unixisc writes: Over the last 2 years, June 6th had been observed as IPv6 day. The first time, IPv6 connections were turned on by participants just for a day, and last year, it was turned on for good. A year later, how successful is the global transition to IPv6? According to Cisco 6labs, adaption rates vary from 50% in Belgium to 6% in China, with the US coming somewhere in the middle at 37%. A lot of issues around IPv6, such as the absence of NAT, have apparently been resolved (NAPT is now available and recognized by the IETF). So what are the remaining issues holding people up — be it ISPs, businesses, consumers or anybody else? When could we be near a year when we could turn off all IPv4 connectivity worldwide on an IPv6 only day and nobody would notice?
We are pleased to celebrate GNU’s 30th anniversary with the release of GNU Guix version 0.4, representing 300 commits by 5 people over 2 months.
This release comes with a QEMU virtual machine image that demonstrates preliminary work toward building a stand-alone GNU system with Guix. The image uses the GNU Linux-Libre kernel and the GNU dmd init system. It is console-only, and may be used primarily to try out Guix.
unixisc writes: Soren Jacobsen has announced the release of NetBSD 5.1.2: "The NetBSD Project is pleased to announce that version 5.1.2 of the NetBSD operating system is now available. NetBSD 5.1.2 is the second critical/security update of the NetBSD 5.1 release branch. It represents a selected subset of fixes deemed critical for security or stability reasons. Please note that all fixes in critical/security updates (i.e., NetBSD 5.0.1, 5.0.2, etc.) are cumulative, so the latest update contains all such fixes since the corresponding minor release. These fixes will also appear in future minor releases (i.e., NetBSD 5.1, 5.2, etc.), together with other less-critical fixes and feature enhancements. NetBSD 5.1.2 is dedicated to the memory of Yoshihiro Masuda, who passed away in May 2011.
unixisc writes: I don't see how MS can claim that exploiting the vulnerability requires local network access, when the very nature of IPv6 will give everybody a globally routeable access, which would be reachable anyway. If they have the fix, it needs to be made available, since in IPv6, every node would have to be secured with an appropriate firewall and malware.
unixisc writes: US NETWORK OPERATOR AT&T believes that by 2020 most networks should have completely moved onto IPv6.
AT&T, like all major network providers, has been banging on about IPv6 for many years but with the exhaustion of IPv4 addresses earlier this year the looming change over was brought into sharp focus. The plan in the short term is to run 'dual stack' networks, meaning running the current IPv4 network and the next generation IPv6 network side-by-side, however according to a report by AT&T that will only continue until 2020.