3, Insightful)

pak9rabid (1011935) | more than 5 years ago | (#28374181)

Why does everyone here get so excited when anything about IPv6 is mentioned? From an end-user's perspective, it appears to accomplish the same thing that IPv4 does, except addresses are longer and contain more characters. Are there any real benefits from and end-user's perspective in using IPv6? ISPs are still going to charge the same amount for public IPs and people are still going to user routers with NAT to save money on having to pay extra for additional IPs. From a sysadmin point of view, it's just going to mean more work and probably sleepless nights as we discover quirks with software and equipment that don't play nicely with IPv6. So, whats to get excited about?

Re:What's the big deal with IPv6 (2, Informative)

Anonymous Coward | more than 5 years ago | (#28374235)

ISPs are still going to charge the same amount for public IPs and people are still going to user routers with NAT to save money on having to pay extra for additional IPs.

That would be quite pointless, given the number of IPs available. Why shouldn't the ISP just hand out a /64? There are plenty of them to go around. The ISPs gave up on the idea of trying to make extra money from multiple devices connected a while ago - and since they know people will just use NAT if they only give out one IP, why bother?

Re:What's the big deal with IPv6 (1)

Attila Dimedici (1036002) | more than 5 years ago | (#28374341)

ISPs are still going to charge the same amount for public IPs and people are still going to user routers with NAT to save money on having to pay extra for additional IPs.

That would be quite pointless, given the number of IPs available. Why shouldn't the ISP just hand out a /64? There are plenty of them to go around. The ISPs gave up on the idea of trying to make extra money from multiple devices connected a while ago - and since they know people will just use NAT if they only give out one IP, why bother?

Because there are people who NEED that additional public IT. Those people will pay to get it, since NAT doesn't work for whatever it is they are doing. Additionally, there are a lot of people whose LAN would be screwed up by having all of their machines have a public IP address and who don't know enough to fix it.

Re:What's the big deal with IPv6 (1)

Just Some Guy (3352) | more than 5 years ago | (#28374937)

Additionally, there are a lot of people whose LAN would be screwed up by having all of their machines have a public IP address and who don't know enough to fix it.

No, there aren't. A DSL or cable modem with a default-deny firewall (which will be all of them) will give a superset of the protections NAT offers now. There's a difference between public and publicly routable, you know.

Re:What's the big deal with IPv6 (0)

MadKeithV (102058) | more than 5 years ago | (#28374343)

Because 640k is enough for anybody!

Re:What's the big deal with IPv6 (1, Troll)

pak9rabid (1011935) | more than 5 years ago | (#28374355)

That would be quite pointless, given the number of IPs available. Why shouldn't the ISP just hand out a /64? There are plenty of them to go around.

Because ISPs exist to make money, not to provide a civil service to people. ISPs (especially the bigger ones) are going to do whatever they can to maximize profits. Just because there's essentially an unlimited number of IPv6 addresses available doesn't mean that the value of a public IP will disappear.

Re:What's the big deal with IPv6 (1)

Dragonslicer (991472) | more than 5 years ago | (#28375015)

That would be quite pointless, given the number of IPs available. Why shouldn't the ISP just hand out a /64? There are plenty of them to go around.

Because ISPs exist to make money, not to provide a civil service to people. ISPs (especially the bigger ones) are going to do whatever they can to maximize profits. Just because there's essentially an unlimited number of IPv6 addresses available doesn't mean that the value of a public IP will disappear.

Doing something like that might get (and would most likely deserve) an investigation by the FTC and/or federal Department of Justice. If every major ISP charged extra money for a resource that has no practical limit, you'd have a fairly easy collusion and price-fixing case. If you can have such a case against memory manufacturers, who deal with creating physical items that are obviously much more limited than IPv6 addresses and actually require money and resources to create, even a Slashdot I-am-not-a-lawyer could win a case over something like IPv6 addresses.

Re:What's the big deal with IPv6 (1)

quazee (816569) | more than 5 years ago | (#28374433)

Yes, in fact, stateless autoconfiguration implies using at least a /80 prefix.
And I don't see why ISPs would want needless complexity of keeping track of every device in a household.

Re:What's the big deal with IPv6 (1, Informative)

Anonymous Coward | more than 5 years ago | (#28374657)

I thought it was /64, but either way, it's a tiny fraction of the address space. An ISP with a /32 allocation could give billions of customers a /64 each.

ISPs *could* try giving out private space now, on the grounds that there is a shortage and it's good enough for a lot of users, and sell a genuine public IP as a premium option, yet they haven't done.

Additional IPs (4, Informative)

XanC (644172) | more than 5 years ago | (#28374473)

There will be no paying extra for additional IPs. Everybody will get a /64. Look at this:

Addresses available in IPv4: 4,294,967,296

Addresses available PER CUSTOMER for IPv6: 18,446,744,073,709,551,616

This enables stateless autoconfiguration (usually based on MAC addresses) that simplifies everybody's lives.

Re:Additional IPs (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 5 years ago | (#28374777)

18,446,744,073,709,551,616 IP's ought to be enough for anybody

Re:What's the big deal with IPv6 (3, Insightful)

z4ce (67861) | more than 5 years ago | (#28374917)

Let's say you're using Skype or bittorrent. And you want to do it on more than one computer, and you want to do it relatively efficiently. You need IPV6. Creating P2P apps is a pain with all of the NAT in the world.

Re:What's the big deal with IPv6 (1)

AndrewNeo (979708) | more than 5 years ago | (#28375137)

This. The point of assigning a /64 is to prevent the need to NAT.

Re:What's the big deal with IPv6 (1)

Hatta (162192) | more than 5 years ago | (#28375225)

Why does everyone here get so excited when anything about IPv6 is mentioned?

Two words: No NAT.

Re:What's the big deal with IPv6 (2, Insightful)

kimvette (919543) | more than 5 years ago | (#28375285)

A lot of devices still do not support IPv6. Phones, cellphones,

A lot of people have to type in IP addresses (sysadmins, etc.) when configuring devices, DNS, web servers, and so forth, and those huge address strings are a pain in the ass. I don't want to deal with them. I like the dotted quads.

Also, one occasionally needs to access machines by IP address when DNS flakes out. What do you do when a DNS server goes down? Ideally you have a secondary DNS however not all organizations are willing to spend the money - especially in this economic climate.

froSt pi5t (-1, Offtopic)

Anonymous Coward | more than 5 years ago | (#28374257)

Here, but what iS want them there. very own shItter, could save it

OMG! OMG!.IPv6 is coming for ME! (3, Insightful)

ae1294 (1547521) | more than 5 years ago | (#28374293)

It's funny how all of you are complaining so much about this. IPv6 is a required evil for the internet to keep going and it will simplify things greatly and should speed up things in general too. That is if and when they get rid of the IPv4 hardware...

I've never seen a bunch of self described computer geeks whining so much about something that will simplify routing and get rid of NAT which is a truely horrid hack.

Come on guys, you know you are going to have to deal with problems no mater what happens in computer land?! Might as well deal with a problem that will make the internet routing make sense again and it's not like it will need to be done again in your life time.

Time Warner is already doing this in Brooklyn/NYC (1)

thesandbender (911391) | more than 5 years ago | (#28374397)

However, they're being really evil and routing all their traffic through SWIP's 6 network... Which means everything gets routed over to Amsterdam and then back.  e.g. :

    C:\Users\Mike>tracert -6 ipv6.google.com

    Tracing route to ipv6.l.google.com [2001:4860:b004::68] over a maximum of 30 hops:

    1    <1 ms    <1 ms    <1 ms  2002:185a:90f:1234::1
    2     *        *        *     Request timed out.
    3   109 ms   107 ms   109 ms  ams-core-1.tengige0-0-0-0.swip.net [2a00:800:0:1::1:1]
    4   110 ms   110 ms   109 ms  ams16-core-1.gigabiteth4-0-0.swip.net [2a00:800:0:1::2b:1]
    5   105 ms   109 ms   107 ms  pr61.ams04.net.google.com [2001:7f8:1::a501:5169:1]

Well googles local AMS server handles it but you get the idea.  It's slower and you have to wonder how long before SWIP gets pissed.

tracert in no time at all - beat that sucker ! (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 5 years ago | (#28374741)

Tracing route to ipv6.l.google.com [2001:4860:b002::68]
over a maximum of 30 hops:

    1 Destination host unreachable.

Trace complete. Gotta love that AT&T speed.

Re:Time Warner is already doing this in Brooklyn/N (3, Informative)

quazee (816569) | more than 5 years ago | (#28374983)

That's because you are using an IPv6 address in the 6to4 address space, not a native IPv6 address.
And according to trace, your ISP doesn't have their own 6to4 router deployed, so the traffic gets sent to whoever announces the shortest route to 192.88.99.1 route via BGP.
(192.88.99.1 is a special IP which means 'any 6to4 router')

Re:Time Warner is already doing this in Brooklyn/N (1)

Movi (1005625) | more than 5 years ago | (#28375051)

Nope, not really

1  [My IPv6]  1.421 ms  1.087 ms  2.245 ms
2  [My Tunnel]  35.730 ms  38.181 ms  34.940 ms
3  gige-g2-4.core1.fra1.he.net  33.940 ms  34.452 ms  33.944 ms
4  de-cix20.net.google.com  45.923 ms  43.556 ms  39.865 ms
5  * * *
6  fx-in-x68.google.com  56.283 ms  50.369 ms  36.717 ms

Believe it when I see it. (1)

maskedbishounen (772174) | more than 5 years ago | (#28374437)

Much like the mythical Comcast bandwidth usage meter which we have been hearing about for over half a year now, I will believe it when I see it. And I am certainly not seeing it now.

Really? I wonder... (1, Interesting)

kenp2002 (545495) | more than 5 years ago | (#28374575)

This would have NOTHING to do with monitoring and shaping your network traffic. None at all. ISPs don't do that.

And they won't be sending you:

"We have observed an unusual amount of encrypted traffic originating from your IP address" email implying that using encryption will get you disconnected.

Nope never will happen. They won't be injecting packets either to kill you VPN connections because that can't figure out what traffic you are sending. They would never do that, at least until your employers get involved asking why they were tampering with a secure connection to a financial institution. Nope not at all. Hamachi works great when it doesn't mysteriously die...

And they'll never send you a "Friendly Reminder" warning that using Tor to hide software piracy is still illegal, even if you are chatting with people in China on the annaversary of Tieniman.

Because they never inspect your traffic in order to identify what you are doing on their connecition.

They also don't send "friendly reminders" when you use PGP encrypted email that they are simply checking in on "unusual activity on their email server."

Nope, no motivation at all for switching on and using IP6 except perhaps the ability to assign static IP address for better tracking...

I wonder: Anyone out there with a brand new shiney IP6 address try a release\renew to see if you get a new address?

Re:Really? I wonder... (1)

AndrewNeo (979708) | more than 5 years ago | (#28375165)

They can track your IPv4 DHCP allocations just fine. Their DHCP servers are the one that assign the IP to your cable modem's MAC.. the hardcoded, whitelisted MAC address they have in their system to give you service. They know exactly who you are right now.

This is what it'll take for IPv6 to happen. (1)

IGnatius T Foobar (4328) | more than 5 years ago | (#28374751)

I'm happy to see this. If the major ISP's start rolling out IPv6 to customers, then we'll really start to see the chicken-and-egg deployment problem get solved. In the US there are really only half a dozen of The [Phone|Cable] Companies that need to get on board to cover the vast majority of Internet users.

Stupid (1)

scubamage (727538) | more than 5 years ago | (#28374953)

First, IPv6 is still a draft standard(s) to my knowledge. Many pieces of equipment aren't interoperable because of conflicting draft standard revisions. Further, the IPv6 stack gets updated in windows updates, and suddenly everything is broken. We have had this happen for a bank who tried upgrading to IPv6. The deployment went smoothly, until a windows update changed the IPv6 stack to use a different standard from the standard being used by the networking hardware. Suddenly they lost connectivity with all branch offices and had to pull back the update. A day's worth of productivity ruined because of this. Further, how are they going to solve the other issues with IPv6? Dual stack, teredo tunneling - none of these things are standards. They could handle all of it on the network shy of the last mile with teredo tunneling, but then the clients are still limited to IPv4 addresses. This is like someone saying "hey, we want all of you to use this thing we're not sure will work yet." It's foolhardy. Let the IEEE do their work and roll crap out when it's finished. Using your paying customers as beta testers is foolish - nay - freaking retarded.

Where is Mark Lottor? IPV4 has plenty left to it! (4, Interesting)

aisnota (98420) | more than 5 years ago | (#28375247)

The large telecoms and cable outfits have tons of unused IP space that could be CIDR blocked out, think of the class A 24.X.X.X for instance that used to be @Home and Rodgers, large portions are empty! AT&T moved @Home to 12.X.X.X and then subsequently provides managed space to cable outfits like Mediacomm etc.

Now Mediacomm has just finally got around to getting its own space, is AT&T offering to CIDR out their precious class A?

No of course not, like some of the others, they get allocations from ARIN and sit on them instead of consolidating. They have scads of CIDR blocks used by all sorts of companies out there. Heck ARIN should just re-map some of those AT&T direct to the customers, let them keep the 12.X.X.X A Space.

Back in the day, Mark Lottor did mapping of all live ping able IP's before firewalls were so common and NAT extremely rare. If he were to make a comparison with whomever does like mapping today to those legacy maps and IP allocations, it would be a fascinating graphic to show the transformations and if by carrier, show how greedily the Worldcom/UUNets Sprints and Baby Bells have asked for space, color to their identity and now look to see many time those scattered CIDR blocks are empty. Sprint, old UUNet and Baby Bell CIDR's if unused, should get back into the pool.

Where is Mark Lottor and these newer guys with the latest IPV4 utilization's mapped out for the comparison analysis.

Enough said.

 

Lots of ISPs already have IPv6, including Verizon (1)

XMLsucks (993781) | more than 5 years ago | (#28375309)

Lots of American ISPs are already providing IPv6 because they want to have the government as a customer. Many of you probably could enable IPv6 but don't because your router is incapable of handling IPv6. There are very few home routers that I could find that support IPv6. One that does is Apple's Airport Extreme. I bought that, connected it, and instantly got IPv6 addresses handed out to my home network. Although they are 6to4 addresses, I can connect to other IPv6 hosts, including friends at other ISPs, and ipv6.google.com. When I'm remote, I can connect directly to any of my home computers (when using IPv6) --- no more port forwarding via NAT. One reason that 6to4 appeals to the ISPs is that it puts a time limit on your IPv6 prefix lease which is tied to the lease on the IPv4 address. Thus when the IPv4 address changes, your IPv6 subnet's prefix changes, which makes it hard to run a server, and you must rely on dyndns. Dyndns with IPv6 is very easy, because your end host knows its IPv6 prefix (and doesn't have to ping a remote host to figure out its IP address as is necessary for a IPv4 host behind NAT), and because everything on your subnet knows instantly when the IPv6 prefix changes, and so you can update the dyndns with a very small race condition.
Load More Comments
Slashdot Login

Need an Account?

Forgot your password?
or Connect with...

Don't worry, we never post anything without your permission.

Submission Text Formatting Tips

We support a small subset of HTML, namely these tags:

  • b
  • i
  • p
  • br
  • a
  • ol
  • ul
  • li
  • dl
  • dt
  • dd
  • em
  • strong
  • tt
  • blockquote
  • div
  • quote
  • ecode

"ecode" can be used for code snippets, for example:

<ecode>    while(1) { do_something(); } </ecode>