I've got a blackberry :-(

Rob,

Thank you for creating Slashdot

I know you had plenty of help along the way but as a wise person once said - ultimately, all we have to offer to each other is ourselves. You definitely gave more than your share of time and energy to making plenty of people happier. You suffered fools with class and you should be proud of what you have done.

Good luck

Malaysia and Japan also fingerprint visitors

The NS glue records in the .com TLD are 172,800 seconds (2 days) but that has nothing to do with IPv6 day.

The actual IPv6 DNS records being advertised today are things like www.cisco.com (TTL 30 seconds), www.cisco.com (TTL 300 seconds), www.google.com (TTL 300 seconds) so backing them out isn't a big deal or something that needs a lot of lead time.

January 6 through April 14. CentOS patches for version 5 were nonexistent.

Take a look at the RHEL watch list for the same period and compare.

https://www.redhat.com/archives/enterprise-watch-list/

There has been some strong criticism of the CentOS team recently and frankly, some of it is deserved.

It was recorded so you'll be able to catch it later.

You didn't miss much. Extremely boring speeches by some not very talented speakers.

While it's not universally implemented, RA does work in many cases to advertise DNS resolvers to clients. Adoption of this is certainly going to increase because it is so unbelievably sweet in operation.

Somebody mod this guy up - he is exactly correct about this whole issue.

This is incorrect. This ruling went against Nagano Shoten's Maneki TV service which was targeted almost exclusively at a small number of Japanese living overseas - especially people who were doing the same thing by sticking a media PC at their Japanese apartment or parents house or whatnot and streaming it themselves.

Sony sells a device called location free TV that does the same thing except you set it up yourself with no service provider involved.

I wouldn't read too much into this ruling. If Sony is sued successfully then this would actually be news.

This is simply wrong. Please don't spout this anymore - you are spreading a myth.

There are about 40 /8 blocks allocated to organizations.

Since 2004 we've used at least an average 10 blocks each year and I'm not including the rush in 2010 when 19 blocks were allocated.

If we could magically reclaim all 40 of these /8 blocks today it would buy us no more than 4 years. And remember - those organizations that lost their space would be eligible to immediate regain some percentage of their space based on their actual need.

So do we spend the next 4 years moving to IPv6 or do we spend 5 years in courts with 15-20 of the largest organizations on earth trying to reclaim space that was lawfully granted under the rules in place at the time? What is the better use of the effort that has to be expended either way?

Maybe if we went after all the legacy blocks we might be able to gain close to 10 years but at what cost - how can you possible make it happen quickly enough for it to make a difference?

Some of these organizations have already returned space and I don't doubt we'll see a couple more in the next year or two but it doesn't make a difference. We need to ask ourselves - do we solve this issue now or do we kick the can down the road? I'd rather be one of the ones who helps fix the mess we made.

Your smartphone might not need a public IP address but it certainly could benefit by having a unique IP address within the mobile operators network, right?

Do you know China Mobile has hundreds of millions of subscribers. Did you know even T-Mobile has 150 million subscribers globally? Any guess as to how large private IP space is? Hint - it isn't big enough for any of the major operators to supply a unique IP within their networks.

These large operators have had to choose between partitioning their subscribers which makes phone-to-phone applications a mess or using bogons (IPv4 space registered to other people!) which is what T-Mobile had been doing, or they can choose sanity, which for them includes IPv6 as it is large enough to handle these mobile networks address needs without breaking a sweat.

T-Mobile decided that IPv6 only with a NAT64 back to IPv4 is the right way to go for the future. It's doesn't solve all their issues but it's a pretty clean way for them to solve it with the minimum of cost and near maximum usability.

Other vendors are betting on IPv4 partitioning with IPv6 capability. If T-Mobile is successful with their approach it's likely IPv6 only on handsets will become the defacto standard. After all, why should your phone run two IP stacks when one can get the job done?

Dual stack works but is has failed in the sense that it can't be the singular solution during the transition from IPv4 to IPv6.

Computer