Want to read Slashdot from your mobile device? Point it at m.slashdot.org and keep reading!

 


Forgot your password?
Close
typodupeerror
×
The Internet United States

U.S. DoD Commits To IPv6 318

Posted by CowboyNeal from the leading-the-way dept.
babaloo writes "According to this article the U.S. Defense Department wants to move it's entire network to IPv6 by the year 2008. Will this be what pushes at least U.S. based companies and providers to actually convert over?" It's definitely a shot in the arm that IPv6 needs. This seemed to be more of a priority back when NAT was much less prevalent, but it seems we'll eventually find ourselves on IPv6, even if we drag our feet there.
This discussion has been archived. No new comments can be posted.

U.S. DoD Commits To IPv6 More

U.S. DoD Commits To IPv6

Comments Filter:

  • dupe? (Score:4, Informative)

    by zoloto ( 586738 ) on Thursday June 26, 2003 @05:13PM (#6306818)
    Wasn't this covered here:
    http://slashdot.org/article.pl?sid=03/06/13 /194120 6&mode=thread

    oh wait, this is /.
    any news is good news!

    • Re:dupe? (Score:2, Funny)

      by Anonymous Coward
      I hear that with IPv6, there will be a mind-boggling amount of available IP addresses... like, one IP address for every slashdot dupe. Amazing!

    • Re:dupe? (Score:2, Funny)

      by Anonymous Coward
      At least it's a genuine dupe and not a SCO update....

  • Sigh... (Score:3, Redundant)

    by Andorion ( 526481 ) on Thursday June 26, 2003 @05:13PM (#6306821)
    A simple search for "ipv6" before posting the article would have been nice =)

    Karma-seekers, just go to the original post [slashdot.org] and repost all insightful comments! :)

    ~Berj
    • actually the above post was in fact just seconds after me. my fellow mods, please look at the time before you moderate and not just the location in the discussion of where a comment is made.

      not to pick but Andorion and I were on the same ball :)

      cheers!
      • It's all good, karma's not worth much these days ;) I just wish editors would take a second and use the search feature before posting a story.

        Maybe instead of posting the above, I should have taken my own advice and just posted a bunch of insightful, funny, and informative comments from the last discussion! :)

        ~Berj

  • An IP address for.... (Score:5, Funny)

    by ciroknight ( 601098 ) on Thursday June 26, 2003 @05:14PM (#6306836)
    .....every second until the day IPv8 goes into effect, not to mention every person alive, every toaster making toast, every toilet still flushing, and every bullet fired. Maybe this is why the DoD wants IPv6... No not for toilets, internet enabled bullets!!

  • Comment removed (Score:5, Funny)

    by account_deleted ( 4530225 ) * on Thursday June 26, 2003 @05:15PM (#6306844)
    Comment removed based on user account deletion
  • Click here [e46fanatics.com] :)
  • What are they going to do with all those IP addresses? Oh wait, I know. A trillion nano-machines flying around the Iraqi country side, injecting anthrax into Saddamic supporters...

    • Re:IPv6.... (Score:5, Interesting)

      by JoeBuck ( 7947 ) on Thursday June 26, 2003 @05:34PM (#6307006) Homepage

      You want to have vastly more addresses than can ever be used; this will kill scanning attacks by black hats and spammers who just try every network address looking for a victim. Anyone scanning thousands of bogus addresses for every real one will trigger all kinds of alarms.

      • Re:IPv6.... (Score:2, Insightful)

        by FatherBash ( 632310 )
        I don't think so. As machines get more and more powerful and bandwidth availability increases at some forms of scanning will reemerge. I realize the magnitude of IPv6 (or at least I think I do) but how long will it take Moore's Law and whatever lays beyond gigabit ethernet to catch up? and remember we're talking a protocol that will probably be in use for hundreds of years. This will only stop scanning as we currently know it.

  • Chicken and egg (Score:4, Insightful)

    by caluml ( 551744 ) <slashdot.spamgoeshere@calum@org> on Thursday June 26, 2003 @05:18PM (#6306874) Homepage
    Will this be what pushes at least U.S. based companies and providers to actually convert over?"

    Why would it be? I assume most US based companies and providers don't have many connections to the DOD network :)
    When a: there is a decent amount of IPv6 only content, and b: when the most widely used OS in the world ships with it enabled by default, (ipv6 install doesn't count here) then it might start taking hold. But it's a chicken and egg situation at the moment. That autopr0n guy should switch his site to IPv6 only, and force his viewers to start using IPv6 (or IPv6-over-IPv4) ;)
    Sign yourself up to an IPv6 tunnelbroker today, and get your own n * 2^64 addresses to play with.

    In fact, why isn't Slashdot an IPv6 enabled site?

    • Re:Chicken and egg (Score:3, Interesting)

      by JoeBuck ( 7947 )

      Ah, but if you're shipping networking gear, the telecom industry is broke, so the only major source of customers is the military. You're going to design to fit the requirements of the paying customers, and as keeping two designs going is more expensive, there will be more and more ipv6-capable gear sold to everyone if the military demands it.

      People forget that as late as the early 80s, the US military bought 50% or more of all electronics purchased in the US.

    • Re:Chicken and egg (Score:4, Funny)

      by Anonymous Coward on Thursday June 26, 2003 @05:32PM (#6306997)
      In fact, why isn't Slashdot an IPv6 enabled site?

      Because we are all hypocrits.

  • Heavy Sigh (Score:4, Funny)

    by mofochickamo ( 658514 ) on Thursday June 26, 2003 @05:20PM (#6306894) Homepage Journal
    IPv6 will allow an expansion from the Internet's current limitation of 4 billion addresses (to a new limit of 380,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,00 0, which is a number so great it could supply each person living today with more than 4 billion addresses each).

    Too bad I have to type http://132.122.21.123.155.135.132.152.132.122.221. 123.15.23.32.52 to get to my computer that I don't have a domain name for.

    • Re:Heavy Sigh (Score:5, Informative)

      by caluml ( 551744 ) <slashdot.spamgoeshere@calum@org> on Thursday June 26, 2003 @05:25PM (#6306934) Homepage
      Er, no.

      From ifconfig:
      inet6 addr: fe80::240:93fa:fe43:6f50/64 Scope:Link

      And you're right - DNS will become more invaluable.
      Although you only have to remember your subnet - eg 2001:618:15, and the address you use on that subnet, which is usually something like ::1, or ::2, etc.

      • Re:Heavy Sigh (Score:2, Informative)

        by KentoNET ( 465732 )
        The subnet is the easy part. Unfortunately, your end IP fields will rarely equate to a single digit, like ::1 or ::2. More often than not, an automatic configuration scheme will give you something like :203:6dff:fe1d:85c4 at the end (my PC under a /64 prefix, as an example). That value is calculated via the MAC address. Preset IP's are usually only given to routers and servers.

      • inet6 addr: fe80::240:93fa:fe43:6f50/64 Scope:Link

        Thanks. That will be much easier to remember.

      • DNS will become more invaluable.

        I'm really sorry about this, but as a fully paid-up member of the Campaign for Real Pedantry (CaRP), I can't let 'more invaluable' go. DNS could become 'more valuable'. But invaluable means incapable of being valued; something is either invaluable or it's not - it can't be more invaluable, in the same way that something can't be more unique or more dead.

        Thank you for your understanding in this matter.

  • IPV6 Costs.... (Score:3, Funny)

    by wo1verin3 ( 473094 ) on Thursday June 26, 2003 @05:20PM (#6306900) Homepage
    >> U.S. DoD Commits To IPv6

    Washington, DC - June 26, 2003 - Dept. Of Defense in charge of security and defense for the United States Of America will be going over budget on an IPV6 upgrade. The majority of costs will be involved in training staff to count to the number 6. Previous training to count up to 5 was thought to be years ahead of its time since the DOD believes IPV5 would come after IPV4.

  • Heh (Score:5, Funny)

    by egg troll ( 515396 ) on Thursday June 26, 2003 @05:22PM (#6306918) Homepage Journal
    IPV6 is the Hurd of networking protocols!

    • Re:Heh (Score:5, Funny)

      by eht ( 8912 ) on Thursday June 26, 2003 @05:37PM (#6307028)
      Not really, IPv6 is actually useful.

  • IPv6 May becomre much MORE needed (Score:4, Interesting)

    by zapp ( 201236 ) on Thursday June 26, 2003 @05:23PM (#6306920)
    This seemed to be more of a priority back when NAT was much less prevalent

    Since several states have already banned NAT, and several more are moving in that direction... perhapse IPv6 will be necessary much sooner than we think.

  • Time to learn... (Score:4, Interesting)

    by krray ( 605395 ) * on Thursday June 26, 2003 @05:28PM (#6306961)
    You know, call me weird or something, but I happen to like NAT and, well, pretty much fully understand IPv4.

    Yeah -- I know how to use a Linux box as a decent router and setup Firewall's as needed, etc.

    The fact that I'm not doing anything SERIOUSLY complex helps:
    - Web servers (port 80 and 443)
    - imaps (port 993)
    - ssh2 (private port with honey-pots all over :)
    - other misc needed ports and tunnels as well.

    ONLY ports I specifically opened up and re-directed are available to the general Internet. Firewalls run internally as well, but many more services (lpr, smb, hell IPX is stilled used/preferred for accounting work)...

    With IPv6 I'm probably going to go the route of:
    1) Ok -- I *basically* understand it, but honestly haven't wrapped my brain around it ... learn it.

    2) Try and get a few IPv6 addresses as needed
    3) Update front end router to use it work with it.
    4) Tunnel it back into my IPv4 network per port as needed. IPv6 NAT if you will...

    I really don't want anything/everything directly connected to the Internet. At anytime. Except the Internet network router. These ISP's selling "Windows DSL modems" where it plugs directly into USB or the Ethernet is NUTS, IMHO. :)

    Once in a blue moon I'll come across a Linux box that has ftp (for example) enabled and there really isn't the want/need for it. Oops, not Firewalled either... Glad it wasn't directly on the 'Net (!)

    Even when the need _has_ arisen to put a box completely on the Internet directly it's been easy enough to setup a 1:1 map on the router... While the video feed was going on I personally would be nmap'ing the box to double check the firewall settings...

    Of course the problem exists because, well, it is TOO easy to get on the Internet. Too many have no clue what they are doing, but they get email (!) Yeah. Those are the ones spreading virus' and not knowing it or have a hacked box spewing spam around the world. Some problems could also become moot with IPv6 in regards to security and accountability...

    !fp

    • Re:Time to learn... (Score:4, Insightful)

      by caluml ( 551744 ) <slashdot.spamgoeshere@calum@org> on Thursday June 26, 2003 @05:58PM (#6307165) Homepage
      NAT is the spawn of SATAN. Really it is. Get two hosts behind NAT, and they are unable to establish connections between themselves. It's truely horrible. At the moment, I am using a tunnel broker to give my lab IPv6 connectivity ( tunnelled over IPv4, but you wouldn't know it.)
      Because my workstation is behind NAT on IPv4, I have to either VPN in, or SSH to the firewall, and then onto my workstation. With IPv6 however, because I can address my workstation directly, and because I've allowed SSH to it, I can ssh right in through the firewall. It's just better. Abolish NAT.
      • NAT is the spawn of SATAN. Really it is

        Oh, come now. You're over-reacting.

        Get two hosts behind NAT, and they are unable to establish connections between themselves.

        This is sometimes true, and is usually considered a benefit. Put servers on the public Internet, put client workstations behind NAT.

        Because my workstation is behind NAT on IPv4, I have to either VPN in, or SSH to the firewall, and then onto my workstation.

        Have you ever heard of port forwarding? Basically, you can take a high port (say
    • Why not instruct iptables to drop all incomming packets destined for your network, and the you can easily add a rule to allow specific ones as and when you want? its really not that hard to do

    • Re:Time to learn... (Score:3, Informative)

      by Alioth ( 221270 )
      Your argument is a bit of a red herring. Firstly, security is a host problem more than a network problem, but let's ignore that for now.

      Your IPv6 router can *still* be used to firewall off your internal IPv6 network even though it has globally addressable IP addresses. The added benefit (you might not think this is a benefit, but many firms do) is if everyone has globally unique address space, and say, for example, two companies become partners, they don't have to renumber vast amounts of machines so the t
  • Won't we need IPv7 by then?

  • Damnit! (In the spirit of dupes) (Score:5, Funny)

    by teamhasnoi ( 554944 ) <teamhasnoi@@@yahoo...com> on Thursday June 26, 2003 @05:31PM (#6306978) Journal
    I was promised flying cars, why aren't they working on the flying cars?

    IPv6 sounds great but I see that we will need more TLDs and a domain name will be absolutely necessary.

    Frickin' Rainman will be the only one able to remember xxxx.xxxx.xxxx.xxxx.xxxx.xxxx.

    At least the giant corporations that are our new overlords will have to spend some serious $$$ to cover all the new 'name.new tld'. Perhaps after all this is done, they can work on flying cars. 'cause we are like 50+ years behind the times here, people.

    But all that has to take a back seat to hard-to-remember IPv6.

    Here's a plan, why don't we just take the internet away from all the AOLers, the Flash greeting card senders, the 'Great Story! Read this LOLRFLOLRLOL!!!!'ers, Zone Bejewled players and the cheaters at Counter Strike and we'll have enough IPs for all of the elitist bastards that are going to make my toaster talk to me.

    Tell you what. I will trade all my IPs (192.168.x.x) for a friggin' flying car.

    Let's make it happen. I'll even have a bumper sticker, "IPv6, but my doctor says I'll be fine!" with a smiley!

    Gimme my flying car.

  • make sense, the issue is security (Score:3, Informative)

    by e40 ( 448424 ) on Thursday June 26, 2003 @05:31PM (#6306983) Journal
    if it were not for the increased awareness of security, this would never had happened.

  • More than one benefit. (Score:5, Informative)

    by davidu ( 18 ) on Thursday June 26, 2003 @05:34PM (#6307008) Homepage Journal

    IPv6 has many improvements over IPv4 other than just
    more address space.
    • Expanded Addressing Capabilities (multicast, anycast, etc)
    • Header Format Simplification
    • Flow Labeling Capability
    • Authentication and Privacy Capabilities
    There is no address space shortage as reported...everywhere. -davidu

  • By 2008 (Score:3, Funny)

    by Kludge ( 13653 ) on Thursday June 26, 2003 @05:37PM (#6307025)
    I hope to be 5 years older.

    How slow is that?

  • Excellent example! (Score:4, Funny)

    by Mike Schiraldi ( 18296 ) on Thursday June 26, 2003 @05:44PM (#6307066) Homepage Journal
    From the recent Slashdot IRC chat [slashdot.org]:

    reefer asks: Is there any system in place or a plan on developing some system to prevent duplicate posts?


    CmdrTaco: Whatever. Next.


    Great attitude there, Rob.
    • That's because it's a ridiculous question.

      • Re:Excellent example! (Score:2, Interesting)

        by Anonymous Coward
        Yeah, you're right. No system should be needed because the editors, who are paid to do their jobs, should take all of ten minutes a day to read the headlines.

        Sheesh, and they expect us to subscribe for this shitty service and shitty "customer is always stupid" attitude.

        Check out the FAQ: "Why don't you do this simple thing to make the Slashdot experience better?" "I'm too busy." "Well, what about this one?" "Busy." "This?" "Busy."

        What the fuck are the Slashdot editors so busy doing? They don't read their
    • reefer asks: Is there any system in place or a plan on developing some system to prevent duplicate posts?

      CmdrTaco: Whatever. Next.

      Great attitude there, Rob.

      And they want people to pay for this?

      The next dupe will be posted soon, but subscribers can see it early!

  • Last time with ISO protocols. (Score:5, Interesting)

    by dfries ( 466073 ) on Thursday June 26, 2003 @05:48PM (#6307104) Homepage Journal
    In 1998 the National Institute for Standards and Technology (NIST) mandated that equipment must support the ISO protocols (rather than TCP/IP) or demonstrate how their systems could support them. It was expected the commercial sector would adopt the ISO standards. It didn't happen, computers were shipped with ISO-compliant code, but people kept using TCP/IP. The requirement was dropped in 1994.

    It is definitely a good thing, but the US isn't going to shift to IPv6 just because one government department has decided to use it. It will happen by people getting involved with IPv6. Jump on the 6-bone today.

    www.freenet6.net [freenet6.net], it's free.

    • (1998? I assume you mean 1988?) I remember those days, having to deal with conflicting requirements that computers for NASA and DoD had to be Certified C2-secure, POSIX-compliant, use the GOSIP Government OSI Protocol stack, run Ada, and often comply with POSIX standards that weren't finalized yet, like Posix 2.x Real-Time, and still be Commercial-Off-The-Shelf.

      One of the big differences between the GOSIP OSI stack (which failed in the market) and IPv6 (which might succeed) was that GOSIP was big, clumsy,

      • One of the big differences between the GOSIP OSI stack (which failed in the market) and IPv6 (which might succeed) was that GOSIP was big, clumsy, generally didn't work, and ...

        Well, it worked enough that I now support a 7 layer OSI network stack! (infact, I just ported it to the PowerPC!)

        Shoot me now? Please?

  • For anyone still in the dark... (Score:3, Informative)

    by H0NGK0NGPH00EY ( 210370 ) on Thursday June 26, 2003 @05:51PM (#6307124) Homepage
    ...simple info on IPv6: http://www.internet2.edu/resources/infosheetIPv6.p df [internet2.edu]
  • How could we forsee a use for 3.8e38 addresses? 4 billion per person? Can computers handle this? Will they be able to? I don't really know how IP works (short of every computer is assigned one) - maybe someone can clue me in or link me? I imagine the IP is stored in each computer somewhere. Storing a unique number that large is going to suck up a lot of memory.

    Remember, IP n00b - don't yell at me.

    • Re:Big numbers... (Score:5, Informative)

      by caluml ( 551744 ) <slashdot.spamgoeshere@calum@org> on Thursday June 26, 2003 @06:06PM (#6307208) Homepage
      It's hierarchical. Someone owns "all" the IP addresses. Big ISP 1 asks for a chunk of space, and gets, oh, I don't know, a /30. ISP 2 gets a /36. Company 3 (me :O) ) gets a /48, which is 65536 subnets, each of 2^64 addresses, which is more than enough for me.
      Hierarchical is good, as it means that the world doesn't need to know about routes for each company. It just says: Oh, that address is in the range belonging to Big ISP 1, so I'll pass it on. Big ISP 1 knows that it belongs to ISP 2, and ISP 2 passes it on to Company 3.
    • IP addresses currently take up 32 bits for the four octets. IP address will take up 128 bits. This means that any time you're storing an address it will take four times as much memory. A 32 bit processor will have to do eight loads and four compares to compare two IPv6 addresses; This is a very real problem, since it only has to do two loads and one compare to compare two IPv4 addresses. Until the advent of true 128 bit processors (with a 128 bit data path all the way through) this will continue to be a pro
      • IP addresses currently take up 32 bits for the four octets. IP address will take up 128 bits. This means that any time you're storing an address it will take four times as much memory. A 32 bit processor will have to do eight loads and four compares to compare two IPv6 addresses;

        Most routers and OS's store IPs used for routing data in hash or trie data structures which will keep it from quadrupling the amount of RAM used. Since they are already using these data structures, the number of loads/compare ops

    • Re:Big numbers... (Score:3, Interesting)

      by billstewart ( 78916 )
      (I'll flip the coin and decide you're not trolling, because there _is_ something generally useful to say here...)

      It isn't actually that every computer has one IP address - it's really that every _network_interface_ has one IP address, but if you've only got one network card that's close enough to the same thing. The IP address has two parts, a network part for the network you're connected to and a host part for your machine itself. On the current IPv4 the address is 32 bits, which was plenty back in 1

  • How to defeat NAT with IPv6 (Score:3, Insightful)

    by sbwoodside ( 134679 ) <sbwoodside@yahoo.com> on Thursday June 26, 2003 @06:01PM (#6307177) Homepage
    [note, it really should be NAPT (network address and port translation), NAT alone is pretty harmless]

    Let's say I'm the author of a voice over IP application on a platform that supports IPv6, like, say, Mac OS X. I get myself a NAPT-replacement box that I stick on the edge of my home network. It assigns an IPv6 address to each of the inner systems using 6to4. Then, when my caller wants to try to phone me, I give her my IPv6 address. She connects to that address and her magic box sets up an IPv6 tunnel to my magic box automatically. Then my magic box forwards the packets to the right machine in my network.

    Add a firewall to that, and you've got something that replaces NAPT.

    You could keep IPv4 NAPT as a legacy feature for inside hosts and applications that don't support IPv6 yet. But apps that do support IPv6, would not have to do any work to traverse the NAPT.

    simon

  • Coming faster and faster (Score:5, Interesting)

    by anticypher ( 48312 ) <anticypher.gmail@com> on Thursday June 26, 2003 @06:17PM (#6307274) Homepage
    IPv6 is picking up steam, another push like this is going to make it appear in all new computers a little bit sooner.

    In every installation I've rolled out in the last few years, I've specced IPv6 support. Every network, router, interconnect, carrier and transit has had IPv6 working. Not always working very well, but enough that people didn't notice whether their traffic went over IPv6 or v4.

    Solaris has had IPv6 for several years, and the current release its on by default, plug it into a network with an IPv6 router and it works. M$ is playing catch up by including it natively in XP, but it still takes some tweaking. The linux distros will have to start making it enabled by default (no more kernel recompiles), but that may be happening as I type this. More and more applications are being written as fully IPv6 aware, and most of the traditional apps like ping, FTP, traceroute and SSH are now re-written to use IPv6 when a AAAA record is returned from a DNS lookup. There still is a lot of work to be done, like fully working dynamic DNS updates, and DHCPng, route servers, and a free (as in everything) certificate system for IPSec. Every new release of every browser should check for IPv6 and use it whenever possible, M$ claims that will happen starting with their next desktop releases.

    Where I've seen the most far-sighted development is in the newest generation of GSM mobile phones. All the big players are including IPv6 in their current handset designs, and the carriers are now developing value added services to sell. So its not just each phone is individually addressable, but can roam onto competing carriers networks and still have a globally accessible address. Internally, every carrier in Europe with 2.5G/3G services is running IPv6 for everything (except for a few dinosaurs about to be extinct). The other big area is giving each credit card with a smart chip (anti-fraud and verification chip) a range of IPv6 addresses. When the card is put into a reader or used for an online purchase, the chip will actively participate in the verification step by being uniquely addressable and requesting end-to-end encryption. There were several card manufacturers showing off their tiny IPv6 stacks at a recent smartcard trade show.

    As I've pointed out in a post months ago, many ISPs here in Europe are making IPv6 available for early adopters, in the hopes of riding the next wave to some higher margins. I've had clients ask me for advice on getting onto the "new internet", because they didn't want to get left behind on the "old and obsolete internet". Then I point out how they are already on it, and my installations use the "new internet" whenever possible.

    IPv6 is here, it works, and soon consumers will make it a "must-have" item when buying a new computer. When that starts happening, then techies with a few years of solid IPv6 experience will be sought after for their skills.

    the AC
    working with IPng/IPv6 since 1994

    • Re:Coming faster and faster (Score:3, Interesting)

      by Cato ( 8296 )
      "Internally, every carrier in Europe with 2.5G/3G services is running IPv6 for everything (except for a few dinosaurs about to be extinct)"

      This might be true for a few carriers you know, but it is absolutely not true for the wireless networks I've been working with (and they aren't dinosaurs, they include the market leaders) - they are all IPv4 and are running routers with IOS/JUNOS versions that don't even support IPv6. Since Cisco IOS 12.3 is the first non-T train IOS to support IPv6 and it came out in

  • I can't wait (Score:5, Insightful)

    by theCat ( 36907 ) on Thursday June 26, 2003 @06:53PM (#6307493) Journal
    OK, this is very funny. IP addys for every bullet. But listen gang, the ISPs have been tight fisted with IP addresses for so long that most of you young-uns don't even remember the day when anyone with a router could count on a Class-C or even B to themselves. Those days are LONG gone; now you get DSL and you pay for ONE frigging static IP address, and if you want anything like a big chunk of a Class-C you have to pay serious cash. Monthly. And upgrade? You want more? Well all the IPs on either side of your teeny tiny block were sold to other shmoes already, so if you want more you get a whole new block. So you better get more than you think you will need...ever...or else everytime you run over your public IP space you will need to reconfig your entire public facing Internet presence to a new block.

    But you know what, that's not really a technology limit, that's a BUSINESS MODEL.

    Watch this. When they finally go over to IPv6 and later install your new DSL, know what the knee-biting bastards will do? First, they will charge you MORE for a basic DSL with dynamic IP because now it is the new-fangled IPv6 (new=$$$). Then they will assign you a SINGLE IP addy from their store of 128 trillion. And they will assign IP addresses this way in SEQUENCE to all subscribers so that as soon as you get yours you are boxed in by other subscribers just getting theirs. You know they will, it will be a strategic decision to completely undermine the freedom you SHOULD have when there are about 1 billion IP addresses for every human alive on earth.

    The only way around this would be to issue IP blocks to physical locations on the earth, so no matter where you are you have all the IP addresses reservered for that square meter of dirt, and if you have a large home/office/company then you have a big block indeed. ISPs would be forced to backbone their entire geographic area, including the whole planet if they are big enough.

    As a business model it sucks big wind. But I like it as an end user.

    Wire the planet. Freedom to connect! No more IP address space tyranny!!

    • Re:I can't wait (Score:4, Funny)

      by El ( 94934 ) on Thursday June 26, 2003 @08:33PM (#6307937)
      The only way around this would be to issue IP blocks to physical locations on the earth, so no matter where you are you have all the IP addresses reservered for that square meter of dirt...

      Well, wouldn't that make mobile computing a pain... "uh oh, by car has moved twenty feet, better change my IP address!" as you're going down the freeway.

  • Advantages of IPV6 (Score:4, Informative)

    by 42forty-two42 ( 532340 ) <bdonlan.gmail@com> on Thursday June 26, 2003 @07:00PM (#6307523) Homepage Journal
    For those not in the know, here is a brief article [slashdot.org] Explaining the benefits of IPV6.

  • Small/independant ISPs? (Score:3, Insightful)

    by qtp ( 461286 ) on Thursday June 26, 2003 @10:52PM (#6308513) Journal
    What is to prevent the independant ISPs from switching thier systems over?

    I believe that cisco already supports IPv6 on most (all?) of thier equipment. There are IPv6 packages for most OS, and you can support IPv6 and IPv4 simultaneously if neccessary.

    Is it neccessary for the smaller guys to wait?

    If .mil is going IPv6 in 2008, does that mean the rest of the net waits until then?

    That seems a little ass backwards to me.

  • An IBM Rep. at some conference once.. (Score:4, Funny)

    by Radix42 ( 455239 ) <Radix42@cox.net> on Friday June 27, 2003 @02:17AM (#6309116)
    ...was telling the audience (mostly non-technical) about IPv6.

    He mentioned how many addresses, and then asked if anyone knew what that meant.

    He said that it would mean there would be enough for every frickin appliance, and it could run Java on it, and did anyone know what THAT meant?

    Of course no one was supposed to have any answers, it was almost all PHBs there (I got dragged along to man a cursed booth).

    So I raised my hand and said "So you can get up in the morning and reboot your toaster?"

    EVERYONE burst out laughing!

Slashdot Top Deals

If a 6600 used paper tape instead of core memory, it would use up tape at about 30 miles/second. -- Grishman, Assembly Language Programming

Close