Major Sites To Join ‘World IPv6 Day’ 247
netbuzz writes "Facebook, Google, and Yahoo are among the major sites on board with what the Internet Society is dubbing 'World IPv6 Day,' a collective trial scheduled for June 8. 'It's an exciting opportunity to take IPv6 for a test flight and try it on for a full 24 hours,' says Leslie Daigle, the Internet Society's Chief Internet Technology Officer. 'Hopefully, we will see positive results from this trial so we will see more IPv6 sooner rather than later.'"
A site seems to be missing from the participants (Score:5, Insightful)
A site seems to be missing from the participants, but I just can't put my finger on it /.
Re:Retarded (Score:5, Insightful)
It's precisely BECAUSE something could go wrong. A full day on a site like Facebook is more than enough time to see any major issues crop up, yet isn't long enough to deeply impact their service*.
*I know, I know..."Facebook" and "service" in the same sentence. Hurpadurp.
Only one day? (Score:5, Insightful)
So how about it, Slashdot? (Score:5, Insightful)
Re:Yay (Score:5, Insightful)
And I'll STILL NAT everything in my house. I dont need NX10^23 script kiddies attacking every one of my appliances.
I won't, since I don't think anyone is going to port scan me.
Here's an IPv6 address: 2001:0db8:85a3:0000:0000:8a2e:0370:7334, the bold bit is the local part. How much bandwidth is your script kiddie going to have to have to find 0000:8a2e:0370:7334 in the range 0-ffffffffffffffff?
Also, a firewall is simpler than a NAT, and doesn't have the disadvantages of NAT, so you can just do that instead.
Re:Yay (Score:5, Insightful)
Here's a hint: "No NAT" doesn't mean "no firewall".
Re:Yay (Score:4, Insightful)
whether is has a public or private address is nothing to do with scarcity of IP but need and suitability and there a lot of IP device's that do not need a public address, my printer for starters, don't need to manage it from the outside, don't need to print to if from outside. Plain old private IP4 seems to work fine and dandy.
But using a separate address space makes your work WAY more complicated and less reliable.
All public scenario: Your stateful firewall prevents incoming traffic to your printer, just like it prevents incoming connections to anything else that you haven't specifically allowed. One address range everything reaches everything. Everything on one happy layer 2 LAN. Simple dynamic (re-)addressing.
Public plus private scenario: You still need a configured stateful firewall for all your other devices but now you have the joy of adding a statically configured LAN. How do the two networks reach each other? Route thru your slow firewall? Or multiple static and dynamic addresses on every device in your LAN? The time you spend complicating the heck out of your LAN, is time you're not spending securing it at the network and device layers.
So, sure, if you really want, you can spend a lot more time, money and effort to get a LAN that is much harder to design, configure, troubleshoot and monitor, all while being less secure, but you would be "saving" one of the 3 x 10 ^ 38 addresses, except you actually aren't because they assigned you a /64 for your LAN so its not like anyone else could use that address anyway.
IPv6 doesn't outright prevent you from shooting yourself in the foot, but its still kinda usable.
Plus if your LAN is a corporate LAN you've now gained the nightmare of merging multiple LANs using the same private addresses. Even if FC00::/8 is mostly empty, you know most clowns are going to use network=0 / host=1 for their firewall and watch the chaos when they interconnect.
There seems to be no advantage to private ipv6 space...
Re:Yay (Score:4, Insightful)
Your 'gate' is your router/firewall. People can't magically get around the same exact piece of equipment that NATs today simply because they are independently addressable. Those devices need to just have a 'no unsolicited incoming traffic' firewall by default.