Canadian TV, Computing and Home Theatre Forums banner
1 - 20 of 46 Posts

·
Member #1
Joined
·
47,683 Posts
Discussion Starter · #1 ·

·
Registered
Joined
·
8,644 Posts
There are techniques that allow IPv6 to communicate with IPv4 computers, but not the other way around. This means that anyone running IPv4 only will be limited in what they can access. A big problem is many people do not have IPv6 available from their ISPs and the common consumer level routers don't support it either. Some of this can be worked around by using IPv6 over IPv4 tunneling to an IPv6 gateway, but this is simply a short term hack. People have to be able to get IPv6 into their homes & businesses and update or replace IPv4 only hardware. Modern operating systems have supported IPv6 for years.

IPv6
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
1,605 Posts
Where does the NRO get their funding? Does the donor corporation have a vested interest to see IPV6 replace IPV4 as soon as possible?

Before accepting the conclusions of ANY research, you must first follow the money.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
8,644 Posts
This problem has been known for years. I first heard of it about 15 years ago, when I read an article about IPv6 in Byte magazine. RFC1918, where "local" addresses are used behind a router, is simply a stop gap hack that breaks some parts of IP. It also prevents the internet from reaching it's full potential for accessing a wide variety of devices.
 

·
Member #1
Joined
·
47,683 Posts
Discussion Starter · #5 ·
Does the donor corporation have a vested interest to see IPV6 replace IPV4 as soon as possible?
Something tells me you really don't understand IPv4 or IPv6.

The depletion of public IP addresses and the allocation of IP addresses is not "research", it's fact. You can quibble over the depletion rate but no one is going to argue with the fact that internet protocol needs to be able to access more than 4.3 billion unique addresses
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
50 Posts
yeah, this is one of the many problems the world is experiencing, like polar ice caps melting, and carbon emmissions.....

... maybe the IP address issuers will have to put a limit on the number of IP's assigned to porn, it is probably like 50% of the total.

:cool:
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
8,644 Posts
^^^^
One of the reasons Asia is so far ahead of North America with IPv6 is due to the shortage of IPv4 addresses available to them. As mentioned above, there are more than 4 billion IPv4 addresses. How many computers are there? Here, I've got 7 devices that can access the internet. With RFC 1918, they all hide behind one IP address. Now, suppose I want to access some device from elsewhere? Right now, I'd have to configure my firewall to pass specified protocols to the desired device. I can't have a 2nd device use that protcol, unless I remap it to a different port number. Now, add to all the computers in use, all the cell phones, IP phones, all the various appliances (my Blu-ray player uses the internet) etc. around the world and you'll soon find that IPv4 hasn't a hope of serving them all. As I mentioned earlier, RFC 1918 is simply a short term hack around this problem, but it causes others in the process. BTW, this is before we get around to mentioning that the subnetting* of address ranges wastes a lot addresses, so that the number of usable addresses is nowhere near 4 billion.

*With the way subnetting is used, subnets always have some power of 2 for the number of addresses. i.e. 8, 16, 32 etc. In addition, the top & bottom addresses are not usable. So, if a company needs 150 addresses, it has to take a block of 256, with 254 usable. The remaining 104 addresses are not available for use by anyone else. With IPv6, each customer gets a huge block of addresses that greatly exceeds the entire IPv4 address range. IPv6 uses 128 bits for 340282366920938463463374607431768211456 possible addresses vs 4294967296 for IPv4. Notice the difference?

Unique Local IPv6 Unicast Addresses
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
7,131 Posts
For the naysayers and doubters...

IPs are like phone numbers, when their are too many computer devices, or phones, you run out. When 7 digit phone numbers were created, there was not even one phone per family, now there are often several per individual. When IPv4 was created, they figured on, at most, one IP per individual. Now many people have several due to wireless devices plus wired computers in several places. That's all there is to it. If there is a money trail, it goes back to all the new gadgets people like to own. Pretty soon, many appliances, cars, radios and TVs will have IP addresses. If you don't like IPv6, try taking away peoples' iPhones, organizers, laptops, desktops, internet enabled media players and other new gadgets. I dare you. ;)
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
3,210 Posts
See, what everyone is totally forgetting is that there was a thought that there would be no more addresses already... But something happened...

The power of the OSI model allowed for NAT and subnetting. This has GREATLY increased the life of v4. I have 6 devices that use IPs inside my house and not one of them is an INTERNET IP address. ISPs have all started to offer routers and some have even made it default for an install.

The REAL reason that v4 is running out is because large organizations and institutions ran around and bought MASSIVE ranges of INTERNET IP addresses and are not being forced to release them in favour of reducing to a routered and NATed setup or even going to the degree of using proxy setups.

Seriously, there is just no wind blowing where the v6 people are trying to sail. Not yet. There are just too many other options that are far more seamlessly implemented...
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
7,131 Posts
Good points. I've also seen ISPs use NAT to extend the addresses available to their dynamic IP customers. (One did not work well but that could have been for other reasons.) If it were not for NAT, we would be in trouble already.

As for the huge number of addresses given to some organizations, that was a mistake made when it was thought there were lots of addresses to go around. Many were given to educational institutions, businesses and other large organizations when the internet was in its infancy. But then, a school with 10,000 students needs 10,000+ addresses and a business with 50,000 employees needs 50,000+ IPs right? Well, not so right, as we now know. :confused:
 

·
Member #1
Joined
·
47,683 Posts
Discussion Starter · #11 ·
I agree that IPv4 can be greatly extended which certainly would reduce the depletion rate but I doubt it would extend the need for Ipv6 more than a few years.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
5,463 Posts
NAT saved IPV4 about 6 years ago when people first got really worried about the address space running out but clearly the problem is much worse now.

Thankfully IPV6 is a lot more mature than it was back then.
 

·
Banned
Joined
·
310 Posts
The REAL reason that v4 is running out is because large organizations and institutions ran around and bought MASSIVE ranges of INTERNET IP addresses and are not being forced to release them in favour of reducing to a routered and NATed setup or even going to the degree of using proxy setups.

Seriously, there is just no wind blowing where the v6 people are trying to sail. Not yet. There are just too many other options that are far more seamlessly implemented...
Quoted for truth.

Huge Class A addresses were handed out like Halloween candy early on and those allow more than 16 million IP addresses each which I'm sure are hugely underutilized.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
5,463 Posts
That is true about the class A ranges.

I know that BNR, the old research arm of Nortel has a class A (47.*). I wonder if they are going to sell that as part of the auction?
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
8,644 Posts
When IPv4 was created, they figured on, at most, one IP per individual
When IPv4 was created, personal computers weren't even considered. It was originally for connecting research computers at university and military contractors.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
8,644 Posts
The power of the OSI model allowed for NAT and subnetting.
As I mentioned earlier, NAT is a hack that breaks parts of IP. For example, FTP doesn't work well with it. Also, routers are not supposed to change source and destination addresses, yet NAT requires it. The main reason for NAT (RFC 1918) is to relieve the address shortage. This shortage has been recognized for many years. Also, even if those blocks of addresses were given up, there still wouldn't be enough.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
1,564 Posts
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_assigned_/8_IP_address_blocks

Whole lot of network real estate can be freed up in there.

Does HP really need 2? They probably inherited one of those from Compaq. Few other suspect companies in there although I'm sure none of them need a class A.

End of the day though the trigger needs to be pulled. Just as well get it over with! My PSP needs a public address. Death to NAT!!!
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
366 Posts
There are really good security reasons for IPV6

Here is a pdf that explains how the expansion of address spaces goes from 32 to 128 bits. It is a really good read and clarifies the biggest reasons why IPV6 is essential to the future of the net.
However seeing that most Windows users do not update their acrobat reader there might be some that think reading a pdf is unsafe. So here is the actual site address //documents.iss.net/whitepapers/IPv6.pdf.... just have google read it as html instead.

If you are really worried about using acrobat reader then I strongly suggest you either switch to Linux or update to reader 9.3.

One of the biggest security concerns that will be addressed with the switch to IPV6 is bots scanning for open ports to unpatched Windows machines. It will become very hard for this to go on with web address spacing set to 128 bit character lengths!

For example if you put a fresh install of Windows XP on the net without having a firewall or other security measures it will be compromised in a very short time. With IPV6 as a standard space this will become almost impossible.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
3,210 Posts
For example if you put a fresh install of Windows XP on the net without having a firewall or other security measures it will be compromised in a very short time. With IPV6 as a standard space this will become almost impossible.
There are good reasons for v6. This is not one of them. Security through obscurity/improbability is just flat out stupid. Proceeding that way is why all GSM call worldwide are now compromised. Saying what you said is just as silly as when the BluRay group claimed that their AACS would never be hacked...
 
1 - 20 of 46 Posts
Top