4892013
submission
Comments: 7 +- Comcast to bring IPv6 to residential US in 2010-> on Wednesday June 17 2009, @08:30PM darthcamaro
Submitted
by
darthcamaro
on Wednesday June 17 2009, @08:30PM
background: url(//a.fsdn.com/sd/topics/topicinternet.gif); width:70px; height:73px;
internet
darthcamaro writes "We all know that IPv4 address space is almost gone — but we also know that no major US carrier has yet migrated its consumer base either. Comcast is no upping the ante a bit and has now said that they are seriously gearing up for IPv6 residential broadband deployment soon.
Link to Original Source
""Comcast plans to enter into broadband IPv6 technical trials later this year and into 2010," Barry Tishgart, VP of Internet Services for Comcast said. "Planning for general deployment is underway."
Link to Original Source
No yak too dirty; no dumpster too hollow.
All trademarks and copyrights on this page are owned by their respective owners. Comments are owned by the Poster. The Rest © 1997-2009 Geeknet, Inc.
This equals ipv4 masquerade for the users (Score:2)
This equals ipv4 masquerade for the users of ipv6 when they talk to ipv4 machines, they will have to go through an ipv6 to ipv4 gateway and the ipv4 IP addresses will be shared amongst many users.
If you host a server, you need to have an ipv4 address until everybody else uses ipv6.
This will be good for consumers only needing to get stuff from the net but equivalent to AOL service which shares ipv4 address amongst many users, they used to do this anyway, I haven't checked in a while.
At least, this will be th
Re: (Score:2)
If you read the article, you'll see they're going to use dual-stack [wikipedia.org]. You can have a public IPv4 *and* IPv6 address at the same time.
Note that dual-stack doesn't mean that it translates between IPv4 and IPv6. You have two native connections at the same time, over the single whatever-it-is-link (DSL, Cable, whatever). PPP fully supports this configuration.
Re: (Score:2)
I know this although I admit I did not read TFA.
But the citation starts with :
""We all know that IPv4 address space is almost gone"
How is IPv6 going to help the shortage if you are using a dual stack that still requires a dedicated ipv4 address ??
Or maybe use shared public ipv4 addresses ? This would require masquerading which was the point I was trying to make.
Did I miss anything ?
Re: (Score:2)
I think we're both in agreement, but I'm still trying to fully understand your point in your original post. :)
Yes, we will definitely not be able to get rid of our IPv4 addresses in the foreseeable future. Much like moving from Windows to Linux, I suspect there will always be "that site" that is critical, and yet hasn't migrated to IPv6 yet.
However, I'm hoping that everything that you currently need your public IPv4 address for (as opposed to your ISP putting you behind a massive NAT) will support IPv6.
Re: (Score:2)
> I think we're both in agreement, but I'm still trying to fully :)
> understand your point in your original post.
I was saying that I host a server (web server,smtp, etc,..) just like slashdot is hosting web servers for the slashdot site.
People who have only ipv4 won't be able to connect to my server if I switch to ipv6 without a dual stack.
Hence I need to wait until everybody switches to ipv6 before I can switch my server to ipv6 only and help the shortage of ipv4 address !! ;-)) ipv6 is already confi
Re: (Score:1)
While the article talks about dual-stacks. It should be noted that Comcast has talked about using IPv6 for transport and doing NAT exactly as the parent talked about.
Also for management of the cable modems they ran out of 10.x.x.x addresses to use. So rather than break up their global view they acquired new public addresses from ARIN to use for management of the cable modems. So with new equipment they want to use IPv4 for customer transport and use IPv6 for management of devices such as cable modems. Thus
Great... (Score:1)