Google Over IPv6 Coming Soon 264
fuzzel writes "Today Google announced Google over IPv6 where ISPs can sign up their DNS nameservers so that their users will get access to an almost fully IPv6-enabled Google, including http://www.google.com, images and maps, etc., just like in IPv4. Without this only http://ipv6.google.com is available, but then you go to IPv4 for most services.
So, start kicking your ISPs to support IPv6 too, and let them sign up.
Check this list of ISPs that already do native IPv6 to your doorstep.
The question that now remains is: when will Slashdot follow?"
Wow! (Score:5, Insightful)
Wow I can finally have all the advantages of IPv6 like
Until they run out of IPv4 addresses it really doesn't matter.
There are a few obscure tunneling applications to this but who cares.
Re: (Score:2)
Yea With NATs and DNS aliasing It will still be a while. Most likely there will be a point where they go to the people who reserved those big Class A and B networks, early on and edict of Use it or Loose it.
Re: (Score:2)
Routing speed. Jumbograms.
Re: (Score:3, Interesting)
Wait for it.... (Score:4, Insightful)
Re:Wait for it.... (Score:5, Insightful)
It's not about the short-term advantage because there is no short-term advantage. However, it's going to take a long time to do. Therefore, you start to think about doing it 10 years before it all goes tits-up.
We don't have a problem *now*. IPv4 is working great at the moment. However, we (people) are incredibly bad a doing global solutions to big problems quickly, so we need to start to migrate things early.
Comment removed (Score:5, Insightful)
Re: (Score:3, Insightful)
Re: (Score:2, Interesting)
Given that NAT at least partially became popular due to a few ISPs trying to argue that you can have only 1 machine on your network connected or you're breaking "the law" (their idiotic TOS), I have some doubts that IPV6 would bring about any real advantages to end users.
I'm not sure that I even want all my machines to have globally routable IPs.
Re: (Score:2, Informative)
I'm not sure that I even want all my machines to have globally routable IPs.
NAT != security
NAT doesn't provide security, it happens to disallow uninitiated inbound connections since it doesn't know where to send them, but so does any good firewall.
Re: (Score:3, Interesting)
I'm not sure that I even want all my machines to have globally routable IPs.
NAT doesn't provide security,
It does however provide privacy.
No it doesn't.
To most people it provides, at most, privacy between the number of computers in your residence. If you thinking about work or school, well, then you gain nothing, even assuming your access to the internet isn't filtered and logged wholesale, your IP assignment almost certainly is.
If you're actually concerned about privacy, you should be using something like Tor that was designed to provide privacy. NAT absolutely was not.
Re: (Score:2)
We do have problems. If you don't think we do, fire up the configuration page of your router, and take a look at the "DMZ" and "port redirection" pages.
I get what you're saying, but it's not like those things are complex, or even necessary for most home users. And even when IPv6 becomes commonplace they will still have their uses (thinking of stuff like workplaces and universities where you really want a single point of control for internet access).
Re: (Score:2, Interesting)
Yes, a single point of access control, like a router. But it doesn't have to do NAT anymore.
Sure, they might run a transparent proxy on some services, but the point is they will be able to setup two way services without idiotic things like UPnP. IE they won't need dynamic port translations because every device will have it's own ports and specific applications can be allowed in advance.
For example, try to run multiple, simultaneous Xbox Live connections without UPnP. (It will probably work these days, bu
Re: (Score:3, Insightful)
I don't see what that has to do with IPv6. Sure, in an ideal world, the ISP will give every residential user their fair share of IPv6 addresses they're entitled to. No,
Re: (Score:2)
If you think this then you don't really understand what NAT is. A workaround for the limitations of IPv4, limitations which don't exist in IPv6.
Re: (Score:2)
No, most ISPs will probably give you an entire block of IPv6 addresses, but they'll only route packets to one of them, unless you pay $5/month for more (it's too lucrative a stream of cash - like text messaging).
I don't see how. Most of their traffic is going to be home users, and most home users currently use NAT, rather than pay for the extra IP. So, ISPs have to realize that home users are going to continue to not pay for the privilege of IP addresses, so there's not much reason for them to do that.
Though you still do see the occasional game that requires DMZ mode...
...which wouldn't have to exist, without NAT.
Re: (Score:2)
It sounds like ISP's should start their own ipv4 to ipv6tunnels and feed their customers a ipv6 address. They then become a giant nat that can open up the tunnel as more companies go ipv6
Re: (Score:2)
Yes. That's the point. Right tool for the job and all that. People are still not getting it. The reason to switch to ipv6 isn't for residential users, it's because it makes life a lot easier when youre connecting seriously large networks together. The company I work for just merged with another large problems, and we have massive problems with networks with overlapping RFC1918 networks. Cue clusterfuck of N
Re:Wait for it.... (Score:5, Insightful)
However, we (people) are incredibly bad a doing global solutions to big problems quickly, so we need to start to migrate things early.
Unfortunately, we're also bad at doing global solutions to big problems ahead of time, especially when there's still disagreement as to whether or not the problem even exists or is as serious as some say it is. Nobody wants to spend all the money to redo their network infrastructure when no one can give them a good answer as to when or if the changes will actually be necessary.
IPv6 will only move forward in a big way when we actually run out of IPv4 space and no one can get the addresses they need, and no one can come up with a good workaround. Until then, it will only be in use in widely scattered installations, just like it is now.
Re: (Score:3, Interesting)
Unfortunately, we're also bad at doing global solutions to big problems ahead of time, especially when there's still disagreement as to whether or not the problem even exists or is as serious as some say it is.
As usual, there's really no debate.
It's a bit like global warming. Serious scientists admit that it exists. The "controversy" is because of research groups quite literally paid for by the oil companies who would stand to lose the most if we started taking it seriously.
Similarly, there's really no debate that IPv6 would be a good thing to have, and that we'll run out of IPv4 addresses eventually, and that it will only get uglier as we do. The only real debate is from people who don't want to take the time to
Re: (Score:2)
the human, as a species in the animal kingdom, is known to be the kind of animal who fouls its own nest and overruns its habitat. the idea of a tipping point, whether it be for CO2 in the atmosphere or polar ice shelves or explosively deaggregated IPv4 routing tables, does not occur in the minds of individual decision makers. i
You suck: mobile phone static IP (Score:2)
Allows for more interesting mobile internet apps.
Re: (Score:3, Funny)
You were only a NAT's cock away, why not finish up the joke? Are puns allowed? Oh wait, too late.
Soon ? (Score:2, Interesting)
I got ipv6.google.com the night the IETF turned off IPv4 [arstechnica.com], and that was
over 9 months ago.
Re: (Score:3, Informative)
tried google in ipv6 (Score:5, Funny)
it's eerily similar to google in ipv4
Re:tried google in ipv6 (Score:5, Funny)
Re: (Score:3, Funny)
Where do I download?
Is it just me (Score:5, Insightful)
Re: (Score:2)
Comment removed (Score:5, Informative)
Re:Is it just me (Score:5, Funny)
And, if you're on a WAN in Chicago, the choice could be: X.25 or 6to4?
Re: (Score:2)
You just made my day. HA!
-l
Re: (Score:2)
Kind of related, but I wonder...
Will someone create 4to6? (or have they already) The router would map IPV6 external addresses to v4 addresses internally? Not that I can think of a reason for it besides some kind of convoluted security or remapping or ports to specific internal addresses.
Re: (Score:3, Interesting)
Re: (Score:2)
Many don't advertise well.
NTT/Verio has some of the best IPv6 support out there.
Hurricane Electric has made a point of being an aggressive IPv6 deployer.
Verizon Business (UUNet) now offers IPv6 on a "beta" basis.
Level 3 has some sort of offering, but I have no details on it.
It's true none of the consumer ISP's offer it to the consumer yet (Comcast, Cox, CableVision, Verizon FIOS), but then that may be premature at this point. Several of them have stood up in public forums and talked about the planning and
Re: "Research Toy" (Score:3, Interesting)
Until Comcast, Verizon, AT&T, NTT, Telekom, or any other major ISPs start showing up on that list all of this IPv6 stuff is going to remain a research toy.
The phrase "research toy" strikes me as an excellent opportunity for the canonical auto analogy:
Imagine that all the commercial transport vendors had "standardized" on the Ford Model T (a very good car in its day). Your chain of stores needs to deliver tons of material from suppliers to warehouses to retail outlets? Organize a fleet of millions of M
Re: (Score:2)
Terrible analogy, those trucks are interoperable if companyA moves to using trucks/trains/etc. then they can use those to ship to companyB. If any company moved to be ipv6 only they'd have the same effect as if they powered down their data center.
I currently pay ~$100 for a /29, and given I'm not a bu
Re: (Score:3, Informative)
Comcast isn't able to support IPv6 at the CPE until DOCSIS 3.X is rolled out, which is currently in progress. Once people have IPv6-capable CPE/DOCSIS, they could use either stack (or Comcast could just give them IPv6 and tunnel the IPv4 back).
Re: (Score:2)
Or is that list of ipv6 capable ISPs depressingly short?
You must be in North America, like me. Providers in Europe, Asia and Africa seem to be leaving us in the dust here. Then again when I check what free.fr is offering their customers in general, I feel we are being left in the dark ages in North America.
One quetsion (Score:4, Funny)
Re:One quetsion (Score:5, Informative)
The Internet Stream Protocol (RFC 1819) used 5 in the protocol version field.
Re: (Score:3, Funny)
it was a development-only version. Some parts of it were backported into v4, but once it was stable enough to be released it was renamed to v6.
Great IPv6 song! (Score:3, Funny)
Great IPv6 song! :)
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=_y36fG2Oba0 [youtube.com]
Excellent for Internet2 connected institutions (Score:4, Informative)
One BIG carrot for Universities and Labs that use google (gmail, docs, etc) is that this means that all that google traffic can be routed over their Internet2 connections which are MUCH faster and of lower latency than their commercial internet connections.
As an IPv6 user, I would LOVE to use google over IPv6.
I smell the hand of Vint Cerf at google...
Re: (Score:3, Interesting)
Those universities should lose their access to the Internet if they are using Google apps. In the past year, I have seen several leaks of student information (SSN, financial, etc.) caused JUST by the use of Google docs. Maybe if their students are using Google, they will reap some benefit, but even that is a bad idea -- a recent leak at Columbia was caused by a student using Google docs for a research project involving Columbi
Re: (Score:3, Insightful)
Re: (Score:2)
Except that the traffic won't be going over the I2 unless Google decides that it wants to pay for connections between their data centers and the I2. Even then, I'm not sure the I2 group would allow it unless Google could bring something of value to the research effort other than faster searches, gmail and google docs.
I2 != IPv6
Sure, you can use IPv6 on the I2 but most people are still only using IPv4 on the I2. The I2 runs on completely different fiber than the regular internet. You aren't all of a sudde
Re: (Score:2)
Check your data.....google is a member of I2.
Re: (Score:2)
Being a member and having connections to the I2 are two different things.
Re:Excellent for Internet2 connected institutions (Score:4, Informative)
My IPv6 connection is over I2 only, tracerouting to ipv6.google.com works.
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
thats no hand your smelling...
IPv6 on Slashdot? (Score:3, Funny)
The question that now remains is: when will Slashdot follow?
I heard that Taco is skipping IPv6, and going straight to IPv7.
The problem with IP6 is... (Score:3, Informative)
.. that for quick and dirty use the numeric address are just too complicated. Sure it has benefits wrt security, routing and a load of other behind the scenes stuff. But for people who are used to using numeric ip4 addresses when DNS is slow or for testing purpose or setting up various IP tables or 101 miscellanious things , ip6 is a royal PITA.
Ok , thats hardly a reason for not using it but I suspect its perhaps one reason why people are relunctant to try it. Half a line of hex is not user friendly.
Re:The problem with IP6 is... (Score:5, Interesting)
When was the last time you used an IP address instead of a domain name? The only thing I could think of was setting up my DSL modem a year ago, but I'm not a network admin.
The reason why nearly nobody is using IPv6 is because it doesn't offer any direct benefit to those who need to deploy it.
Re: (Score:3, Informative)
"When was the last time you used an IP address instead of a domain name"
About 30 minutes ago ftp'ing to one of the many boxes here than arn't assigned a DNA name on the local network.
DNS , not DNA. (Score:3, Funny)
Though DNA addresses could be the future!
Re: (Score:2)
About 30 minutes ago ftp'ing to one of the many boxes here than arn't assigned a DNS name on the local network.
Honestly, if your admins are too damn lazy to set up local DNS, then that's their (and your) problem. You can't generalize that incompetency into a reason for the rest of the Internet to suffer.
It's nothing personal, but I keep hearing that same dumb excuse every time the subject comes up. Average people don't ever type addresses. New network admins type addresses quite often because global DNS doesn't cover them. Experienced admins almost never type addresses because their internal zone is accurate. Y
Re: (Score:2)
For public addresses, if they are too long for you to want to type then you need to learn about search domains - the machines of mine that I most commonly connect to are all in domains that I've got in my search d
Re: (Score:2)
for people who are used to using numeric ip4 addresses when DNS is slow or for testing purpose or setting up various IP tables or 101 miscellanious thing
Just as a guess, you won't really care in the end when you get v6-ified. And what kind of DNS service are you using if you resort to typing addresses? You might want to make some improvements.
On a similar note, why is there so much FUD surrouding IPv6 here on slashdot? It's as if it was invented by Microsoft, by the sound of it sometimes.
Re: (Score:2)
"And what kind of DNS service are you using if you resort to typing addresses? You might want to make some improvements."
Here in many firms I've worked in they don't bother assigning even auto generated DNS names to internal desktop workstations. They get an IP number from DHCP and thats it. If you have to access the box from elsewhere in the building its via the numeric address only.
Re: (Score:2)
On a similar note, why is there so much FUD surrouding IPv6 here on slashdot? It's as if it was invented by Microsoft, by the sound of it sometimes.
Slashdot is filled with BoFH wannabees. And NAT is one of the tools that the BoFH invented to have maximum control while insuring that noone would get an easy working internet experience. As one of the main advantages for IPv6 is to remove the need for NAT it is not strange that you get many protestors.
Atleast that is my theory, and I am sticking with it.
Re: (Score:2)
Printing more money would help quite a bit. It would deflate the inequity between the rich and poor at the heart of the problem, so it would very quickly improve the situation.
Re: (Score:2)
IPv6?
No wireless, less space than a Nomad. Lame.
Routers? (Score:4, Insightful)
Sweet, so I have Google doing IPv6, my OS doing IPv6, yet there are still a finger full of gateway/routers, targeted at the home market, providing IPv6 support. The only router claiming IPv6 support in their specifications is the Apple Airport. Linksys and D-Link apparently have plans, yet nothing in the user documentation. For me, if the manufacturer doesn't document IPv6 in its user document or specification on its web site, then it is as good as not supporting IPv6 - after all I doubt their support team would be any more clued in.
Don't get me wrong, I am all for IPv6, its just that I am fed up having to deal with tunnels because certain parties are dragging their feet.
Re: (Score:2)
So... buy the Apple product, and be sure to let them know that IPv6 support is why you did it. Vote with dollars. The Apple wireless hardware is actually some of the best ones out there anyway feature-wise, they're just a little hard to configure without the special client admin software.
Re: (Score:2)
OpenWRT [openwrt.org] and DD-WRT [dd-wrt.com] are third-party firmware for a rather large variety of consumer-level routers and both of them support IPv6.
D-Link and Cisco routers support IPv6 (Score:2)
D-Link and Cisco support IPv6. The D-Link-supported routers (a firmware update may be needed) are: DI-784 abg, DI-524 bg, DI-624 bg, WBR-1310 g, WBR-2310 g rangebooster, DIR-615 n. See p. 16 of Ref: http://www.ipv6.org.tw/summit2008/doc/1-4-4.pdf [ipv6.org.tw]
On p. 15, they say: "Not only [does D-Link] meet IPv6 Ready logo requirements, but also uppe
Re: (Score:2)
D-Link and Cisco support IPv6.
Certainly, but I see nothing on D-Link's site. If it is not documented on their site, then it is not supported, ie I wouldn't be able to complain that the feature is broken, since their support team would claim their hardware doesn't support it. Remember the difference between capable and supported.
All Switches are IPv6 Compatable (Score:2)
Maybe you have a reason you want a router but if you can live with a switch it should be compatible since switches operate at a lower level and are oblivious to the IP protocol being used.
Re: (Score:2)
I am not sure there is much benefit in pinging the localhost ;)
Joking aside, the colon form is probably a pain the butt, but it is one of the side-effects of more available addresses. You should learn to deal with it. At the same time, I would like to see stuff like 'Bonjour' become more common, so that local networks don't even need to use numbers. For example if your router supports Bonjour, then you would simply need to point your browser to router.local, or something of the sort.
Re: (Score:2)
If the ISP has a web proxy, it could quite easily take connections from the users with IPv4 and connect to the destination server with v4 or v6 as appropriate.
But there is no generic way to connect to an IPv6 address from an IPv4 network, so you couldn't have an IPv4 network at home and play IPv6-only games for example.
Re: (Score:2)
How exactly do you expect the IPv4-only hosts behind the router to indicate which IPv6 addresses their packets are to be sent to? It's relatively easy to go the other way around, since all IPv4 addresses map to IPv6 addresses -- /48 subnets, actually -- but having an IPv4-only local network would limit you to accessing the IPv6 web via a proxy server.
Anyway, you can already access both IPv4 and IPv6 local hosts by mDNS names (hostname.local) rather than IPs provided they're running Avahai (on Linux) or Bonj
What's in it for me? Nothing! (Score:5, Insightful)
see subject: spoken as a consumer/end-user/Joe Sixpack.
Looking at my Internet connection: it works fine.
Looking at my small office network: it works fine.
Does ipv6 bring any improvement in this? Not that I am aware of!
From a consumer pov there is no reason for the change. It's purely technical. And even technical there are obviously very few reasons (at least at the moment) to move to ipv6. It ain't broke, so why fix it? Why should I really care anyway? NAT works fine, and anyway I really don't want my networked printer to be reachable from the outside world, unless I very very specifically say so.
Re:What's in it for me? Nothing! (Score:4, Insightful)
I'm not sure about that (Score:2)
There are at least a few protocols that I suspect were designed after some sixpacks.
Re: (Score:2)
Looking at my Internet connection: it works fine.
No, it doesn't. It's probably broken by NAT, so a lot of cool peer-to-peer stuff is impossible without going through a broken (which makes it no longer peer-to-peer). What this means to you, Joe Sixpack, is that you can't use fun things like BitTorrent without either manually configuring your router or enabling a security-killing protocol like UPnP.
Re: (Score:2)
Looking at my IP telephony -- it "works", but pretty much only Skype, because no one else does the tunneling hack required.
Looking at any other peer to peer connection: It works, but it's much more difficult than it needs to be. Want to transfer files from home to work, over the Internet? You need a VPN, or you need to upload them to a third party (dropbox, etc) and download them at work, or you need to forward ports...
Oh, and there's the built-in ipsec -- opportunistic encryption.
From a consumer pov, there
No, the real question is (Score:2)
And, moreover, IPv6 Google (Score:2)
Stupid question (Score:2)
I apologize if this is a ridiculously simplistic question, but how do you have a LAN with IPv6? If I want to connect to my file server from my laptop now, I just use a local 192.x.x.x address now and it goes straight to my server. Is there something like that for IPv6 so that I don't have to go all the way out to the internet to get back to my file server? I'm assuming there is but I'm a novice when it comes to some of this networking stuff.
A Google search for "LAN over IPv6" turned up the following, but it
Re: (Score:2)
Well, I have my own /64 so I just use the public IP addresses of my machines but you could also use the "link local" addresses of your machines (fe80::/10) or "Unique local addresses" (fc00::/7). The best way would probably be to use public addresses though...
/Mikael
Re:Stupid question (Score:4, Informative)
If this is too full of 'technical jargon' for you, here are some definition:
A subnet is a part of a larger network (borrowing some conventions from set theory, the whole network is also sometimes called a subnet, just to be confusing). IP addresses are a string of bits, 32 with v4 and 128 with v6. For routing purposes, each subnet is identified by a subnet mask. The first n bits of an IP address identify the subnet and the last 32-n or 128-n identify the machine on that subnet. When you see something like 10/8, this means the subnet that starts 10.x.y.z, where the first 8 bits identify the subnet. Sometimes the subnet doesn't fit on a byte boundary. The medium-sized private address range is 172.16.0.0/12. In hex, this is AC100000 - the AC1 is the subnet, and all of the zeros ignored until the packet is on the subnet.
Subnets can be hierarchical. For example the 10/8 subnet might be used by a big site with the 10.1/16 subnet used by one building, 10.2/16 by another, and so on. The first building might use 10.1.1/24 for one floor, 10.1.2/24 for the next floor, and so on. When you send a packet from the second building to 10.1.1.12 it will be routed to the 10.1/16 subnet, then to the 10.1.1/24 subnet, and then delivered within this subnet by ethernet (the router will use ARP to look up the MAC address that corresponds to that IP address and the ethernet switches will handle delivery on the last segment).
Bak to your question, you can use a publicly-routable address on a LAN, using v4 or v6. This doesn't mean that data will go over the Internet. If both machines are on the same subnet then packets will never make it to the router, they will be delivered by the local ethernet (or whatever) directly. IP routing is only needed when packets go outside the local subnet.
In summary, yes it's a ridiculously simple question, it's only the answer which is complicated...
Re: (Score:2)
Short answer: No problem. You will have many addresses to use in your LAN, and your packets will not enter the internet to go to a local file server.
Slightly longer explanation: IPv6 routing is quite similar to IPv4 routing. I think you might be misunderstanding what is keeping your current local traffic from bouncing over the WAN link.
Re: (Score:3)
Is there something like that for IPv6 so that I don't have to go all the way out to the internet to get back to my file server?
That actually is a really stupid question, for someone who knows how Internet routing works.
Very simply, your computer is always configured to know which addresses are "link-local", which ones must go through a gateway, and what the gateway (router) is. So, for your local address, you've probably got 192.168.1.* as "link-local", 192.168.1.1 is your gateway, and everything else is "on the Internet".
But that's arbitrary. I like to use the 10.0.0.0/8 network, which is also defined as "local", for that purpose.
Why not respond to all AAAA DNS requests? (Score:2)
Why only respond to an AAAA DNS request if it comes from a DNS resolver whose IPv4 address is on a whitelist? Surely it would make sense to allow any connection capable to IPv6 to make use of it. I am lucky in that my ISP is on the list of those providing IPv6, but I use my own DNS resolver which will not be on the Google whitelist.
Re: (Score:3, Informative)
From Google:
To qualify for Google over IPv6, your network must have good IPv6 connectivity to Google. Multiple direct interconnections are preferred, but a direct peering with multiple backup routes through transit or multiple reliable transit connections may be acceptable. Your network must provide and support production-quality IPv6 networking and provide access to a substantial number of IPv6 users. Additionally, because IPv6 problems with users' connections can cause users to become unable to access Google if Google over IPv6 is enabled, we expect you to troubleshoot any IPv6 connection problems that arise in your or your users' networks.
Simply said, some networks may have borked IPv6 which would mean that users will be unable to access Google. I can understand that they're doing this before rolling it out to everyone. Maybe there could be something like OpenDNS for IPv6 so that more advanced users have a choice?
Re: (Score:3, Informative)
Why only respond to an AAAA DNS request if it comes from a DNS resolver whose IPv4 address is on a whitelist? Surely it would make sense to allow any connection capable to IPv6 to make use of it.
Some clients may erroneously think they have working IPv6, get an AAAA address and timeout trying to use it before falling back to IPv4. This really annoys users. It wouldn't be Google's fault that this happens, but their sites would be perceived as very slow and they'd lose users.
I am lucky in that my ISP is on the list of those providing IPv6, but I use my own DNS resolver which will not be on the Google whitelist.
It is not clear to me exactly what they're doing. They might be whitelisting networks and not individual resolvers. If so then your home resolver may work when your ISP signs up with them.
Re:Try it! (Score:5, Funny)
Google over IPv6 is crisp and clean, with good intensity and a hint of citrus on the nose
Re:Try it! (Score:4, Funny)
Google over IPv6 is crisp and clean, with good intensity and a hint of citrus on the nose
Even more importantly, MP3s over IPv6 have an open, airy feel that is notoriously lacking over IPv4. It's even enough to compensate for the jitter they pick up when going over WiFi.
/stands back to watch audiophiles trample each other to get IPv6.
//plans to market IPv6 "enhancers" to audiophiles, both speeding adoption and lining my pockets with "stupidity tax".
Re: (Score:2)
Seriously.. I'm going to get in on the audiophile market. I just need to find a manufacturer who can make awesome-looking cases for the guts of a Sony receiver. Disable half the features and inputs, and voila.. one Specialized Blu-Ray Audio Amplifier and Sound Distribution System.
Re:Try it! (Score:4, Funny)
If you think that's good, you should try using a network cable designed for IPv6. A proper cable will allow you to enjoy the full richness of IPv6 sites without the harshness that results from using inferior cables. I'm developing one such cable, which demonstrates proper directional signal alignment with minimal crosstalk, providing the full digital experience so that you can finally see websites the way their creators intended them to be viewed.
Originally designed to provide maximum quality for streaming media, these cables offer an uncompromising blend of digital audio, video, and data transfer capabilities in an IPv6 protocol. They are also fully backward-compatible with IPv4, so you can use them to view websites replete with the aliveness and snap that you expect, with none of the soggy, diffuse, syrupy qualities that are a plague among cheaper imitation cables. Imagine a pure white background with the full flavors of the multispectral Google logo, each delicate cherry, azure, and emerald letter almost coming alive before your eyes.
My cable utilizes the latest in hermetically sealed insulation to provide years of reliable service with minimal degradation of the pure, solid silver conductors. As a bonus, our cables have already been put through a specially tailored burn-in process, ensuring that you receive maximum signal integrity from day one. These cables are not yet available to the general public, but through a special offer, I'm allowing a limited number of people to sign up for the beta-testing process. Rest assured that these cables have already been tested to ensure 100% compliance with our exacting quality standards, but we're looking for real-world users to verify our astounding results. As part of this program, you will receive a special discount on the proposed retail price of these cables:
Solid-Core Conductor, Hermetically Sealed, with Specially Molded Connectors -- 1 Meter: $16,000
Solid-Core Conductor, Hermetically Sealed, with Specially Molded Connectors -- 2 Meters: $26,000
Solid-Core Conductor, Hermetically Sealed, with Specially Molded Connectors -- 10 Meters: $99,000
If you require longer runs, custom lengths may be ordered at the special price of $9,000 per meter, for lengths greater than 20M only. We highly recommend that you do not couple multiple cables together, as there is currently no way of compensating for any fuzziness or wishy-washiness which may be introduced by the coupler. In the future, we plan to offer 100% compatible couplers in the low 5 figure price range.
Re: (Score:2)
How exactly? I've read the howto, but it's not clear to me how to get a valid ipv6 address assigned to me. I understand that I can just use ifconfig, but I use dhcp to get my ipv4 address. Does dhclient support ipv6?
Re: (Score:2)
The other option is to set up an IPv6 tunnel on top of IPv4, which is complicated (especially if your IP is dynamic, which it is) and means you get to send all of your data through some node somewhere before it goes out to the internet at large (adding hops). Basically it's
Re: (Score:2)
Apple's Airport line supports IPv6 and 6to4 for those on IPv4.
Re: (Score:3, Informative)
I hoped that Linksys, et.al., would intro consumer routers at CES2009 with IPv6/IPv4 dual stacks.
As I wrote elsewhere, you can get IPv6 on Linksys (et al.) routers at present as well, but you have to use custom firmware, meaning OpenWRT or DD-WRT.
Unfortunately this means that it can be quite difficult to configure. OpenWRT is not really suitable for non-technical users anyway, so for their userbase it won't be much of a problem. For DD-WRT, IPv6 was supported quite well in v23, but has been having problems for some years in v24 out of the box. If you want IPv6 in recent DD-WRT versions (v24 or highe
Re: (Score:2)
Well I've had a 64-bit cpu for about two and a half years and I'm still running a 32-bit operating system for fear that none of my favorite games/programs will work properly under the 64 bit platform. Screw 128 bit.
Re:Oh great (Score:5, Funny)
I'm still running a 32-bit operating system
It's an extension and graphical shell to a 16-bit patch to an 8-bit operating system...
(Wait, this is a joke sub-thread, right?)
This reminded me of something... (Score:5, Funny)