ARIN IPv4 Addresses Run Out Tomorrow 215
jcomeau_ictx provided that teaser of a headline, but writes: Not really. But the countdown at tunnelbroker.net should go to zero sometime tomorrow around noon, considering it's at 45,107 as I write this, it's counting down about one address every two seconds, and there are 86,400 seconds per day. Just happened to notice it today. Might be worth a little celebration at every NOC and IT enterprise tomorrow.
Since we keep talking about the same thing.... (Score:4, Insightful)
...I may as well just refer to an old comment...
http://slashdot.org/comments.p... [slashdot.org]
But 32 bits is enough for anybody (Score:2)
I am wondering whether at this point ARIN would be justified to raising the price for remaining IPv4 addresses and offer IPv6 addresses at a lower cost? And then raise cost as a ratio of remaining IPv4 addresses available to hand out? I am sure this would change business perspective on how much to delay IPv6 adoption?
Re: (Score:2)
They did that. ARIN didn't want to raise prices they just blew through their IPv4s. So ISPs will need to buy them from each other rather while IPv6 addresses will given out for free.
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
I hope ARIN doesn't reclaim. Let the shortages create the pain.
Re: (Score:2)
The problem there is it will cause pain to all the wrong people. New business, need 5 IPs? That'll cost ya! Go with IPv6, half your customers ISPs haven't crawled out of the slime yet and so they won't be able to reach you at all.
The ISPs themselves? They have a massive pool of IPs and they aren't afraid to NAT them.
Until major sites start having v4 blackout days, the pain won't hit the right people.
Re: (Score:2)
True. But other than outright regulation / fines... I'm not sure how to hit the right people. Right now we have:
a) ISPs being sluggish
b) Some network people at companies being obstinate
c) Companies being irresponsible about their own conversion
d) The government not leading the effort (though in all fairness the Obama administration is better than I would expect on IPv6 issues).
Re: (Score:2)
One approach would be via the FTC. Simply offering connectivity to IPv5 is no longer connectivity to 'The Internet'. Perhaps the ISPs should be forced to either get v6 up and running or cease advertising themselves as an ISP. Instead, they should be forced to call themselves deprecated ISPs. Perhaps we should legally define provision of v4 only as 'shitty service' and force them to advertise that. As in, Ajax ISP, shitty service for $60/month.
b and c are difficult, but take care of a and d and the pressure
Re: (Score:2)
If the ISP is able to get one IPv4 address, then they can NAT64 the rest of their network. Sure there will be a lot of software that breaks, but that is going to be a growing reality for many people.
Re: (Score:2)
A good example of this is where I needed a small cheap Linux vps with ipv6 for reasons.. I found one with a small Dutch vendor with 256mb of ram, ipv6 support, and a fair amount of diskspace for $4.00/YEAR.. I knew they were getting cheap but not THIS cheap.. anyway I'm probably not going to need it for more than a few months, so I signed up for one and when I went to provision it, the provisioning config page showed it came with 2 ipv6 addresses included, but if you wanted a v4 address it was an additional
Slashdot degraded into clickbait? (Score:2)
WTF?
Tunnelbroker or whatever site's "countdown gadget" is only an illustrative approximation anyways. The only entity that can really say ARIN IPv4 addresses run out is ARIN.
We are also guaranteed they won't run out tomorrow, since ARIN doesn't make allocations on non-business days.
It's also pretty unlikely there will be 200 /24 requests answered on Monday.
And even after that, there are certain reserved ranges that won't be run out.
As for having
Re: (Score:3)
Yes, but there really isn't, since large chunks of those IP addresses aren't being used...
And that is the problem with the system, lots of IP blocks are taken, but unused and hard to get back.
Frankly, this is all pointless, IP6 fixes this for... more or less, ever...
Re: (Score:2)
340 undecillion address ought to be enough for everyone.
Re: (Score:3)
You joke, and you're of course right to a point, but there comes a point where you have enough IP addresses for every grain of sand on Earth.
We likely won't care within our lifetimes :)
Re: (Score:2)
Just to be "that guy"... no one is handing out single IPv6 addresses. Even if you need just one address, you're generally being given a /64 (or a /48).
So the math people are generally using in these sorts of discussions is wrong.
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
Right!
Because in 1981 or so, everybody was pretty sure that this fairly obscure educational network would *never* need more than about 4 billion addresses... and they were *obviously right*.
The discussion about grains of sand or atoms is pretty silly. The reality is that the idea of 1 item, 1 address is already hogwash. It's very typical for one address to host *many somethings* (EG: websites, NAT, etc) and the opposite is also equally true: it's very typical for one something to respond to many addresses.
T
Re: (Score:2)
Plus you can't project exponential growth out to infinity. It is inevitable that some factor will come to limit the growth. It has been really incredible how long transistors have maintained their growth, but even that seems to be
Re: (Score:2)
Because in 1981 or so, everybody was pretty sure that this fairly obscure educational network would *never* need more than about 4 billion addresses... and they were *obviously right*.
Well, maybe. Back then home computers were already a growth area and so it was obvious that one computer per household would eventually become the norm. If you wanted to put these all on IPv4, then it would be cramped. The growth in mobile devices and multi-computer households might have been a bit surprising to someone in 1981, but you'd have wanted to add some headroom.
When 2% of your address space is consumed, you are just over 6 doublings away consumption. Even if you assume an entire decade per doubling, that's less than an average lifetime before you're doing it all over again.
With IPv6, you can have 4 billion networks for every IPv4 address. Doublings are much easier to think about in base 2: one bit per d
Re: (Score:2)
You're right of course... And the intent of the IPv6 space is not to use all the numbers, but rather to give every device its own number, do away with NAT and DHCP, and to make routing of traffic faster and easier.
So the percentage of "used" space will likely always be low with IPv6, but the total address space is so big, it probably won't matter.
At least, it won't matter in our lifetime...
Re: (Score:2)
> You're right of course... And the intent of the IPv6 space is not to use all
> the numbers, but rather to give every device its own number, do away
> with NAT and DHCP, and to make routing of traffic faster and easier.
There are tons of hacks available.
If things get bad, an ISP could use CIDR on IPV6 for all their customers in a given city. A million customers in a big city could fit into a /64 with 2^44 addresses for each customer. If they're all in one city, routing would not be an issue for route
Re:wft ever dude! (Score:5, Insightful)
For the moment, I think we can limit ourselves to the number of atoms in the solar system. One rough estimate is that there are 10e29 stars in the universe. If the atoms were divided up approximately evenly between these star's systems, then there'd be 10e82/10e29=10e53. So we have one IPv6 address for each cluster of 10e15 atoms.
Except! I've heard it estimated that about half the matter in the solar system is in the sun, and we don't want to use up the sun to build computers, because we need it to power the computers. So, 10e14 atoms per IPv6 left to work with.
So the question before the audience is:can you build a device that implements an IPv6 stack and a minimal radio transmitter that allows it to communicate with other, similar devices, using only 10e14 atoms? If so, or if it can be done in less, then we may have a problem*. Otherwise, I think we should be fine for now.
(To give you a rough estimate of what you're working with:10e14 atoms of silicon would mass about 46 nanograms.)
Submit your solutions to iwannahelpdestroytheworld@weregonnafreakingcreatethesingularity.com :)
* Although the problem may not be manifest until we convert the *entire* Earth, core and all, into these devices, along with all the other planets, and colonize the Oort cloud, and do the same there. :)
Re: (Score:3)
Re: (Score:2)
Are you sure about that? This presentation [ipv6.org.uk] says they're allocating a /56.
Re: (Score:2)
Actually, Sky aren't offering any IPv6 yet, except to a small trial.
But for the trial customers, they're handing out /56s.
Re: (Score:2)
You sure that's residential? Why would a home need 65k subnets?
Re: (Score:2)
A local internet registry at smallest only gets a /32. Which means they can only do 65k homes which would be too small. Now admittedly if they are getting a /20 (maximum allocation) will be fine. But that means you can only have 256 locals in each regional (i.e. each /12) and that's likely too few. There is tons of room but it isn't infinite.
I'm a fan of a /60 for homes. I guess you are right there is enough room to make a /48 work but that seems like needlessly throwing away a lot of b
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
A /56 only allows for 256 networks
With 4e21 addresses each.
Or four billion networks with 1e12 addresses each
Or...
It's not like you couldn't subnet your address space if you wanted. You only need to stick with the 64/64 split if you want everything(*) to automagically configure itself
(*) hosts, anyway. not routers.
Re: (Score:2)
Frankly, this is all pointless, IP6 fixes this for... more or less, ever...
If my (insert profanity here) ISP ever gets off its cheap, lazy butts and makes IPv6 available to me...
Re: (Score:2)
I hear you...
I've been on Verizon FIOS for 5 years now, never had IPv6 at all...
A few days ago, switched to AT&T GigaPower... IPv6 came right up...
Why did I switch you ask? FIOS was stuck at 150 megabits up and down for $105 a month. AT&T offered 1 gigabit up and down for $110 a month.
Ok, ok, I have to agree to let them track what I search for, but I figure they are doing that anyway (I know Google does, so what is the difference?). I also may pay up to $30 more per month max if I use a ton of b
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
Interesting point you make... When I move a large file, give it some time, and the speed tends to go up over time... It often takes 15 to 20 seconds before full speed is attained...
Honestly, I'm considering dropping it back to 300 meg, it saves $30 a month and I suspect I won't notice a difference...
Re: (Score:2)
Slow start [wikipedia.org]
Re: (Score:2)
I found that above about 10Mb/s you start to hit diminishing returns. The jump from 10 to 30 was barely noticeable. The jump from 30 to 100 is noticeable with large downloads, but nothing else. From 100 to 1000, the main thing that you notice is if you accidentally download a large file to a spinning-rust disk and see how quickly your fill up your RAM with buffer cache...
Over the last 10 years, I've gone from buying the fastest connection my ISP offered to buying the slowest. The jump from 512Kb/s to 1
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
Name and shame.
ipv6 tunnels (Score:2)
I've had an ipv6 tunnel (mostly) up and running since 2010 just for experimentation. Now my router brings up the tunnel and enables stateless auto configuration for the entire LAN. Lazy ISP is no excuse.
Re: (Score:2)
Now if Comcast would FINALLY fix their broken route to the 6to4 transition space...
Re: (Score:2)
Essentially, all it says is that hosts and routers (meaning end user's routers) should not default to using 192.88.99.1 as a 6to4 router if they don't get a prefix. The reason for that is too many firewalls and clueless network people were breaking the mechanism and causing long timeouts as hosts assume they have v6 connectivity and use it in preference to v4 (as they should).
The mechanism itself and the associated address space are explicitly not deprecated.
That is, they absolutely DO need to cease black h
Re: (Score:3)
Re: (Score:2)
Am I the only one that sees IP V6 as a "cure" worse than the disease? From everything I've seen it looks like a police state and media cartels wet dream, the ability to assign a unique address to every.single.device like a digital fingerprint so they can trivially trace back every statement, every video watched, every move, for later prosecution?
I'm sure others see that too... but what I'd suggest is that you not pirate media and then the media cartels won't care about you. :)
In fact, if you're not a pirate, then the unique IP for every device can come to your defense, since I'm sure some people are unfairly targeted now thanks to NAT and the like.
Am I the only one having a problem with this idea, or is the idea of always being under the all seeing electric eye something the young folks simply accept and don't care about?
I'm 40 years old, while I have a vague sense of unease with it, the 20 year olds don't seem to care much. My parents and their generation largely don't seem to understand or have given up and accept the
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
This is a weak retort to a sticking argument. From grandparents to teens, people have quickly learned that you need to:
- use VPNs to access sports channels that are blocked in your region
- use VPNs and common sense to access social media that is blocked in your country
- use strong encryption to protect discussion of drugs that aren't legal yet
- block ads / use incognito mode to avoid letting websites you visit learning your sexual orientation or ot
Re: (Score:2)
You can change the MAC address (last 64 bits) your system advertises. If you don't like consistency, change addresses daily or whatever. Of course once systems start using your MAC address as a sort of username...
Re: (Score:2)
This already happens automatically. With privacy addresses enabled (which is the default on pretty much everything), your system will automatically generate itself a new random address every 24 hours. The GP's worry about being able to trivially identify which device was using each IP will not actually happen (unless you've specifically gone and disabled privacy addresses...).
Re: (Score:2)
There are at least 3x that many. There are huge blocks of unused space but then used space if often being crowded in tightly. We are long past when we should have switched.
Re:wft ever dude! (Score:4, Informative)
Re: (Score:2)
The problem is that in the early days they handed out class A subnets like they were candy, wasting millions of IP addresses with every one.
This is correct, and we should continue efforts to reclaim IPs from entities sitting on massive swaths of unused space. Eli Lilly surrendered part of their unneeded allocation, for example. I say forget the corporate blocks for now until the emergency is a bit more dire. While companies like Halliburton and Ford Motors can't possibly have a need for a full /8, trying to recover from them is likely to present legal challenges.
Instead, why don't we take a look at how many /8s are reserved for militaries? 6.0.
Re: (Score:3, Insightful)
Back before the exhaustion policies kicked in, ARIN were burning through a /8 every couple of months.
This is why taking back the legacy address allocations will not really be worth the time or effort. There is more demand than availability. If there was free reign allocation over it all, it would be gone before the year is out.
Move to IPv6 already.
Oh, and 11/8 recently became routable.
Re: (Score:2)
There aren't four billion public IP addresses in use. The problem is that in the early days they handed out class A subnets like they were candy, wasting millions of IP addresses with every one.
Incorrect. Getting an address should be cheap like candy, but that is not the problem. Even if they practiced austerity from the beginning, killing Internet adoption before it could start, there would still be a problem.
The actual number of public addresses that can be used is much less than the 4 billion that you get by raising 2 to the 32nd power. Addresses are allocated in power-of-two groups, so an organization that needs 127 computers online and an organization that needs 250 computers will require the
No, it won't be a problem. (Score:2, Funny)
Yes, it is the exact same behavior. But it won't be a problem, because unlike IPv4, IPv6 isn't going to see any significant adoption, ever.
Re: (Score:3)
Re: (Score:2)
That was by design. Leaving 64 bits for the host address lets them use the Ethernet MAC address (the most common hardware address) as the host address, which leaves only the local network prefix needed to complete configuring the interface and that can be gotten via the Router Advertisement protocol on the known link-local network (fe80::/10). And let's see. The public unicast allocation's 2000::/3, with a few exception blocks carved out for things like 6to4 and Teredo. That's roughly 60 bits for the unique
Re: (Score:2)
Amusingly most home routers already support most of that. #8 isn't feasible, a router doesn't have enough of a view into the traffic to do that kind of thing in real-time. And IMO #9 is better done on the printers. My laser printer's got Ethernet and a built-in print server (actually several, for the different protocols used by different operating systems). The rest is already a standard part of the firmware most router vendors base their own on. It's just that the vendors have disabled/removed a lot of the
Re: (Score:2)
So... There are 10^38 IPv6 addresses. How many is that?
The Earth is about 10^24 kg in mass. That means you could assign 100 IPv6 address to each nanogram of Earth.
I think we'll be OK.
Re: (Score:2)
Eastman?
Re: (Score:2)
Its 512. Come, count with me:
1
2
4
8
16
32
64
128
256
512
Re:Wait Wait Wait... (Score:5, Funny)
I thought they ran out last year, until I saw the report of them running out last month.
I thought they ran out last month, until I saw the report of them running out last week.
I though they ran out last week, now I see they'll run out tomorrow.
Perhaps someone should start reporting facts rather than what ever you call all these reports.
Xeno's IPv4 Paradox.
Re:Wait Wait Wait... (Score:4, Insightful)
After this the only way to get IP addresses will be to pay a broker. The cost will go up and up over several years, until IPv6 is adopted, then the price will go down. IPv6 is already being rolled out in several places, so it's not an impossibility. Your phone more than likely uses IPv6, for example.
Re: (Score:2)
Re:IPv4 is for 32-bit cows. (Score:5, Funny)
(to the tune of "99 bottles of beer on the wall")
4,294,967,290 cows in the field, 4,294,967,290 cows...
Move one aside, add one more cow, 4,294,967,291 cows in the field...
4,294,967,291 cows in the field, 4,294,967,291 cows...
Move one aside, add one more cow, 4,294,967,292 cows in the field...
4,294,967,292 cows in the field, 4,294,967,292 cows...
Move one aside, add one more cow, 4,294,967,293 cows in the field...
4,294,967,293 cows in the field, 4,294,967,293 cows...
Move one aside, add one more cow, 4,294,967,294 cows in the field...
4,294,967,294 cows in the field, 4,294,967,294 cows...
Move one aside, add one more cow, 4,294,967,295 cows in the field...
4,294,967,295 cows in the field, 4,294,967,295 cows...
Move one aside, add one more cow... hey, where did all my cows go?
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:3)
They also are just being sat on. Corperations need to have them forcibly taken back as those asshats will never give them up willingly.
Re: (Score:2)
Who got Nortel's?
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
By the time you finished with all the lawsuits/etc the addresses wouldn't be useful. We need to get past IPv4. Putting it off for another few months won't help that.
That said, there are a lot of things about IPv6 that are rather annoying. There aren't really a lot of good DHCP options if you want to use NAT, and if you don't want to use NAT then anytime your router prefix changes the external IPs of all the hosts on the network change. That is a fairly big change from how things work today, and I think
Re: (Score:2)
You really shouldn't be using NAT with IPv6. The idea is one machine, one address. Given DNS I'm not sure why you would want fixed fully external IPs. But if you do you want to have some fixed external addresses do it via. some sort of relay where you have an external server at a telco colo with a very long term address and then the telco wires it back to your server (or just host your server with the telco). I think part of the idea of IPv6 is simplifying the routing tables so the old any address ca
Re: (Score:2)
The idea is one machine, one address
More like 5 IPs per computer. Each for different usages.
Re: (Score:2)
Why do you need multiple IPs on a machine with 1 nic? Besides the last 64 is going to be the MAC address.
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
Having VMs on the machine is the first that comes to mind for me.
Re: (Score:2)
That's true. One big advantage of IPv6 wii be the ability to create an essentially infinite number of external IPs associated with VMs / containers / microservices.
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
An IP is not a "digital fingerprint". Knowing the v6 address won't let you figure out who was using it at the time, or even what device it was assigned to.
With privacy extensions (which are on by default in basically everything), knowing the v6 address is about as useful as knowing the v4 address. Removing NAT from your network doesn't affect governments or media cartels -- but meanwhile it makes your own life much easier, so you're being dumb if you insist on using it when it's not necessary.
Re: (Score:2)
AFAIk the 2001:678::/29 provider independent space are just supposed to be a bunch of /48 relays.
For residential users on IPv6 they can likely now have a fixed IP (or a /60) now. So it would only change when they their home ISP.
Re: (Score:2)
Well it is half true (Score:2)
Slashdot has been crying wolf since they are a geek site and geeks seem to like that kind of thing and also like new technology, no matter the cost and issues.
However there have been actual depletions of IPv4 space of various kinds. First it was that all available networks were allocated to regional registrars. Now some of those regional registrars are allocating all their remaining addresses.
That doesn't mean doomsday, of course, it means that for any additional allocation to go on, something would have to
Re:Well it is half true (Score:4, Insightful)
Actually, it was never crying wolf. The wolf was actually there, it's just that it was a long way off in the '90s. It has been headed our way in a strait line ever since. You needed a telescope to see it in the '90s, now you don't even need to squint.
And apparently, a warning that far in advance wasn't enough since there are still a lot of organizations with their pants down. How pathetic is that?
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
Check out the IPv4 address space consumption graphs at http://www.potaroo.net/tools/i... [potaroo.net], there is no new space for you in North America. In fact the only place there is still new space for you is in the African region.
See the 1 /8 remaining red line, that's where most of the RIR's started their run out policy which for APNIC at least this means you can only get space if you are using it to transition to IPv6.
Noone is going to make anyone give up their old /8 IPv4 allocations and if they did it, would delay
Re: (Score:2)
How about someone forcing HP to give up their gigantic chunk that they have been camping on unused for 40 years?
And do what? Split it into thousands of of small chunks further compounding the problem that is incredible bloat in routing tables?
Better still I say HP offer to return the addresses but only to those companies which can be shown to have 100% IPv6 compliance.
Re: (Score:3, Interesting)
AfraNIC do not have a shitload of addresses. They have around 2.5 /8's.
Back before the exhaustion policies kicked in, ARIN were burning through a /8 every couple of months.
This is why taking back the legacy address allocations will not really be worth the time or effort. There is more demand than availability. If there was free reign allocation over it all, it would be gone before the year is out.
Move to IPv6 already.
Re: (Score:2)
I'd love to! Oh wait, my ISP still doesn't support IPv6...
Re: (Score:2)
AfriNIC has a shitload of addresses it seems. Maybe they could surrender some or start setting up huge IP infrastructure and capitalize on it.
I imagine that there will soon be a few Murcan carrier battle groups off of Africa, this stuff will be more precious than oil!
Re: (Score:2)
I wonder if a company like IBM could make good money reselling unused IP addresses in their 9.x.x.x block until everyone finally migrates to IPv6. There is no way that they need that many public facing IP addresses.
Re: (Score:2)
I wonder if a company like IBM could make good money reselling unused IP addresses in their 9.x.x.x block until everyone finally migrates to IPv6. There is no way that they need that many public facing IP addresses.
I heard that ARIN will be taking measures against people profiteering from this.
Re: (Score:2)
IPv4 should just go away already. Linux, Mac, and WinDOS had had IPV6 forever. Whatever doesn't support IPv6 should just go away as well. All that old shit is hackable virus prone garbage anyway.
The problem is that numerous companies haven't invested the time or money in ensuring their network can speak IPv6 or to the IPv6 world. The main issue has probably been that it was cheaper to do business a usual. Until major services do an IPv4 blackout day or ARIN raises the prices of the remaining IPv6, companies will be dragging their feet.
One site amongst the feet draggers is /. Sure there was a bug in some of the Perl code used by /. a number of years back, that apparently prevented supporting IPV6, a
Re: (Score:2)
The first step is the carriers / ISPs getting everyone an IPv6 address. The first thing to break after that will be geolocation as the carriers start pooling their home / small business IPv4 addresses and allocating them from a single common pool (so all Verizon originates in West Virginia). That will give companies a reason to switch their consumer internet.
In terms of B2B... I suspect most companies will change most stuff. However longer terms routing tables are getting too fragmented for some many ro
Re: (Score:3)
The big question is: why haven't the telcos moved home / small business over yet?
I asked the owner of an ISP that question. The answer was basically, money. The transition will cost money, and there is zero upside to spending that money before you have to.
Re: (Score:2)
Makes sense. This is where I wish ARIN were pushing much harder to break the chicken and egg issue.
Re: (Score:2)
The first step is the carriers / ISPs getting everyone an IPv6 address.
...
The big question is: why haven't the telcos moved home / small business over yet?
Probably one of the biggest problems for IPv6 is Amazon. Total apathy, there. Amazon.com is not accessible via IPv6, and last I checked, AWS isn’t available over IPv6 unless you go all-Amazon with your DNS and Elastic Load Balancers.
North America is just so awash with IPv4 addresses that businesses don’t suffer from lack of IPv6. I was hoping that the threat of inevitable pain would get American businesses to switch, but it looks like we’ll just have to wait for actual pain.
Re: (Score:2)
I'm going to assume that AWS can move very quickly once their customers start demanding IPv6. It wouldn't shock me if AWS's problem is that many of their carriers (remember they use tons given Direct Connect) don't support IPv6 and thus... So again they are one of the chicken & egg type problems.
AWS as a website though is a perfect point of attack. Once geolocation breaks (or there is a serious threat) I'm going to assume they go aggressively towards offering IPv6.
Re: (Score:2)
The USA will face a different problem: inability to vote connect to new services that only exist on IPv6. Maybe some of the big players, such as Google and Facebook could add some features that you only get through IPv6 and then leak the info about it. I wonder how much noise will then occur on the web?
BTW Netflix supports IPv6 via AWS.
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
There are a number of /8's which frankly don't need to exist.
Human brains just don’t get exponentials.
We’re in the exponential-looking part of the growth curve of the Internet. That means even 5% of a resource that has lasted for 30 years is now only enough for maybe a few months. And all it would take to win those few months is convincing some famously risk-adverse organizations to take new risks. The thought of just scheduling the necessary meetings makes me shudder.
On the other hand, the vast address space of IPv6 means, for those of us who do understa
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
Until *some* carriers (I'm looking at YOU, Cogent) stop playing silly network peering games, widespread use of ipv6 isn't gonna happen. For example, at home I'm on Cox, who doesn't seem to even know ipv6 exists, so if I want to use ipv6, I'm stuck with using a kludgy HE tunnelbroker 6to4 tunnel. I also have a Linux vps with a vendor who provides TWO ipv4 addresses and three ipv6 addresses. I told them I only need one v4 address and they could take back the second one, but they said "no problem, we have plen
Re: (Score:2)
Yeah, let's get that block back. That should buy v4 about two hours or so. That'll totally save us.