Forgot your password?
typodupeerror
The Internet

IPv4 Will Not Die In 2010 264

Posted by CmdrTaco
from the here's-a-shocker dept.
darthcamaro writes "A couple of years ago, the big shots at IANA (that's the people that handle internet addressing) issued a release stating that the IPv4 address space was likely to be gone by 2010. Here we are in 2010 and guess what, IPv4 with its 4.3 billion addresses will NOT be all used up this year. In fact there could be another two years worth of addresses still left at this point. 'We're at about 10.2 percent (IPv4 address space) remaining globally,' John Curran, president and CEO of ARIN said. 'At our current trend rate we've got about 625 days before we will not have new IPv4 addresses available. We're still handling IPv4 requests from ISPs, hosting companies and large users for IPv4 address space, but that's a very short time period.'"
This discussion has been archived. No new comments can be posted.

IPv4 Will Not Die In 2010

Comments Filter:
  • IPv4 doesn't die (Score:3, Insightful)

    by rvw (755107) on Friday January 08, 2010 @09:50AM (#30693602)

    IPv4 doesn't die - it just runs out of available addresses.

    • by A beautiful mind (821714) on Friday January 08, 2010 @10:22AM (#30693946)
      Old programmers don't die, they just use an exploit to induce an overflow in the "time left to live" counter that runs the Reaper's scheduler.
    • Re: (Score:3, Insightful)

      by six11 (579)

      IPv4 will die shortly after x86 does, which is to say: a long time from now.

      • Re:IPv4 doesn't die (Score:5, Informative)

        by Retric (704075) on Friday January 08, 2010 @12:32PM (#30696004)
        One of the quick and dirty ways to continuing to use IPv4 is to have some of the huge chunks of the address space given back. Do FORD, MIT, Apple, IBM, etc each need 256^3 addresses? (http://xkcd.com/195/) IPv4 has almost 256^4 or around 4 billion IP's that's almost one IP per person on the planet and plenty to last a *LONG* time.
        • Re: (Score:3, Insightful)

          by Goaway (82658)

          At current trends, the 10% remaining will last less than two years. 256^3 addresses is less than half a percent. One of those huge blocks would be gone in about a month. Even if you freed up every single IP address, that would not last very long. Probably less than ten years, as demand grows.

          • Re:IPv4 doesn't die (Score:4, Interesting)

            by Retric (704075) on Friday January 08, 2010 @02:53PM (#30698092)

            IP's are given away and there is no reason to give them back so of course there is a lot of demand and we are "running out". But don't think just because IANA runs out of IP's you will be unable to get new ones. They will just come with a price tag. It's a classic land grab, and people that got large chunks of IP space are going to start selling them as soon as there is no free competition.

        • Re: (Score:3, Insightful)

          by Bruha (412869)

          There are nearly 9 billion people on the planet. The problem of taking a Class A away from a company is that they would have to take years and millions of dollars to redo their address space to what you'll let them keep. We do not have that kind of time, and it's not as easy as you think to do such a thing. Getting a lawyer would be cheaper compared to the costs of changing ip addresses. There are servers out there that have ip's hard coded into them at the costs of tens of thousands of dollars to get i

        • Re: (Score:3, Insightful)

          by Dwonis (52652) *

          IPv4 has almost 256^4 or around 4 billion IP's that's almost one IP per person on the planet and plenty to last a *LONG* time.

          Now all we need to do is to replace all the routers on the Internet with ones that can manage 4 billion routing table entries. Wanna bet that IPv6 will be cheaper?

  • by gandhi_2 (1108023) on Friday January 08, 2010 @09:51AM (#30693608) Homepage

    IPv4 not dying... Enterprise Networking Planet confirms it!

    That just doesn't have the same ring to it. ):

  • by Kenshin (43036) <kenshin&lunarworks,ca> on Friday January 08, 2010 @09:54AM (#30693648) Homepage

    Another two years? Good, now we can all can put off panicking for another two years and not do anything to resolve this in the meantime.

    • by Anonymous Coward on Friday January 08, 2010 @10:07AM (#30693788)

      Worse than that, we'll continue to deal with the issues NAT causes, and I'm sure the various money grubbing ISP's will charge even more for additional IPs as we run out.

    • by delinear (991444)
      It goes hand in hand with our doing nothing about global warming policy (the hope being once that kicks in it'll reduce the populace and free up some IPs). Stay the course.
      • It goes hand in hand with our doing nothing about global warming policy (the hope being once that kicks in it'll reduce the populace and free up some IPs). Stay the course.

        You have accurately compared responses to IPv4 and global warming: listen to underlings rabble about pseudoscience, find out that no problem exists, move on to next problem.

    • by prandal (87280)

      So the question we each need to ask, on behalf of ourselves and our employers, is how long will it take to transition my/our setup to IPV6?

      If the answer is greater than 2 years, it would be prudent to start doing something about it now.

      • Re: (Score:3, Insightful)

        by Sancho (17056)

        Except that if you read between the lines, this is all a subtle stab at the 2 year estimate. "A couple of years ago" we were slated to run out of addresses by 2010. Now they're estimating 2 more years.

        We're bound to eventually run out, and it's probably going to be cheaper to start getting IPv6 out there now rather than at crunch time. But there's a lot that can be done to stretch out the IPv4 address space. I predict that we'll see major ISPs using NAT (and offering upgrades to real IP addresses for ex

        • by Guspaz (556486)

          And let's not forget the possibility of forced re-allocations of class As.

          For example, does the Ford Motor Company really need sixteen million IP addresses? Take them back, make Ford go through ARIN. The US military has about 151 million addresses too...

          I'd like to say that no single entity should own an entire class A block, and that they should be forced to go through normal allocation channels.

          There's a precedent for this. Stanford voluntarily returned their class A to help relieve the IP crunch. Clearly

      • by shentino (1139071)

        To get v6 internet, you need cooperation all the way up to the tier 1 providers. If even one of them isn't playing ball, the chain breaks.

        The first thing that needs to happen for v6 to prosper is for v4 to suffer.

  • Trends (Score:5, Funny)

    by mrpacmanjel (38218) on Friday January 08, 2010 @10:04AM (#30693746)

    "...At our current trend rate we've got about 625 days before we will not have new IPv4 addresses available..."

    I think this:http://www.xkcd.com/605/ [xkcd.com] sums it up

  • by kieran (20691) on Friday January 08, 2010 @10:13AM (#30693862)

    We'll never be able to justify the cost of implementing IPv6 properly until it becomes something customers are demanding, and that won't happen until there is stuff on the Internet people want that to reach couldn't get hold of an IPv4 address.

    Still, I suppose I just have to be patient.

  • by Troy Roberts (4682) on Friday January 08, 2010 @10:13AM (#30693866)

    Big F...ing deal! How many predictions are accurate for three or more years? The original prediction was made in May, 2007 and current prediction has slipped the date from December 2, 2010 to November 18, 2012 not quite a 2 years. I challenge anyone to find accurate predictions that are 3 1/2 years old.

    We need to be moving to IPV6 as quickly as possible. We may have a bit longer than was predicted 3 1/2 years ago. The thing that is scary is have we made much progress in moving to IPV6 in the last 3 1/2 year? I think not much. So, whatever the actual exhaustion dates are for IPV4 address. We can be certain that we are 3 1/2 years closer than we were and we have done almost nothing to prepare.

  • That's the point at which IANA is no longer the one handing out addresses. It's also the point at which the market for IP addresses opens, and companies start selling subnets.

    There aren't 4.3 billion Internet facing IP addresses. The bulk are held and used internally by companies (for no good reason). People complain about NAT all the time, but it works. How many Internet facing IP addresses are used by Google's quarter million servers?

    $ host google.com
    google.com has address 64.233.169.104
    google.com has

    • by fbjon (692006)
      You mean NAT solves more problems than it causes? I don't buy that for a second.
    • by A beautiful mind (821714) on Friday January 08, 2010 @10:37AM (#30694110)

      It's also the point at which the market for IP addresses opens, and companies start selling subnets.

      No. Repeat after me, there is no market in IPv4 addresses. The current rule is that when a RIR requests a block from IANA that would bring the IANA pool below 5 /8s, then every RIR gets one last /8 from the "final five". Then IANA is done and the RIRs have whatever addresses they have left in their unused pool. For AfrNIC it'll last decades, for APNIC/ARIN it's curtains in about a year.

      There is no market in IPv4. There never will be, because reclaiming addresses is too hard and routing can't handle it atm (routing too small blocks). Let's switch to IPv6 already, for fuck's sake, we'll have to do that anyway even if a miracle happens, technical problems get worked out and someone sets up an IPv4 market, about 6 months after.

      • by sarhjinian (94086)

        Repeat after me, there is no market in IPv4 addresses.

        Tell that to the people who were calling my former employer, offering to buy portions of their /16 for substantial amounts of money.

        • Ok, let's say your former employer would have agreed. How would he assign the addresses to the buyer? How would he claim the money for the financial transaction without pissing off the $government of the country?
      • Re: (Score:3, Funny)

        by Dirtside (91468)

        then every RIR gets one last /8 from the "final five"

        And if BSG taught us anything, it's that the final five won't be who you expect!

    • by bbn (172659)

      $ host google.com
      google.com has address 74.125.43.104
      google.com has address 74.125.43.105
      google.com has address 74.125.43.147
      google.com has address 74.125.43.103
      google.com has address 74.125.43.99
      google.com has address 74.125.43.106

      Looks like Google just had you.

  • So it's all good.

    Seriously random calendar rolling over, IPv4 addresses running out. At the same time! Proof that Jesus is coming back in 2012!?!

  • by A beautiful mind (821714) on Friday January 08, 2010 @10:16AM (#30693894)
    ...another financial crisis. Because that's the reason there was a slump in allocation rates. The current best projection for IANA pool exhaustion is Sep/Oct 2011 [potaroo.net]. Without the financial crisis that would have been end of 2010. The IANA guys would have been dead on, if not for a once in a 100 years financial event.

    The tone of the submission is really silly. There wasn't 4.3B allocatable addresses in the first place. Out of the 256 "/8s" only 219.914 /8 is theoretically usable, even before subtracting the legacy allocations. The summary makes it sound like it was a doom-and-gloom prediction that didn't happen to be true, but that's not the case.

    Also, it's "not the next 2 or 3 years", based on the available number of addresses 1.5 years for the IANA pool and 2,5 years are hard bars until RIRs (regional internet registries) run out.
    • by dunezone (899268)
      Its been 1.5 to 2.5 years for the past 6 years.
    • I'm not following how we'll run out. IP addresses are sort of like gold; they never get consumed, just used for a while, then perhaps sold to someone else. Even if the current allocator of IP addresses runs empty, there will still be the owners of the 4.3 billion addresses out there. I'm also guessing that the current seller has some sort of fixed price, which tends to suppress the natural market signal of a higher price that tells others that they're scarce and not to buy them unless they are really needed
  • by SlOrbA (957553) on Friday January 08, 2010 @10:29AM (#30694016) Homepage

    I predict that 2012 we will still have available IPv4 addresses.

    This will happen because some IPv4 addresses will be reallocated as client-side doesn't need IPv4 addresses in IPv6 to access IPv4 resources. So IPv6 adaptation it self will slow the need to migrate to IPv6 as singular Internet Protocol.

    • by bbn (172659)

      This will happen because some IPv4 addresses will be reallocated as client-side doesn't need IPv4 addresses in IPv6 to access IPv4 resources.

      This is wrong. You do need an IPv4 address to access IPv4 resources.

      There is no IPv6 to IPv4 "NAT" technology that has not been deprecated.

      So likely we will all have dual stack IP connectivity, with a global unique IPv6 address and a local IPv4 address that will be NAT'ed at the ISP level.

      • You need an IPv4 address, but it can be NAT'd if all you are doing is accessing IPv4 resources. That means that ISPs can NAT their customers (so their computers will be double-NAT'd) for IPv4. They can still use IPv4 HTTP / SMTP / whatever, but they won't be able to host anything or run peer-to-peer IPv4 services, which should provide a lot of incentive for them to start using IPv6 (which will Just Work if both ends have v6 connectivity) for as much as possible.
        • by Abcd1234 (188840)

          They can still use IPv4 HTTP / SMTP / whatever, but they won't be able to host anything or run peer-to-peer IPv4 services, which should provide a lot of incentive for them to start using IPv6 (which will Just Work if both ends have v6 connectivity) for as much as possible.

          Wait, what? I can only assume the "them" in "incentive for them" must refer to the customer, because it certainly doesn't apply to the ISPs. What you just described is a great reason for ISPs to *not* provide IPv4. I can see it now: "S

  • STUPID (Score:4, Insightful)

    by mc1138 (718275) on Friday January 08, 2010 @10:29AM (#30694020) Homepage
    Whether or not the issue will be forced, the problem is that for most of the developing world they already are either running out or pretty damn close. Because of this, if the US doesn't jump on the band wagon we will continue to be outpaced by countries like China that are already neck deep in rolling out IPv6. This isn't a matter of when, just if, and really ought to be done gradually, but quickly, rather than wait till a moment to be forced. I encourage anyone that can to move as quick as they can towards this rather than sit and wait and watch the world pass them by.
  • Doesn't Nortel have an entire class A network (47.x.x.x) to itself? Having that returned to the pool after the death roll is complete should presumably buy a little time?

    (I guess that falls into the "On the other hand, ARIN is also having some success in reclaiming unused IPv4 address space back from organizations that aren't using all of their addresses." line from the article?)

    • Re: (Score:3, Insightful)

      Reclaiming all the legacy IP addresses would buy us 6 months tops. So we delayed the problem by 6 months, during which we would be fucking up the DoD, IBM and a handful of other companies, I'm sure it'd be worth it, it's not like the military would be fighting somewhere and they could pull off a massive networking restructure in less than a year for the 8 /8s they're holding on to.
  • In other news.... (Score:5, Informative)

    by idiotnot (302133) <sean@757.org> on Friday January 08, 2010 @10:43AM (#30694186) Homepage Journal

    IPX won't die in 2010, either.

    But, in all seriousness, there's a few things to remember here.
    1. The v4 address space will be exhausted in the foreseeable future.
    2. Reclaiming large blocks only delays that inevitability by a few months.
    3. With a few exceptions, modern, supported OSes (Windows [2003, 2008, Vista, 7], GNU/Linux, all of the BSDs, OS X) support IPv6 perfectly.
    4. Most of the critical applications support IPv6 perfectly.
    5. The big holdup on the consumer side has been with the ISPs. The DOCSIS 3.0 roll-out is ongoing in many places.
    6. The US government has mandated it. The compliance date was in 2008 for all of the Federal agencies on their backbones. It's just a matter now of getting ISP access to those sites, and configuring lower-level systems.

    The luddite attitude here about this is amazing. If you're really all that concerned about it, and don't want to focus too much on the nuts-and-bolts, here's some advice: Learn BIND. Setting up your resolvers properly will spare you headaches.

    I use IPv6 every day. I get lots of e-mail over IPv6 (netbsd and freebsd mailing lists, to name just a couple). I enjoy being able to ssh to all of my machines at home directly. It's here. Evaluate your crap, and see what's not going to work. Plan to replace that stuff. Most of it probably will need replacing by the time you get assigned a /64 or /48 by your ISP, anyway. This isn't rocket science. /rant

    • The answer to this is that too many people have tried to setup IPv6 and have run into problems and reverted back to IPv4 (Thank you Microsoft!)

      Once burnt twice shy ... we'll wait until it is easy to setup (or default) ... why is is not the default on all new systems?

      • Re: (Score:3, Informative)

        by idiotnot (302133)

        IPv6 was a PITA on 2000 and XP. It is the default protocol on Vista, 2008, and 7. In fact, one of the original bugs in Exchange 2007 was that you couldn't install it *without* IPv6 being enabled on your public interface.

        But, I disagree with your contention that bad experiences are why people shy away from it. I think for more people, it's the nastiness of the stateless addresses. "But I can remember 192.168.0.1 in my head!" Yeah, and you can remember the four numbers in your /64 prefix, too. You're ju

        • by Abcd1234 (188840)

          But, I disagree with your contention that bad experiences are why people shy away from it. I think for more people, it's the nastiness of the stateless addresses.

          Nah, frankly, most people shy away from it because they just don't see the benefit that makes the trouble with it. And I'm one of them. I could, this weekend, get myself an ipv6 allocation from hurricane or a similar provider, configure my firewall appropriately, reconfig the few boxes on my network, and voila, have ipv6 deployed. But then what?

          • by dkf (304284)

            It's fundamentally a chicken-and-egg problem. Until ipv6 starts getting deployed, it's useless. But until ipv6 appears useful, it won't get deployed. It sucks, but that's the simple reality of the situation.

            That's why governments are pushing it; to get things from one meta-stable state to another (hopefully more stable) one.

  • 2012? (Score:3, Funny)

    by Xacid (560407) on Friday January 08, 2010 @10:46AM (#30694228) Journal

    Maybe THIS is the end of the world everyone's talking about...

  • For ipv6 to get widespread use there has to be a killer app that people (businesses or consumers) want or think they must have. I don't mean what geeks want or think they must have. The masses of sheeple are perfectly happy if everything is NAT'd.

    I have no idea what this app may be, but it could be some cloud service that everyone wants and is only made available via ipv6 technology. Customers will demand that ISPs support it so they can use the product.

    migration away from ipv4 for strictly technical reason

  • by jimpop (27817) *

    no, really? AGAIN?

  • speaking honestly from a position of ignorance on the issue: is there anything about the ipv6 spec that lends itself better to censorship and control? in other words, could china or iran do their authoritarian bullshit easier with ipv6 than with ipv4?

    depending upon the answer, i will either support ipv6 adaptation, or fight giving up ipv4 until the bitter end

  • ...of deploying IPv6? Two years isn't that much time, and I haven't heard much of when IPv6 will be the new standard.
  • by wowbagger (69688) on Friday January 08, 2010 @01:47PM (#30697118) Homepage Journal

    Once again, I'll ask a simple question:

    How long until it is possible to pull up the main page on Slashdot, using nothing but IPv6 packets?

    IMHO, every time one of these "OMFG IPv4 gonna run out RSN!!!1!11!" stores hits the front page, the Slashcrew should have to state where THEY are in becoming IPv6, and what is preventing them from doing so already.

Life. Don't talk to me about life. - Marvin the Paranoid Anroid

Working...