IPv6 Deployment Picking Up Speed 158
An anonymous reader writes "The Internet's addressing authority (IANA) ran out of IPv4 Internet addresses in early 2011. The IPv6 protocol (now 15 years old) was designed exactly for this scenario, as it provides many more addresses than our foreseeable addressing needs. However, IPv6 deployment has so far been dismal, accounting for 1% of total traffic (the high-end of estimates). A recent paper by researchers at the Cooperative Association for Internet Data analysis (CAIDA) indicates that IPv6 deployment may be picking up at last. The paper, published at the Internet Measurement Conference (IMC) shows that the IPv6 network shows signs of maturing, with its properties starting to resemble the deployed IPv4 network. Deployment appears to be non-uniform, however; while the 'core' of the network appears to be ready, networks at the 'edges' are lacking. There are geographical differences too — Europe and the Asia Pacific region are ahead of North America."
Stop the Presses! (Score:3, Informative)
That's NEVER happen. Except with everything.
Re: (Score:2)
I fail to see how this is offtopic...
Re: (Score:2)
I've asked all three major ISPs local to me if I can get IPv6 addressing and they don't even know why I'd want it.
Re:Stop the Presses! (Score:4, Insightful)
To be fair, America has adopted standards, but hasn't always standardized on them, and sometimes invents a standard that is outdated by the time the rest of the world adopts it.
For instance, metric is used in hospitals, at NASA, in many sciences, etc. It was even taught in school until Ronald Reagan in his infinite wisdom and reverence decided America was too f**king stupid to learn it (sorry about the sarcasm injection - it was a REALLY bad time for me to switch, as I was half way into learning metric when it happened and we all of a sudden had to learn these nonsensical English units - I'm still all for switching to metric).
CDMA predates GSM, and some providers bet big on it early in America. Nothing America can really do about it except wait for it to age and be replaced, hopefully with an international standard. Data already has been merged with LTE.
Almost all cable providers use DOCSYS international standard.
IPv6 is supported by some ISPs and CLECs, but many that supported PPPoE like mine bought IPv4 only hardware. The former owner of this hardware, Qwest, said they would never implement IPv6. Their current owner, CenturyLink, is rolling out IPv6 support, but only currently in areas that were not formerly Qwest. Meanwhile, my IPv4 and IPv6 addresses are registered and just waiting for IPv6 to be supported to go live (I hacked the router to get its IPv6 address just in case this is a server only issue - the underlying hardware supports it, just not the PPPoE connection).
Non-sensical customary units of fail (Score:4, Interesting)
I learned under metric, for me those "customary" units of height are very hard to grasp.
In metric, everything is in tens, you add or subtract zeros, thats it.
A meter contains 10 decimeters (rarely used), a decimeter contains 10 centimeters, a centimeter contains 10 milliliters, etc.
http://physics.nist.gov/cuu/Units/prefixes.html [nist.gov]
Customary/Imperial units are a mess, and to make matters worse, you don't use a single unit but TWO different ones for measuring things (feet AND inches?). What the hell is an inch? half a feet? quarter? decimal? no... its freaking 1/12. OF COURSE you don't fit 12 feet in a yard, that would be too easy, its 3... AND you also don't fit 12 pica in an inch, but 6...
To make sense of your nonsense, we have to convert to a single unit first (eg. inches), and THEN move to metric, that is not a trivial mental operation for many.
Another American annoyance is paper sheet sizes. But there are many more areas for frustration in those outdated customs.
Let them sink in their isolation, is what we say here.
Re: (Score:3)
Everyone seems to understand meters, centimeters, millimeters and kilometers; bytes, kilobytes and megabytes.
Yet when I try to describe the distance from Denver to Chicago in megameters my friends look at me funny.
I find it especially lame when astronomers describe distances in millions of kilometers. Are they too stupid to understand metric and use gigameters?
Re: (Score:3)
I wonder how much of this is just visualization problems.
I'm an old fart who was taught from a young age to measure things in inches, pounds, etc. I understand metric units just fine and use them almost daily, but still when I'm given a measurement in metric, I don't have an instinctive feel for how much the measurement is. i have to convert to the old units to be able to picture it.
Same for things like gigameters. Yes, I know what that means, but it's not a unit that is commonly used and so there's no imme
Re: (Score:2)
I'm glad I'm not the only one. :)
Can you use a 24-hour clock system?
Yes, but I do have to do the math to convert it. Fortunately that's a really easy conversion.
Perhaps you can make use of the Celsius scale at least?
This is the most difficult of all for me, actually. Without doing math, I do have a vague sense of what a kilometer "means" (a bit more than half a mile), and what a meter means (a bit more than a yard), but I have exactly no sense of what the various Celsius numbers feel like. They all sound "cold" to me. I have to convert to Fahrenheit to understand them on a physical level.
None of
Re: (Score:2)
CDMA deployment in US might predate GSM deployment in US, but GSM development in Europe dates back to 1982, while CDMA development for mobile phone use started in 1995. Perhaps you are thinking of DAMPS, the digital cellular system used in the US before CDMA came into the picture.
Re: (Score:2)
I like your rant, and would like to add to it P25 ('merkin, barely works) vs. TETRA (everyone else, seems to have worked for years).
But back in context, it amuses me that my DSL provider still doesn't have the ability to give me real IPV6 connectivity, but my CDMA/LTE cell phone
Re: (Score:2)
IPv6 is yet another example of a niche technology favored by a small elitist segment of a diverse but elitist professional trade categorization, pushing change for the sake of change, against the wishes of everyone else.
Sorry, but when pretty much everyone except the people who gobble up marketing and training material doesn't think IPv6 deployment is a good idea, it's probably not a good idea. We have decades of equipment considerations to phase out, and that's not even counting applications which won't wo
Where the heck is IPv7 (Score:1)
Thats what I want to know, IPv6 is old hat! Any respectable IP _must_ have functionality equal to TOR built right into the specs!
Re: (Score:1)
closest thing I know of: https://github.com/cjdelisle/cjdns/
Re: (Score:1)
Wow, seriously? An anonymous first post, and you blow it with this? *Facepalm*
Re: (Score:1)
IPv6 ought to be enough for anybody.
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:1)
Can you post a source for that quote?
Re: (Score:3)
2013 could be... (Score:5, Funny)
Re: (Score:3, Funny)
If we make it past December 21st...
Re: (Score:2)
Already pretty much debunked [csmonitor.com] because an older, longer calendar exists, but you can always give me all your earthly belongings, just in case.
Re: (Score:3)
Nope. People have IPv6 enabled browsers so they can connect to IPv6 enabled websites, but how many have some sort of legacy software that doesn't in any way understand or support IPv6 - perhaps there's not even an input field for an IPv6 address. Of course people will now chime "dual stack" but it has practically all of the annoyances while not solving the problem since it means pairing every IPv6 address with an IPv4 address. And by annoyance I mean like some stupid software, I don't remember what would pr
Re: (Score:2)
That would probably be your resolver, since most programs use getaddrinfo() to do a DNS lookup (which returns a lin
Re: (Score:2)
The idea with IPv6 is that, even though your network prefix will be assigned to you by your ISP and is subject to change (for example, if you move to a new ISP), you typically won't configure any device with a fixed prefix. You'll assign them a host address (through DHCP, router advertisements or static) and the the prefix will be assigned to your router only. For example, on a cisco router, you would use :
ipv6 general-prefix ISP-prefix XXXX:XXXX:XXXX::/48
Everything else will be using that general prefix, g
Re: (Score:2)
Especially if you're very used to the IPv4 way of doing things
I suspect that's a big part of the reason why adoption has been so slow. IPv6 is annoyingly different. You pretty much just have to force yourself to accept that you have to do things differently, and a lot of people don't like that.
NAT is ugly, but people are very comfortable with the way it works.
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
Nope. People have IPv6 enabled browsers so they can connect to IPv6 enabled websites, but how many have some sort of legacy software that doesn't in any way understand or support IPv6 - perhaps there's not even an input field for an IPv6 address. Of course people will now chime "dual stack" but it has practically all of the annoyances while not solving the problem since it means pairing every IPv6 address with an IPv4 address. And by annoyance I mean like some stupid software, I don't remember what would prefer the IPv6 address over the IPv4 address then leading to a delay before it would connect via IPv4. I couldn't be arsed to find some other solution, so IPv6 is completely disabled on my machine. And so far I've had zero reason to change that. The only people feeling the hurt are those not getting an IPv4 address.
This! Fact remains that since most people are now either on Windows 7 or OS-X or Android or iOS, most devices support IPv6. If an ISP supports IPv6 now, then a customer could easily request a link, and hook all the devices he wants to that. As it is, the default local networking protocol on Windows 7 is IPv6.
Issue is that most websites are not IPv6 enabled, which would make accessing them difficult from IPv6-only computers, which is why people still need to be dual stacked, which somewhat defeats the
Re: (Score:2)
The year of IPv6 on the desktop!
It should be branded iPadV6 and then sold in clean stores all over the world. I bet it would be commonplace in no time, especially when the Chinese try to copy it.
Re: (Score:2)
Re:2013 could be... (Score:5, Funny)
It looks cool.
Come on slashdot ... (Score:5, Insightful)
This [ipv6-test.com] is not what I expected from you when facebook and google enabled it long ago ...
Re:Come on slashdot ... (Score:5, Informative)
The problem I have faced is that none of my server ISPs will even let me get an IPv6 address even if I know they have it and I beg. That goes for major service providers too. I'm looking at you Amazon Cloud and RackSpace. Amazon kinda has it, but only if you use one of their load balancers.
Re: (Score:3)
I use linode.com. They have IPv6 (and have for quite some time). Now if only voip.ms (and oh, say, /.) would support it...
Re: (Score:3)
The problem I have faced is that none of my server ISPs will even let me get an IPv6 address even if I know they have it and I beg.
They'll come round once they start having problems getting more IPv4 addresses from their upstream providers, at which point it will start to hit their bottom line (as they need to have all their cloud instances individually direct-routable for configuration and management purposes). We're getting close to that, but aren't there yet.
I wouldn't base any long term plans on them staying IPv4 only...
Re: (Score:3)
They won't, they'll just put everybody behind a NAT, with the added bonus of breaking bittorrent, VoIP, or any other protocol that actualy uses bandwidth.
IPv6 will only come later, and just for the places that have any competition between ISPs.
Re: (Score:2)
Note that Slashdot is in no way exceptional here:
http://ipv6-test.com/validate.php?url=apple.com [ipv6-test.com]
http://ipv6-test.com/validate.php?url=microsoft.com [ipv6-test.com]
http://ipv6-test.com/validate.php?url=yahoo.com [ipv6-test.com]
http://ipv6-test.com/validate.php?url=oracle.com [ipv6-test.com]
http://ipv6-test.com/validate.php?url=twitter.com [ipv6-test.com]
In light of the above bad examples, I was actually surprised that Internic, ICANN and the White House were IPv6-ready...
Re: (Score:2)
What we really need is for Comcast, Verizon, Time Warner, etc... to enable IPv6 on their networks. Almost nobody is going to set up a tunnel broker for their home connection, it's way to esoteric and most home routers are crap anyway.
New Rule: (Score:5, Interesting)
New Rule:
Websites are only allowed to try to garner page-views on IPv6 when all the websites that article is posted on are available over IPv6.
Re: (Score:2)
Good luck with that. :)
Re: (Score:2)
Maybe get a Congressman from California to pass that as a new law.
Slow news day (Score:1)
IPv6 was no big deal (Score:4, Informative)
I've been on native IPv6 for a couple of years on my home DSL connection. It works very well - only thing I had to do was check the 'enable IPv6' option in my modem/router and everything 'just worked'. It is rather nice not having to deal with NAT and port forwarding etc.
I'm in Australia (so within the Asia-Pacific/APNIC region, which as the summary mentions, is a bit ahead of the curve when it comes to IPv6 adoption. Most of the major sites are fully IPv6 now too (e.g. all the Google sites, Facebook, etc. etc.) But the point is, done properly, it should be a completely seamless transition to enable dual-stack (and eventually to turn off IPv4, though I'm sure that won't happen for decades!). Hell I usually forget I'm even on IPv6, unless I happen to do a ping/tracert to an IPv6 host and see all those long-ass IPs :)
C:\>tracert www.google.com
Tracing route to www.google.com [2404:6800:4006:800::1014] over a maximum of 30 hops:
1 1 ms 1 ms 1 ms gateway [2001:44b8:(snip!)]
2 7 ms 7 ms 7 ms loop0.lns20.cbr1.internode.on.net [2001:44b8:9010::5]
3 7 ms * 7 ms gi0-0-2.cor3.cbr1.internode.on.net [2001:44b8:9010:14::1]
4 11 ms 11 ms 11 ms te6-0-0.bdr1.syd4.internode.on.net [2001:44b8:9010:e::2]
5 11 ms * 11 ms te0-0-0.bdr1.syd7.internode.on.net [2001:44b8:b070:1::11]
6 11 ms 11 ms 11 ms gi1-2-121.cor2.syd7.internode.on.net [2001:44b8:b060:121::2]
7 11 ms * 12 ms gi6-0-0-101.bdr1.syd7.internode.on.net [2001:44b8:b070:104::1]
8 12 ms 11 ms 12 ms 2001:4860:1:1:0:1283:0:4
9 13 ms 13 ms 12 ms 2001:4860:0:1::1fb
10 13 ms 12 ms 11 ms 2404:6800:4006:800::1014
Re: (Score:1, Insightful)
Yes your home DSL network is completely and thoroughly analogous to an enterprise implementation.
Just check some stuff off in the UI and run a dual stack...
Re: (Score:1)
I've been on native IPv6 for a couple of years on my home DSL connection. It works very well - only thing I had to do was check the 'enable IPv6' option in my modem/router and everything 'just worked'. It is rather nice not having to deal with NAT and port forwarding etc.
I've been on native IPv4 for ages on my home DSL connection. Only thing I had to do was tick the "NAT" and "UPnP" checkboxes and it just worked. Provided me also with a simple firewall as a nice side effect. ;)
Re: (Score:2, Informative)
> Provided me also with a simple firewall as a nice side effect. ;)
I rather suspect you're a troll given how often and exhaustively this has been refuted previously on this site, but oh well.
NAT is not a firewall. The stateful firewall in your home router is a firewall. NAT isn't . There are plenty of technologies to punch holes into NAT, usually developed because NAT is such a fucking pain to deal with for many protocols.
Re: (Score:2)
Well any decent router that offers NAT will also have an actual firewall as well. Which will continue to work on IPv6 ... so it's not like you're unprotected or anything. I'm not one of those rabid "NAT is an awful hack" people, but it's just another tool in the box that ceases to really have a purpose in the IPv6 world.
Anyway, if your point is that you don't NEED IPv6 (yet), then you're absolutely right. I was merely offering my experience of IPv6 adoption as an end user. And that it was pretty painless (b
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
only thing I had to do was check the 'enable IPv6' option in my modem/router and everything 'just worked'.
I would have enabled it long ago 'cept my router doesnt support it, not does it support any of the alternative (open) firmwares available.. this in spite of both previous and later models of this same line of routers being supported by those alternative firmwares.
I would buy a new router, 'cept this one works and has a decent enough range/power/sensitivity that the bedroom machine on the other side of the wet-wall and about 40 feet away doesnt have issues. It needs a reboot every month or so due to some
Re: (Score:2)
Haha. Am reasonably confident my router's firewall is up to the task, but because the IPv6 /64 assigned to my router (and the /56 prefix assigned to my network) is static, figured I'd better remove it, just in case :)
A new apocalypse. (Score:3)
Dear Media,
Every week, there's a new apocalypse in the news.
AIDS. Global Warming. Copyright violations. Vodka enemas. Terrorism. ???. Prophet. (I mean... profit.)
The IPv6 lolocaust is not going to impress us unless there are concrete figures about exactly when and how it's going to devastate us.
Then, we can plan for it.
Until then, it reeks of hype.
Love,
The consumers
Re: (Score:2)
Insightful, but missing the point of the article. (Score:2)
This is insightful and I agree for the most part. However, a consumer facing a "black box" is helpless. It's better to make the box simpler and more accessible so they can fix minor problems when they arise, since they arise with every technology we have on a regular basis.
Here I disagree.
This a sp
What about Slashdot? (Score:2)
It would be nice if Slashdot itself was available on IPv6... After all, you would have thought that a site reporting on the latest and greatest in tech would have managed to adopt a technology fifteen years old by now!
Re: (Score:3)
You mean like an edit button?
Re: (Score:2)
An edit button would drive trolling levels off the scale here.. though it would be nice to correct those moments where you click submit and notice an incredibly stupid typo. I use preview when I remember, but sometimes things just slip by..
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
There is an edit button. It's labeled "preview". If you could edit your comments after posting, you could post a funny comment, have it modded to +5, and then change it to a GNAA troll.
Just use the preview button and pay attention.
Re: (Score:2)
Provider slowness. (Score:5, Insightful)
IPv6 Capable operating systems: check. .........
IPv6 Capable router: check.
IPv6 Capable cable modem: check.
IPv6 Capable internet service:
Maybe one of these years the cable company will get this figured out, sigh.
Re: (Score:2)
Unfortunately, the next step:
IPv6 Capable end-points:
is also missing. The website you are reading is IPv4-only and hasn't bothered to publish an AAAA record in all the time it's been posting IPv6 articles.
And how long does it take to IPv6 enable a website nowadays, even if only in a basic "testing" mode before you try to redo all your blacklist scripts, etc.? About ten minutes.
Re: (Score:2)
I don't know who hosts slashdot, but I bet they are the ones that are slagging.
Re: (Score:2)
Oh, I'd add more then a few IPv6 end points to the net if the cable company would provide IPv6 to the business fibre service here. For now we stack services on ip addresses via NAT. Fun to scan an IP and see Windows and Linux services living at the same address.
Re: (Score:2)
xs4all (Netherlands) does provide ipv6 and I find it quite useful to have direct links between computer that would otherwise be difficult to reach (e.g. between my computer at home (ipv4 NAT by the ADSL router) and a virtual server at work for which I didn't get an ipv4 address and hence only has pulic ipv6.
Also, it is useful to be able to connect directly to my home box from outside, and there are multiple ssh enabled machines on my LAN. Of course, I could give them all different ports and forward them us
Re: (Score:2)
Just curious, but do you see lots of hack/hit attempts on those now exposed boxes like you do if you put an IPv4 box on the internet with ssh open?
Re: (Score:3)
Network scanning is much, MUCH harder to do with IPv6. Assuming a reasonably random assignment of v6 addresses, your local subnet has 2^64 possible addresses, in other words twice as many bits as the entirety of the world's IPv4 address space. But remember twice as many bits doesn't mean merely twice the effort, it actually means it would take 4 billion times as long to scan a *single* IPv6 subnet as it would to scan the *entire* IPv4 internet.
Re: (Score:2)
Even for a couple of servers that do not have an external firewall filtering packets for my IPv6, there is basically zero packets besides those going to applications hosted on my servers, and they have published DNS records for web and DNS. Some basic PCs I have online see zero packets from random internet hosts on IPv6.
The IPv6 address space is literally too large to crawl within any useful amount of time. If you figure an average LAN will have 18,446,744,073,709,551,616 addresses (a /64 block). Let's say
Re: (Score:2)
Thanks. Makes sense given the size.
I see the next round of software like netcat being much faster/parallel to deal with these huge sizes.
Re: (Score:2)
Not at all practical even then. You'd need some way other than scanning. Maybe a set of broadcasts designed to provoke a response in some way from common servers, tricking them into revealing their presence. Or passive monitoring.
Re: (Score:2)
Big numbers are big.
Let's say you have a 10gig connection between you and the target network, for your use only. 10 gig means you can send 10 billion bits per second. And let's say each one of those bits could test one IP address on that one small 64 bit subnet (which is crazy, but why not).
In that case, it would only take you about 6 years. To scan 10% of the subnet. And most providers are giving out hundreds or thousands of subnets to each house.
Parallelism and speed increases will not help here!
Re: (Score:2)
Cable companies have it somewhat easy. DOCSIS 3 requires hardware to support IPv6.
Re: (Score:2)
Does DOCSIS 3 require that the ISP actually route IPv6 packets? Because if it does not, they will not.
Re: (Score:2)
No, but it requires the hardware to support it, making it considerably easier to convince then to start routing.
Re: (Score:2)
Cable companies have it somewhat easy. DOCSIS 3 requires hardware to support IPv6.
From what I understand cable companies are sitting on their thumbs waiting for multiple vendors including Cisco to fix broken code at the CMTS so operators can actually deploy IPv6 to their customers.
Re: (Score:2)
Blame Cisco.
The major ISPs are generally ready, but they can't do anything until Cisco actually rolls out IPv6 capable head-end gear. Among other things, Cisco has already all but missed their 2012 deadline for having IPv6 working on their CMTSes.
Re: (Score:2)
Setting up an IPv6 tunnel is not hard to do. A couple minutes and you'll have IPv6 internet access. tunnelbroker.net (just for example) walks you through it, then you can install 6orNot in your browser to show off :)
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
Also, it is entirely possible to run a pure IPv6 network to
Re: (Score:2)
Yeah it'll be dual stack for a long, long time. Though must say, I currently have 11 devices connected to my internal home network, and 9 of them have a globally addressable IPv6 address. The Nintendo Wii and the WDTV Live are the only non-IPv6-capable devices in the house, apparently. The rest are all fine and grabbed a v6 address with no additional config needed.
(2 Windows machines, 1 Mac OS X, 2 Linux, 2 iPhones, 1 iPad and a D-link NAS, presumably running some embedded Linux).
Re: (Score:2)
rest of that headline (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
the real game changer: 4G (Score:4, Interesting)
The game changer here is that US cell phone companies have finally figured out that 4 layers of NAT isn't exactly a great way to manage a growing network, and are switching to IPv6 for their 4G networks. That is millions of customers right there, using IPv6 without even knowing about it.
Pieces are falling into place, it's just a matter of time now. And if you lobby your ISP instead of complaining about it, you may get it native too soon enough.
BTW: for those worried about the switch, let me just mention that both ipv6.google.com and www.kame.net (common test IPv6 addresses) are reachable in *less* latency and *less* hops than their ipv4 counterparts. IPv6 rocks.
CPE equipment from ZyXEL (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
Many ZyXEL CPEs can do IPv6. Check out their NBG4615, which is your typical home wifi/router appliance that supports IPv6. I think all or most of their current ADSL/VDSL CPEs all support IPv6 out of the box too.
Re: (Score:2)
Model P-660HN-F1Z does not support IPv6.
Model P-2612HNU-F1 does not support IPv6.
Why don't US companies implement IPv6? (Score:2)
Inertia.
I work for a large company that's had a domain since the Elder Days of domain registration, and there's just no way that it'll migrate over to IPv6. Too many computers and routers (including many legacy) and there's no actual need to do it: 10.*.*.* and 196.168.*.* networks abound and work just fine.
Re: (Score:2)
North American not behind in IPv6 (Score:2)
http://www.networkworld.com/news/2012/092412-ipv6-side-262674.html [networkworld.com]
US has the most IPv6 users, North America has the most IPv6 traffic.
Sure, it's still small in absolute magnitude, but it's a start.
Re: (Score:2)
Hah! (Score:4, Informative)
Companies are still shipping network gear that is IPv4 only. Find me a fixed-wireless device that supports IPv6! Sure they're layer 2 devices, but the units themselves don't have IPv6 addressability.
IPv6 will take a long, long time. Maybe 10 years for major crossover. The fanbois and the advocates get shriller every day, but moving to IPv6 - even dual-stack - from an existing network is currently *hard*.
Re: (Score:2)
hard? sudo apt-get install miredo
or get a free account with tunneling broker, maybe six steps to set up your whole house with one of your machines supplying tunnel and addresses for the others.
my AT&T DSL supports IPv6 too, but with the broker I get static addresses
Re: (Score:2)
How does this even begin to approach the GP's concerns? It doesn't.
Sorry, I do not want to have to maintain two address pools because a handful/quarter/third/half of the devices on my network do not fully or properly support IPv6. It's anathema to "internet protocol".
It's the same reason why we hated on IE for so many years, and why technology like OpenVPN and OpenSSL became not only commonplace but have become preferred over the likes of isolationist technologies like IPSEC. (That's what IPv6 is, an isolat
Re: (Score:2)
what kind of obsolete junk do you have on your home network. the concerns are the same as with an ISP. use encrypted traffic for things you care about, firewall ports you care about at the tunnel endpoint. it's easy, everything in my house runs IPV6 and IPV4 with no issues and no increased security risk over IPV4 via ISP
Re: (Score:2)
Tunneling brokers are a security fail. Do you really want all your traffic going through a single, unaccountable third party that makes no guarantees? Particularly one that is probably not
I agree with your general message people are better off waiting till they have native connectivity but for those of us who want to dink around or have a reason to use IPv6 now I don't see any problem with a tunnel broker.
I trust hurricane electric as much as I trust any other anonymous router/tier x ISP along the network path. The Internet is inherently insecure regardless of who your ISP is... the way I see it your better off assuming every router on the Internet hates you and therefore use end to end pre
Vegas area MIA (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
I have IPv6 at home, but had to disable it: a bug in NetworkManager caused it to misbehave when it encountered a IPv6 DHCP on wifi. Long story short, I had a kernel panic every 30 minutes (+/- 10 min). Windows 7 via wifi? No problem. Linux via ethernet cable? No problem. Will have to check if it was patched since I last tried it.
That sounds like neither a bug in networkmanager nor with DHCPv6. Neither of those would cause a kernel panic. That's a bad wireless network card driver. Network manager did have issues with DHCPv6, but it's more on the lines of not setting the routing correctly
Re: (Score:2)
No
Re: (Score:2)
IPv6 privacy extensions go some way to solving that problem: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/IPv6#Privacy [wikipedia.org]
Re: (Score:2)
Doesn't switching to IPV6 virutually guarantee the **AA spies would be able to tell exactly which computer was used to download supposed infringing files?
This is what privacy addresses are for. They are enabled by default on windows and can be enabled manually on the MAC. Basically computers get a random address that keeps changing over time.
I must say however using torrents to download illegal crap is pretty stupid nowadays you should assume 100% coverage from both LEA and "*AA spies".
Transfer files directly between you and your friends. This is not only safer for you but by denying feedback channel to "the man" it helps protect the Internet in your coun
Re: (Score:2)
Interesting definition. So which is it: either Google, Facebook, Youtube and Netflix are not basically household names, or the deployed IPv4 network does not resemble the deployed IPv4 network.