Four Root DNS Servers Go IPv6 On February 4th 228
I Don't Believe in Imaginary Property writes "On February 4th, IANA will add AAAA records for the IPv6 addresses of the four root servers. With this transition, it will finally be possible for two internet hosts to communicate without using IPv4 at all. Certain obsolete software may face compatibility problems due to the change, but those issues are addressed in an ICANN report (pdf)."
Routers! (Score:5, Informative)
Regards,
--
*Art
Re: (Score:3, Insightful)
What's so awful about that? OK, so it's not native, but none of your apps or services can tell the difference. The advantage is that when you do get native connectivity, you've already done your testing and you're ready for the world.
Re: (Score:3, Insightful)
Re: (Score:3, Insightful)
Re: (Score:2)
Actually, CPE is often IPv6-capable, Core isn't (Score:3, Insightful)
Re: (Score:3, Informative)
Re: (Score:2)
Wow, that's idiotic. It's important to keep language dynamic because it is a very good thing for language to be UP TO DATE. Else, thou wouldst have to sticketh this commentation in thine arse!
Re: (Score:3, Informative)
Re: (Score:2)
The phrase "begs the question" has an intuitive meaning which is understood by any English speaker even if they've never encountered the phrase before. The fact that the intuitive meaning is "wrong" is irrelevant. The "correct" meaning is only going to be understood by those who study philosophy or logical fallacies, i.e. a specialised field. It's further complicated by the fact that there are other terms such as "circular argument" which mean much the same thing (and are typically used when people are tryi
Re: (Score:2)
Finally (Score:2, Insightful)
Re:Finally (Score:5, Informative)
Re:Finally (Score:5, Insightful)
IP changes, in my experience from both Comcast and Verizon FIOS, are so rare that they effectively don't happen. I've never had a change with FIOS from the day the service was fired up, and although I can't recall ever having my previous Comcast one change except when I physically moved, its possible it did once or twice.
If they want to block servers, they'd block inbound ports.
Dynamic IP addresses are used because its the only possible way to do it without having techs setting up every joe six pack or grandmothers computer.
Re: (Score:2)
Re:Finally (Score:4, Insightful)
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
though if I use the same mac address I usually get the same IP. exceptions to this are duration between changes.
As for IPV6 my systems and internal routers can use it whenever I want. As it is now my routers broadcast both, switching won't be hard.
Re: (Score:2)
(I just wish they'd run FIOS in my hometown already!)
Re: (Score:2)
No... if that was the case, your IP would change.
IP changes, in my experience from both Comcast and Verizon FIOS, are so rare that they effectively don't happen. I've never had a change with FIOS from the day the service was fired up, and although I can't recall ever having my previous Comcast one change except when I physically moved, its possible it did once or twice.
My IP changes every time I reconnect. If I tell my router to drop its connection then reconnect straight away I never get the same IP. As to why my ISP do this I have no idea if it is to stop me running a home server or not, but I do know they throttle bit torrent traffic. Personally I don't mind them throttling torrent traffic if it means I can play online games with no lag.
Back on topic I would like to say that for about as long as I can remember we have been very close to the limit of IPv4 addresses. Wi
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
Dynamic IP addresses are used because its the only possible way to do it without having techs setting up every joe six pack or grandmothers computer.
DHCP can be used to assign static addresses and it would be transparent to the end user.
Reasons they don't :
1) Possible admin overhead (automatic assignment needs to handle non-contiguous blocks, returned IPs, etc)
2) Why waste the time on this? Is a static IP guaranteed as part of your service?
3) We can charge for static IPs!
Re: (Score:2)
In reality, I have an OpenBSD box acting as a router with static IPs (and NAT, natch), and on the other side I have . . . static IPs distributed over DHCP because it's just plain easier. My computers have static IPs, friend's laptops get assigned dynamic IPs, everything works.
DHCP is awesome whether you have static or dynamic IPs.
Your argument is leaky. (Score:3, Informative)
"Get IP address automatically" has nothing to do with dynamic / fixed assignment.
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:3, Informative)
From the customers standpoint, the different doesn't really matter except as an inbound DNS address, however managing static IPs via DHCP is still complicated because you can't easily move machines around subnets as the leaves of your network change in terms of device concentration and data load.
You pay more for a static IP address because once you have it, they have to adjust the network around you.
(FWIW, I built out a number of
Re: (Score:2)
Do you really think they dont give out static ips because they dont like home servers?
Yeah some ISPs dont like servers. Some even block certain ports (25 is occasionally blocked).
It everyone had static ips though then we'd be using ipv6 a long time ago.
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
So with IPv6 comes the dirt cheap home web/mail/file server (bye bye web and ISP email), enormously long and ever growing IP address blocking lists (billions of entries), possibly hardware manufactured with a fixed IP address and compulsory personal registration (government and corporations watching and monitoring all of your digital interactio
Re: (Score:2)
Pave way for 128-bit registers? (Score:2, Insightful)
Umm... mods? (Score:2)
So when will I be able to connect? (Score:5, Insightful)
Like, when will I be able to open my browser window, type in an IPv6 address, and connect to...say..google?
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:3)
Right now.
No, really.
There are tunnel brokers who will give you an IPv6 address now, and tell you how to create an IPv6 over IPv4 tunnel and keep it up. I've got one public server already set up on IPv6 by tunnel.
Some ISPs are starting to offer native IPv6, as well. My ISP from when I lived in France, Free.fr, offers 30Mbit/2Mbit ADSL with unlimited calling to 40 odd countries with 300 odd channels for 29.99 Euros. They just added IPv6 addresses for those who request them. Makes my Optimum Online ser
Re:So when will I be able to connect? (Score:4, Informative)
You appear to have misspelled your answer: the correct answer is "Real soon now. Not really."
Google has no IPv6 address to connect to. Nor have most other major net sites. IPv4 is still the only way to connect to almost all of the internet.
Chris Mattern
Re:So when will I be able to connect? (Score:5, Funny)
Re: (Score:2)
Imposter! Real hackers always browse by IP!
Re: (Score:2)
dig www.google.com any aaaa
Pretty tough to connect via IPv6 to a server not advertising an IPv6 address.
If you want to use IPv6, you need to do one of the following:
I currently use Anycast. I've used a tunnel broker in the past, but with a dynamic
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
And actually, something else occoured to me. When will we be able to request an IPv6 IP from our ISP, so we don't have to deal with having Dynamic IP's?
Re: (Score:2)
If your ISP is fairly decent (aka your not on a budget plan) then when they switch to v6 they should also give them away.
We wont really know what policies ISPs make until they get off their lazy asses and give us ipv6.
Re: (Score:2)
Also, write to "the other guy", and tell them that you might switch if they offer IPv6. Balking about things here on Slashdot don't do much; writing to companies and backing it up with you wallet does.
About time.. (Score:5, Funny)
Re: (Score:2)
2^128 is a very very big number.
Actually (Score:2)
2^128 / 6.02E23 = 5.16E14 moles of IP-addressable gasses
5.16E14 * 22.4 = 1.226E16 liters worth of IP-addressable gasses at STP
1.226E16 / 1000 = 1.226E13 meters cubed of IP-addressable gasses at STP
1.226E13 / 5.1E14 = 0.024 meters height if you spread that volume over the surface of the earth.
Re: (Score:2)
* at STP of course.
Re: (Score:2)
Well it hardly seems worth doing then. Only 2.5 centimetres - so not even an inch! Lame.
Re: (Score:2)
This page says [jlab.org] "A 70 kg body would have approximately 7*10^27 atoms." So enough for all the atoms in all the people on Earth.
Re: (Score:2)
Sure, you may laugh now and recommend a controller-based architecture with different instance IDs for each bulb, BUT SOMEDAY IT SHALL BE SO!!!!!!!11
Re: (Score:2)
You should do it that way anyway, or else somebody is going to hack into your Christmas ornamentation and do evil things.
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
Welding torch?
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2, Insightful)
You and your kind (those ignorant of IP networking and the concept of true end to end connectivity) may enjoy non-routeable addresses, but I happen to like the flexibility that incoming connections permit.
I could rant about all the things your lousy NAT setup breaks but arguing about this over and over again is just getting tiresome.
Re: (Score:2)
There are other nice things
Re: (Score:2)
Feature, not a bug. I seriously don't *want* you accessing my damn toaster and the fact that you don't have a route to it suits me just fine.
Chris Mattern
Re:About time.. (Score:5, Informative)
ie) deny ip from any to 2610:78:ad::/48
With NAT you are eliminating the possibility of incoming connections, with IPv6 you can deny connections all you want but can allow incoming connections where required or desired. Sure you can setup a port forwarding rule to allow a service for a given machine, but what happens when you need the same service to go to more than one host? You know need to accommodate for that by changing the incoming port on your real IP.
Not to mention all the issues raised by protocols that embed IP's that are not routable within the protocol themselves (take the SIP protocol for example). Work-arounds need to be put in place for many protocols on an individual basis in a NAT'd environment. This is a pain in the ass that would be highly unnecessary in a post IPv4 world.
If you're so fond of the kludge that is NAT, nobody is stopping you from using NAT with IPv6 in combination with a non-routable unique-local prefix (fc00::/7).
Dragging your feet on adoption of a superior technology that works for every situation in favor of a broken setup that happens to meet YOUR rather limited requirements is delaying progress for the rest of us.
Generally speaking the consumer world isn't ready for IPv6 yet anyway (Too many Windows machines with limited IPv6 capabilities)... but I still get annoyed with all the anti-IPv6 commentary by those that have not fully investigated the specifics.
Just the personal pet peeve that is looking forward to moving behind the network design of choice for the 1980's.
Re: (Score:2)
ie) deny ip from any to 2610:78:ad::/48
How about the fact that to the average user it's complete and utter gibberish? That's pretty difficult.
Re: (Score:2)
In an earlier post you said:
With v6, you've unnecessarily exposed something that you don't exactly want open, and would have to firewall every single device connected to your "wonderful" new world of everything connected to v6.
You seem to be arguing that a NAT router in front of your network is easier than having a firewall with a default deny policy in front of your network. Then you go and point out that pretty much all NAT routers also function as firewalls. So... you're complaining that IPv6 requires you to have a device in front of your network to manage access, which you already have and need for IPv4 NAT anyway.
With a firewall that drops all incoming traffic to addresses you don't want expo
Re: (Score:2)
At least v6 gives you the flexibility. Only an idiot would leave everything open. The idea is that you have an implicit deny for the entire network that you have and then only poke holes when you need them. At least then everything's routable. NAT is a kludge. Nothing more. It needs to die a swift death.
Re:About time.. (Score:4, Informative)
Everyone, lets all hold hands and repeat now:
Firewalling and NAT are different things...
Firewalling and NAT are different things...
Firewalling and NAT are different things...
Re: (Score:2)
two of 'em, eh? (Score:2, Informative)
With this transition, it will finally be possible for two internet hosts to communicate without using IPv4 at all
Well, I guess that IPv6 transition is coming along nicely.
HAR HAR HAR.
Yeah, when slashdot drops it's IPv4 address, then I'll believe in this IPv6 nonsense.
Re: (Score:3, Informative)
I'd hope
I think it's backward compatibility IIRC.
Re:two of 'em, eh? (Score:5, Insightful)
Yeah, when slashdot drops it's IPv4 address, then I'll believe in this IPv6 nonsense.
OK, admit it... how many of us would go figure out how to run IPv6 if it was required to get a /. fix?
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
Best IPv6 Read ever (not the article) (Score:3, Informative)
IPv6 [wikipedia.org]
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
No, no, chances are, I am NOT behind a firewall or proxy, I am trying to correct a post on a board that is too goddamn old-school, its own admins don't know how to fix it to offer modern features, like editing posts.
Re: (Score:2)
I don't care how "modern" the ability to edit posts is. It's utterly stupid, and messes up every single forum that uses it. When you say something publicly, you've said it. If you don't want to say it then don't publish it in the first place.
Especially on Slashdot this would be a
Re: (Score:2)
Yeah, yeah, yeah. But will it require boiling the oceans [wikipedia.org] to fully populate IPv6 space?
No, but you could make a good effort of trying.
Both ZFS and IPv6 are 128-bit systems. Populating an IPv6 address can probably be defined as a one-bit operation, unlike the multiple bits required for each ZFS block allocation. Adjusting his math for a one-bit allocation of an IPv6 address gives us an energy of 3.06x10^24 J, and thus 1.3x10^18 kg of water. This works out to 13 million km^3 of water that we can boil. This is roughly comparable to the volume of the Gulf of Mexico, Caribbean Sea, and Mediter
No, wait, not THAT game server... (Score:4, Funny)
Ah crap, I forgot the number again.
Damn you, progress.
Re:No, wait, not THAT game server... (Score:5, Funny)
Re: (Score:2, Informative)
Also IPv6 addresses can be compressed if they contain contiguous 0's.
ie) 2610:0078:00ad:0001:0000:0000:0000:0001 -> 2610:78:ad:1::1.
Worry not though, this is what DNS is for... Humans need not memorize IP addresses.
Re:No, wait, not THAT game server... (Score:5, Funny)
Re: (Score:2)
And to connect to Windows systems, you'll need too make regular and extensive use of sed with escaped escape characters to yield
\\\\b439-88fa-31d3-0507-613a-426c-99ba-02e2\\...
For anyone that hasn't used, for example, wakeonlan scripts, laugh. It's funny.
Re: (Score:2)
For some reason many gamers (or game server admins) don't seem to realize its possible to use DNS. A few years back, I was running a Medal of Honor server and would confuse the hell out of people by telling them the server address was, for example, moh.mydomain.org. A number of folks wouldn't accept that at all and insisted on using the actual IP address.
Irony (Score:2)
IANAIANA (Score:5, Funny)
Mixed up acronyms (Score:5, Funny)
Human readability (Score:2, Interesting)
So, we've got lots of IPv6 addresses, thus we can assign static IP's to everything. Catch: IPv6 addresses aren't very readable/memorable. I can remember all of the IPv4 addresses on my network, but I wouldn't remember the v6 ones.
So, what's the solution there: well there's DNS and DHCP... man I hate DHCP. What if my local DHCP server or DNS server goes down? And, then I try to ping it to diagnose... oh, if only I could remember its address!
What about web hosting providers? Dear Hosting Support, can you
Re:Human readability (Score:4, Insightful)
I can't remember my IPv4 addresses without looking them up, so I'd be no worse off than with IPv6. You'll get older too son, then you'll agree with me
As for web hosting providers, they won;t ever have to 'change your IP address', they'll just have to tell you it in the first place, then you're done.
In both cases, IPv6 supports auto-registration so you won't have to fiddle with it anyway. As the IETF says [ietf.org] "Since IPv6 addresses are too long to remember and EUI64-based addresses are too complicated to remember, they are not suitable for such identifiers"
IIRC you don't need DHCP anymore with stateless autoconfiguration.
NAT:
think for a moment what NAT does. All you have is your router attached to the internet, and all your computers connected to the router. Unless you explicitly allow incoming connections to pass through, your PCs are "firewalled" at the router.
If you have IPv6, you'll still have the router. I hope that all router manufacturers will be shipping them with incoming connectivity disabled by default, just like it is at the moment. Then, you'll be no less secure with IPv6 than you are today.
You will have the benefit of being able to "DMZ" as many of your PCs as you like, not just one of them. This is best of both worlds.
I think IPv6 will be a good thing, if it ever happens. I can't see that happening anytime soon though, there's too much infrastructure out there.
are they really that hard to remember? (Score:2)
Ok, they're long - but in my head right now i can remember 4 subnets, work, previous work, home and the university i went to. Now i tend to think in terms of subnets. For example lets say my home is 192.168.1.0/24, my router is 1, my dns is 2, my mailserver is 3, my printer is 4, etc etc. The bit at the front replacing the 192.168.1 may have got alot bigger, but i still on
Re: (Score:2)
Finally possible? (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2, Interesting)
will 256 be far off
Given that IPv6 would provide over 10^28 addresses for each of the 6.5 billion inhabitants of Earth, I think it will be sufficient for the foreseeable future.
But the intention with IPv6 was not merely to create
Re:Why did they skip 64-bits? (Score:5, Interesting)
Re: (Score:3, Informative)
I belive that they skipped the 64-bits address to be able to fit the 48-bit MAC (Level 2) address inside the IP (Level 3/4) address, and thus avoiding the need for the router to use ARP to find the MAC address corresponding to a local IP address.
Not even close. Those bottom bits are used for the completely optional autoconfiguration feature. You're equally welcome to hand-configure hosts or use DHCP6 to assign network::1, network::2, network::3 and so on without regard to MAC.
Re: (Score:3, Informative)
Re: (Score:2, Informative)
Here's the RFC header, straight from the IETF's website
Network Working Group Request for Comments: 2874 Category: Standards TrackAnd its current status is "experimental" so unless there's something not-so-technical deciding A6's fate, then you've made a mistake to call it deprecated.
Unless of course the IETF doesn't have this categorized right...
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:3, Informative)
Re: (Score:2)