Google Over IPv6 Coming Soon 264
fuzzel writes "Today Google announced Google over IPv6 where ISPs can sign up their DNS nameservers so that their users will get access to an almost fully IPv6-enabled Google, including http://www.google.com, images and maps, etc., just like in IPv4. Without this only http://ipv6.google.com is available, but then you go to IPv4 for most services.
So, start kicking your ISPs to support IPv6 too, and let them sign up.
Check this list of ISPs that already do native IPv6 to your doorstep.
The question that now remains is: when will Slashdot follow?"
Soon ? (Score:2, Interesting)
I got ipv6.google.com the night the IETF turned off IPv4 [arstechnica.com], and that was
over 9 months ago.
Re:Excellent for Internet2 connected institutions (Score:3, Interesting)
Those universities should lose their access to the Internet if they are using Google apps. In the past year, I have seen several leaks of student information (SSN, financial, etc.) caused JUST by the use of Google docs. Maybe if their students are using Google, they will reap some benefit, but even that is a bad idea -- a recent leak at Columbia was caused by a student using Google docs for a research project involving Columbia undergraduates, and thousands of SSNs and financial records were exposed to the world.
Re:The problem with IP6 is... (Score:5, Interesting)
When was the last time you used an IP address instead of a domain name? The only thing I could think of was setting up my DSL modem a year ago, but I'm not a network admin.
The reason why nearly nobody is using IPv6 is because it doesn't offer any direct benefit to those who need to deploy it.
Re:Wait for it.... (Score:2, Interesting)
Given that NAT at least partially became popular due to a few ISPs trying to argue that you can have only 1 machine on your network connected or you're breaking "the law" (their idiotic TOS), I have some doubts that IPV6 would bring about any real advantages to end users.
I'm not sure that I even want all my machines to have globally routable IPs.
Re: "Research Toy" (Score:3, Interesting)
Until Comcast, Verizon, AT&T, NTT, Telekom, or any other major ISPs start showing up on that list all of this IPv6 stuff is going to remain a research toy.
The phrase "research toy" strikes me as an excellent opportunity for the canonical auto analogy:
Imagine that all the commercial transport vendors had "standardized" on the Ford Model T (a very good car in its day). Your chain of stores needs to deliver tons of material from suppliers to warehouses to retail outlets? Organize a fleet of millions of Model Ts, each one carrying maybe 1/4 ton of material. Worldide shipping would be done by having the Model Ts board small ferries that would carry them across the oceans. You have 1 100-tone product? You simply break it down into 1/4-tone pieces, send them via Model T fleet, and assemble them at the customer's site. Maybe there would be some special 1- or 2-ton "extended" Model Ts, for use on the few highways that could support them.
Meanwhile, in academia, they would be using "research toys" like trucks, trains, airliners and huge ships to transport 100-ton objects (or packets of smaller objects) between campuses and research stations. The commercial world would look at this, and dismiss it as untried and unreliable. They wouldn't be willing to make the admittedly huge investment on giant vehicles and infrastructure (rail lines, superhighways, airports, and container seaport facilities) that it would take to change over. Customers wouldn't be demanding it, because they wouldn't understand the technology or economics, and this would be further grounds for the corporate world to "do what the customers want".
The nerdy tech types would be off at the side, discussing amongst themselves what the world might be like if these research toys could be somehow introduced to the public. But commerce would remail slow and crippled relative to our world. The commercial system would refuse to take such wild proposals seriously, because the current system works just fine for them. After all, the Model T is so much better and faster than the horse- and ox-drawn vehicles used by previous generations.
I'm sure that others here can extend the analogy. Maybe we could work out the details and turn it into a fun "alternate history" novel or video game.
Re:Wait for it.... (Score:2, Interesting)
Yes, a single point of access control, like a router. But it doesn't have to do NAT anymore.
Sure, they might run a transparent proxy on some services, but the point is they will be able to setup two way services without idiotic things like UPnP. IE they won't need dynamic port translations because every device will have it's own ports and specific applications can be allowed in advance.
For example, try to run multiple, simultaneous Xbox Live connections without UPnP. (It will probably work these days, but you won't be able to make two way connections ie host games, voice chat reliably, etc). This wouldn't be a problem if they both had their own address and port space.
Don't even get me started on IPSec, NAT-T etc.
Re:Wait for it.... (Score:3, Interesting)
Unfortunately, we're also bad at doing global solutions to big problems ahead of time, especially when there's still disagreement as to whether or not the problem even exists or is as serious as some say it is.
As usual, there's really no debate.
It's a bit like global warming. Serious scientists admit that it exists. The "controversy" is because of research groups quite literally paid for by the oil companies who would stand to lose the most if we started taking it seriously.
Similarly, there's really no debate that IPv6 would be a good thing to have, and that we'll run out of IPv4 addresses eventually, and that it will only get uglier as we do. The only real debate is from people who don't want to take the time to upgrade their infrastructure, or from businesses (ISPs) who actually profit from the artificial scarcity these days.
Re:Wow! (Score:3, Interesting)
Re:Is it just me (Score:3, Interesting)
Re:Wait for it.... (Score:3, Interesting)
I'm not sure that I even want all my machines to have globally routable IPs.
NAT doesn't provide security,
It does however provide privacy.
No it doesn't.
To most people it provides, at most, privacy between the number of computers in your residence. If you thinking about work or school, well, then you gain nothing, even assuming your access to the internet isn't filtered and logged wholesale, your IP assignment almost certainly is.
If you're actually concerned about privacy, you should be using something like Tor that was designed to provide privacy. NAT absolutely was not.