IPv6 Success Stories? 67
DonGar asks: "We've been hearing how IPv6 will save the world, and we've been hearing about how it will never happen. But can anyone give us real world results about what heppens after they convert? In particular, I'm wondering about small networks (home and/or small business). What ISP support commonly exists, and how much does it really matter? How many people are using ONLY IPv6, instead of both IPv4 and IPv6. What devices/applications/OS's cause the most problems with this? What things work, what breaks, and how much work is it to do the conversion? How hard is it to run things like web and email servers that need to reachable from anywhere? From a real world perspective, what do we need to know that isn't mentioned here?"
Which begs the question... (Score:3, Insightful)
Re:Which begs the question... (Score:5, Interesting)
Re:Which begs the question... (Score:5, Interesting)
Comment removed (Score:5, Informative)
Re:Which begs the question... (Score:3, Informative)
Re:Which begs the question... (Score:3, Informative)
Re:Which begs the question... (Score:2)
Ah, if only that were true...
Re:Which begs the question... (Score:1)
Let's put an end to this... (Score:3, Insightful)
A "hub" doesn't care about ethernet.
It cares only about electricity. A hub is a Layer 1 device.
It doesn't know anything about Frames (Layer 2), nor Packets (Layer 3), nor Transports (UDP or TCP, Layer 4), nor Sessions (Layer 5), nor Presentation (Layer 6), and is not the least bit concerned with the Application (Layer 7).
It's only concerned with electrical signalling. It's a shared bus... Th
Re:Which begs the question... (Score:2)
Hell, why have a network at home. One machine with IP is enough. I can run NetBeui on the others, right?
(ok, I'm MS free here with a dozen machines, so beui's out)
Effort to setup IPv6? Not really more than it took you to learn IPv4. You figured out what a netmask is right?
It means my machines speak IPv6 to other machines that speak IPv6 and are reachable by IPv6. Otherwise, all apps back down to IPv4 and use that.
transition to IPv6? More e
Re:Which begs the question... (Score:2, Interesting)
Truthfully, IPv6 really needs to be at the ISP level before it is of any use to the end user. When the ISPs start to use it, then they can give each customer a block of 1000 static IPs...and then you will have to figure out what you are going to use 1000 static addresses for...
Re:Which begs the question... (Score:1)
My server, my laptop, my cellphone, my PDA, my Game Boy, my coffee machine, my graphing calculator, my car, my watch...
Re:Which begs the question... (Score:1)
Re:Which begs the question... (Score:4, Interesting)
2) The average consumer is stuck on IPv4 accessories and applications right now. Of course IPv6 rolling out tomorrow won't help them today. The average consumer never makes use of a new technology immediately. The idea is to make it -possible- so that the average end user will get benefit from it in the future.
3) IPv6 doesn't have to make it easier for trolls to evade IP bans as long as there is a standardized block size made available to individual users -or- as long as some form of CIDR-like registration is used.
Perhaps this is a new tool someone should create. A system that lets you look up what size an IPv6 block is. It should probably point back to the ISP / company that owns the "master" block. In other words, it doesn't need to have any personal information about the person who is using that block (assuming a smaller block is assigned to it), just the range that is owned by that user so that allow / deny rules can be written properly.
An ISP who sets up individual user accounts could have a standard size, so that they simply go in and set up in advance the information rather than having to add it each time they get a new user. If a sub-block does not show up, then people write bans against the entire ISP block, which encourages participation
Coming from someone who used to have to assign and re-assign subnet ownership for an ISP, they already do work like this
That is, assuming that routing doesn't go back to the ways before of users aquiring netblocks and then having their ISP route them (instead of ISPs aquiring netblocks and subnetting them to customers). However even if that is eventually the method (and I believe that was part of the idea behind having so many addresses in IPv6) that just makes it easier to look up block owners and ban entire blocks.
As long as you don't mind a little bit of heavy handedness.
Re:Which begs the question... (Score:3, Funny)
> My server, my laptop, my cellphone, my PDA, my Game Boy, my coffee machine, my graphing calculator, my car, my watch...
Re:Which begs the question... (Score:1, Interesting)
For each of which they will charge you $5 per month. Don't think that they won't because they are "plentiful". Look how much you are paying for cable/satellite; a luxury item with no scarcity and basically zero-cost to add a customer.
Sorry, NAT's not going away until ISP's stop treating us like consumers. (At least not fr
Re:Which begs the question... (Score:4, Insightful)
Also if you truely believe that "zero-cost" to add a customer, you should never go into business for yourself.
It costs plenty to add a customer every time. More head ends, more trenchs, more cable. A lot of those are paid before you ask for service by the cable company as an investment. So technically they have already paid it by the time you get it hooked up, but that's because they footed the bill for you well ahead of time.
Furthermore, the content that you get, costs them per subscriber. It costs them money to bill you, to do collections, to deal with you when you call and complain about service being crappy.
Plus lots of things, like Cable have such huge costs, that they have to 5 million customers before they make a profit. Cover ongoing facilities costs.
Billing works the way it does, because it is the most efficient way to for that good to be traded. It's a capitalist society, if you can make more money giving away cable and satalite feeds "because there is no cost to adding additional customers", then by all means go for it. I'm sure there's a VC out there if you have a good business plan.
Kirby
Re:Which begs the question... (Score:1)
IPv6 isn't going to eliminate NAT or be widely and quickly adopted because the ISP's are not going to allow you to have as many IP's as you can use simply because they will never run out.
They will not give us a revenue stream just because technology has solved the problem that created the revenue stream.
Re:Which begs the question... (Score:2)
Capitalistic society here in the US. All it takes is one or two ISP's to offer them for free. Hell, all it takes is a couple of ISP's. I mean, take your argument and apply it to 20 years ago to banks and checking:
No one will ever offer free checking at banks. It's a good revenue stream,
Re:Which begs the question... (Score:1)
Touche.
I mean, take your argument and apply it to 20 years ago to banks and checking: No one will ever offer free checking at banks. It's a good revenue stream, and they won't give it up. [...] I couldn't find a bank that would charge me for anything as long as I kept $500 in a checking or savings account.
I'm afraid you have that completely backwards. Twenty years ago, you could get a checking account with no fees and no minim
Re:Which begs the question... (Score:2)
A way of charging for the extra bandwidth without admitting that bandwidth usage isn't unlimited.
It's still bites, but it makes a limited amount of sense.
Re:Which begs the question... (Score:2)
Re:Which begs the question... (Score:1)
Re:Which begs the question... (Score:5, Interesting)
IPv6 allows you to have more than one public IP address on your home network. You can go through an IPv6 tunnel broker to make your IPv6 network visible to the world.
IPv6 isn't necessarily that far in the future in the U.S. For example, Speakeasy is claiming that they'll have IPv6 rolled out sometime in the March timeframe. I don't know how realistic that is, but it's certainly one of the reasons I'm sticking with Speakeasy - they seem to really have a clue.
Re:Which begs the question... (Score:1)
Re:Which begs the question... (Score:2)
Japan (Score:2)
Re:Japan (Score:2)
Re:Japan (Score:1)
Things are moving along here pretty fast (I got 2 Fibre-Optic lines for the price of broadband overseas) so IPv6 should be up and running and hopefully they will provide us with Free IP's cause paying for static IP on IPv4 sux
It WILL save the world (Score:4, Funny)
Re:It WILL save the world (Score:1, Funny)
It just has to get in line behind flouridation, Dennis Kucinich, and hemp.
"Do you realize that fluoridation is the most monstrously conceived and dangerous commie plot we have ever had to face?"
I use IPv6 (Score:5, Interesting)
In general IPv6 was pretty painless to setup, my biggest problems were caused by the fact I was using 6to4 which means my IPv6 addresses are based on my IPv4 address, which isn't static, so it took a bit of scripting to get everything to happen correctly when my v4 address changed (changing routes etc).
Almost all application support v6 one way or another, however notably missing is Apache 1, you need extra patches to get IPv6 support, and most apache log analysers get confused with IP addresses with
I'm surprised that Distro's don't enable v6 by default. (If you have a non-RFC1918 address, use 6to4, if you only have a RFC1918 addresses, use teredo).
I've IPv6 enabled our local LUG server (http://www.wlug.org.nz/), you get a dancing penguin for the logo if you use v6.
Re:I use IPv6 (Score:2, Interesting)
Care to write a how-to? You have a
Re:I use IPv6 (Score:5, Informative)
Re:I use IPv6 (Score:5, Informative)
Re:I use IPv6 (Score:3, Informative)
Before you flame me, I think IPV6 is a great thing and I look forward to the day when it will be widely-deployed in the US. I just don't have much need for it in my present work.
Re:I use IPv6 (Score:5, Informative)
Most do actually. They generally configure themselves via autoconf. Here's an example from one of my systems: /. [nether.net] it ;-)
ifconfig -a
vx0: flags=8843 mtu 1500
inet 204.42.254.5 netmask 0xffffffc0 broadcast 204.42.254.63
inet6 fe80::2a0:24ff:fe83:53d8%vx0 prefixlen 64 scopeid 0x1
inet6 2001:418:3f4:0:2a0:24ff:fe83:53d8 prefixlen 64 autoconf
It even has a v6 web server (apache) running on it. (go ahead, try to
This requires a router that sends autoconf messages (eg: a cisco or juniper router will do) as well as the various autoconf features (router discovery, using a /64 mask, etc..) unless you wish to statically configure your IPv6.
It removes DHCP from the equation. Of course if you're like me and swap out ethernet cards periodically (assuming you're not using the privacy extensions available for starters) you do see your address shift as it's based on the hardware address.
With posts yesterday about IPv6 being enabled by default in longhorn, and me seeing more people starting to ask for IPv6 connectivity (eg: DoD) as well as service offerings picking up, I expect it to become a bit more commonplace.
There are a few issues. Some providers for load balancers have had troubles with dns queries. I've seen my own bank as well as some major router vendors (that have IPv6 offerings) break their servers (ftp, web) periodically for those people who are running dual-stack IPv6 and v4. They just don't understand what this IN AAAA query is, and respond with the wrong error code, or just time out.
This tells me that we're quite some distance away from being able to see IPv6 as truly viable. I also don't see 6to4 tunneling as being viable in the long term either. We're going to see a dual-stack internet and those providers that have been reluctant to enable new technologies are going to continue on their paths until there is a compelling reason to provide the service (eg: lost sales/business, or a marketing reason "don't use XXX's internet service, you won't get access to the FULL [v4 & v6] internet".
Mostly today it's for the (never seen here) geek factor, but in my job at a major ISP, we're seeing increased customer demand for our IPv6 service offering not only here in the US but in Europe and Asia as well.
Re:I use IPv6 (Score:2)
Most do actually. They generally configure themselves via autoconf.
Sorry, I wasn't clear, I meant that distro's should enable 6to4 (or perhaps teredo[1]) on a machine, if it has a realworld IPv4 address, but no globally scoped v6 addresses.
[1]: Are there Teredo clients for Linux/BSD? Or just windows?
IPv6 Newb Question (Score:3)
Re:IPv6 Newb Question (Score:2)
Given a IPv4 address you can use all the addresses in 2002:::/48 (yep, thats 2**(128-48) addresses per IPv4 address...), This is called "6to4"
Re:IPv6 Newb Question (Score:2)
You can get IPv6 addresses by signing up with a tunnel broker near you.
You can *also* get IPv6 addresses by using 6to4. For an IPv4 address, you get 2002:::/48 as a network to assign IPv6 addresses out of.
Re:IPv6 Newb Question (Score:2)
IPv6 brings a new addressing system. The first 64 bits of the address is "the address to your network
Re:IPv6 Newb Question (Score:2)
It is important to note that there is a standard for using your ethernet MAC address as (with minor alteration) as the last 48 bits, so a single prefix could potentially contain every ethernet device ever made, with room for role based (assigned) addresses as well (In fact, an entire internet worth of those).
That should leave some ISPs desperatly struggling to find a way to lock you into a single address and technically justify it (since "Because we're cheap bastard control freaks" is a poor sales point).
Re:I use IPv6 (Score:1)
So, when exactly are we adding IPv6 support to ircu? ;)
*goes to hide from their "boss"*
Re:I use IPv6 (Score:2)
When we can get proper limits per
Re:I use IPv6 (Score:1)
Ahhhh, you mean when one of us can be bothered to do it.
Re:I use IPv6 (Score:2)
One success story... (Score:1)
Start->Run->cmd->install ipv6
Install complete.
Success!
Re:One success story... (Score:3, Informative)
IPv6 Routers (Score:2)
IPv6 - easy and straightforward! (Score:1)
Where it really shines is with local networks which normally use NAT. Set up a tunnel on the gateway, run rtadvd, and plug-and-play with any computer with a modern OS. Mac OS X was actually TOO easy - I spent an hour looking for docs on how to set it up, only to find out it
ipv6 network stacks for other o/s-es ? (Score:2)
In the lines of:
- 68k Mac running MacOS 7.5
- 486 running MSDOS w/ cygwnr Packet Driver
- 486/pentium running win95/98
Re:ipv6 network stacks for other o/s-es ? (Score:3, Informative)
You can get support for older computers. You may have issues with older software. Just like getting TCP/IPv4 support was a PITA before 1990.
Dude, try to get IPv4 onto Mac's System 4. Oh that's right, it was kind of a big PITA. TCP/IP(4) in Windows 3.0? You *could* go buy it, I guess.
- 68030 MacCI running OpenBSD (with IPv6)
- 486/133 running FreeBSD (With IPv6)
- SPARC 2 running NetBSD or OpenBSD (with IPv6)
- S
Re:ipv6 network stacks for other o/s-es ? (Score:2)
It saved my world.... (Score:1)
So I turned on the ip6 stack in Solaris and within about 7 hours had all workstations running NFS/SSH/KERBEROS and setup an intel box running freebsd/KAME to utilize ip6-to-ip4 conversion for HTTP/SOCKS/SQUID etc.
ip6 just plain works. - Don't believe the