[KyOSS Discuss] Suggested discussion topic: IPv4 address exhaustion and IPv6 adoption

Barton Chittenden bartonski at gmail.com
Mon Sep 17 19:09:57 EDT 2012


Unless there are *really* good reasons, you should be storing host names,
not IP addresses. That way, it doesn't matter if the back end is using IPv4
or IPv6 ... or simply if someone changes server IP addresses.

On Mon, Sep 17, 2012 at 1:30 PM, Alex Hagerman <alex.hagerman at gmail.com>wrote:

> A quick question thinking about this. How are programs being prepared or
> are they prepared? I can look into this later, but it just popped into my
> mind that I have MySQL databases with users setup with permissions based on
> Host. Right now all of these are IPv4. If I was to enter an IPv6 address
> would MySQL be prepared to handle that comparison?
>
> Alex
>
>
> On Mon, Sep 17, 2012 at 1:27 PM, Britt Dodd <brittman914 at gmail.com> wrote:
>
>> I believe *this* addresses just what your talking about:
>>
>> http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/6in4
>>
>> It's IPv4 traffic encapsulated in IPv6 traffic --- There are several
>> 6-in-4 providers that allow "legacy" IPv4 traffic onto IPv6 networks.
>> I'm not sure that all of the ISPs are going to follow TW's (or the
>> other MPAA-agreeing partied ISPs) lead. At least I hope not.
>>
>> The main beef I have with the Internet (and lots of things for that
>> matter) is that "consumers" don't fully understand what they use and
>> how it works --- sure a tablet reaches YouTube, but nobody seems to
>> care about how/why it works and simply blindly accept major changes to
>> the underlying infrastructure. That's why ISP's dont invest, the
>> consumer doesn't care.
>>
>> I have a re-occuring $10 surcharge on my Sprint bill for the same
>> reason --- It's labelled as a "Enhanced Phone Fee" --- because I
>> happened to buy a phone with a 8MP camera, when it initially was a 4G
>> fee for WiMax that never made it to Louisville. I have to pay the fee
>> because consumers dont get (and complain) about why having a
>> 8MP-camera smartphone means you have to pay $10 a month.
>>
>> IPv6 wont happen until it has to, and ISP's dont care about NAT'ing to
>> oblivion because the consumer doesn't care --- and they don't care
>> because the magic box just works.
>>
>> Speaking of TW, when is the Insight/TW switchover happening?
>>
>> On Mon, Sep 17, 2012 at 1:02 PM, Barton Chittenden <bartonski at gmail.com>
>> wrote:
>> > I've been reading and thinking about it, and I think that the problem is
>> > actually a little more pernicious. We all like to think about the
>> internet
>> > as a nice point to point network where everyone is connected to everyone
>> > else. However, there are some significant interest groups who would
>> like the
>> > internet to be a broadcast network: A limited number of content
>> providers,
>> > and all the rest of the world as consumers. If all of the world's end
>> users
>> > are hidden behind some ISP's NAT, that is much more what the world looks
>> > like... so you get no movement at the national or even international
>> level
>> > (because the lobbyists for Time Warner, Disney, MPAA and all of the
>> Telecoms
>> > are fighting against it), and you get no movement at the ISP level,
>> because
>> > of the investments required.
>> >
>> > On the up side, I believe that Comcast is using IPv6 on their network
>> > infrastructure. They provide IPv4 addresses to the customer, but a lot
>> of
>> > the other stuff is IPv6 (I don't really know what the 'other stuff'
>> consists
>> > of -- set top boxes? edge routers?).
>> >
>> > What I can't figure out is why it isn't possible to have the IPv4
>> address
>> > space be a subnet of IPv6... mark off a [tiny] section of the IPv6
>> address
>> > space and say 'Ok, the lower 32 bits of this address space get sent off
>> to
>> > the old internet'.
>> >
>> > Maybe that's the way it already works. I don't know.
>> >
>> >
>> > On Mon, Sep 17, 2012 at 11:07 AM, Alex Hagerman <
>> alex.hagerman at gmail.com>
>> > wrote:
>> >>
>> >> I'm not sure on the first point, but at least on the second while in a
>> >> perfect world that sounds great, no ISP is going to let that money
>> grab get
>> >> away with IPV6.
>> >>
>> >> On Mon, Sep 17, 2012 at 10:45 AM, alan blount <alan at zeroasterisk.com>
>> >> wrote:
>> >>>
>> >>> But it seems to me (non-networking guy that I am) that you can have
>> both
>> >>> and route either way, right?
>> >>>
>> >>> So providers assign a IPv6 to each of their customers, in addition to
>> the
>> >>> IPv4, and the world remains happy.
>> >>>
>> >>>
>> >>>
>> >>> On Mon, Sep 17, 2012 at 10:32 AM, Jeff Squyres <jeff at squyres.com>
>> wrote:
>> >>>>
>> >>>> Note that it's a very different thing to say "there isn't enough
>> demand"
>> >>>> vs. "we're not going to do it."
>> >>>>
>> >>>> Barton is right in that it's a chicken-n-egg problem: providers like
>> >>>> IgLou won't spent the time/effort to go IPv6 because not enough
>> people (know
>> >>>> that they) want it.  And not enough people want it because their
>> providers
>> >>>> are not forcing them to it.  But if providers start forcing people
>> to IPv6
>> >>>> -- particularly if you're among the first providers to do so --
>> you'll lose
>> >>>> customers.
>> >>>>
>> >>>> Damned if you do, damned if you don't.
>> >>>>
>> >>>>
>> >>>> On Mon, Sep 17, 2012 at 9:30 AM, Britt Dodd <brittman914 at gmail.com>
>> >>>> wrote:
>> >>>>>
>> >>>>> Someone needs to inform IgLou of this. They evidentially haven't
>> read
>> >>>>> the news and don't believe its a problem. I guess they bought a huge
>> >>>>> block of IPv4 addresses back in the day....I had inquired about IPv6
>> >>>>> addresses and say said they haven't looked into IPv6 because there
>> >>>>> wasn't enough demand for them.
>> >>>>>
>> >>>>> On Sun, Sep 16, 2012 at 10:59 PM, Alan Blount <
>> zeroasterisk at gmail.com>
>> >>>>> wrote:
>> >>>>> > Sounds like a very interesting topic. Alas I am not going to be
>> >>>>> > helpful with
>> >>>>> > the answers to these questions, but I'll be very interested to
>> hear
>> >>>>> > them.
>> >>>>> >
>> >>>>> >
>> >>>>> >
>> >>>>> >
>> >>>>> > On Sep 16, 2012, at 3:25 PM, Barton Chittenden <
>> bartonski at gmail.com>
>> >>>>> > wrote:
>> >>>>> >
>> >>>>> > On September 14, RIPE NCC, the European regional internet
>> registry,
>> >>>>> > started
>> >>>>> > allocating IP addresses from its last /8 address block. This is
>> the
>> >>>>> > beginning of the end of the allocation of the IPv4 address space
>> >>>>> > (i.e.
>> >>>>> > addresses of the form xxx.xxx.xxx.xxx) as we know it. Allocation
>> of
>> >>>>> > IPv4
>> >>>>> > addresses in Europe is now strictly rationed.
>> >>>>> >
>> >>>>> > ARIN (American Registry of Internet Numbers) will be down to its
>> last
>> >>>>> > /8 by
>> >>>>> > this time next year.
>> >>>>> >
>> >>>>> > The long term solution to this problem is to start using IPv6
>> >>>>> > addresses,
>> >>>>> > which are essentially unlimited (The address space is so large
>> that
>> >>>>> > you
>> >>>>> > could assign about a thousand times the current internet address
>> >>>>> > space to
>> >>>>> > each cell of every one of the 7 billion people on earth).
>> >>>>> >
>> >>>>> > The problem of switching to IPv6 is a chicken-and-egg problem:
>> >>>>> > internet
>> >>>>> > users won't switch to IPv6 addresses because there are very few
>> sites
>> >>>>> > that
>> >>>>> > they can connect to which use IPv6, and no content providers use
>> IPv6
>> >>>>> > addresses because no-one visits via IPv6. Most ISPs don't provide
>> >>>>> > IPv6
>> >>>>> > addresses (or if they do, no-one realizes that they do).
>> >>>>> >
>> >>>>> > There are some short-term solutions, but they destroy the
>> >>>>> > point-to-point
>> >>>>> > nature of the internet which can cause problems.
>> >>>>> >
>> >>>>> > I have a decent handle on what's happening and why, but I have
>> zero
>> >>>>> > experience with setting up a network using IPv6... in many ways,
>> it
>> >>>>> > should
>> >>>>> > be transparent (as IPv4 is... you connect your computer to a
>> router
>> >>>>> > via cat5
>> >>>>> > cable or wireless, and you're connected). Obviously, it's not
>> quite
>> >>>>> > that
>> >>>>> > easy, if it was, we would all be using IPv6 and we wouldn't be
>> >>>>> > worrying
>> >>>>> > about running out of address space.
>> >>>>> >
>> >>>>> > I was wondering if some of the local network gurus could give a
>> talk
>> >>>>> > about
>> >>>>> > this:
>> >>>>> >
>> >>>>> > A primer on IP addresses in general
>> >>>>> > What physical steps do I need to take to set up an IPv6 network?
>> >>>>> > (e.g. a
>> >>>>> > LAN).
>> >>>>> > Are there any issues involved with running both IPv4 and IPv6 on
>> the
>> >>>>> > same
>> >>>>> > network?
>> >>>>> > How do I connect to the internet via IPv6?
>> >>>>> > Will my ISP provide IPv6 addresses?
>> >>>>> > Are there security issues involved with using IPv6, and if so,
>> how do
>> >>>>> > I fix
>> >>>>> > these?
>> >>>>> > ...
>> >>>>> >
>> >>>>> > Any takers? I would be willing to do the presentation, but, as I
>> >>>>> > said, I
>> >>>>> > have zero practical experience, and I think that the topic
>> deserves
>> >>>>> > more
>> >>>>> > than hand-waving.
>> >>>>> >
>> >>>>> > --Barton
>> >>>>> >
>> >>>>> > _______________________________________________
>> >>>>> > KyOSS-Discuss mailing list
>> >>>>> > KyOSS-Discuss at kyoss.org
>> >>>>> > http://kyoss.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/kyoss-discuss
>> >>>>> >
>> >>>>> >
>> >>>>> > _______________________________________________
>> >>>>> > KyOSS-Discuss mailing list
>> >>>>> > KyOSS-Discuss at kyoss.org
>> >>>>> > http://kyoss.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/kyoss-discuss
>> >>>>> >
>> >>>>> _______________________________________________
>> >>>>> KyOSS-Discuss mailing list
>> >>>>> KyOSS-Discuss at kyoss.org
>> >>>>> http://kyoss.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/kyoss-discuss
>> >>>>>
>> >>>>
>> >>>>
>> >>>>
>> >>>> --
>> >>>> {+} Jeff Squyres
>> >>>>
>> >>>> _______________________________________________
>> >>>> KyOSS-Discuss mailing list
>> >>>> KyOSS-Discuss at kyoss.org
>> >>>> http://kyoss.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/kyoss-discuss
>> >>>>
>> >>>
>> >>>
>> >>> _______________________________________________
>> >>> KyOSS-Discuss mailing list
>> >>> KyOSS-Discuss at kyoss.org
>> >>> http://kyoss.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/kyoss-discuss
>> >>>
>> >>
>> >>
>> >> _______________________________________________
>> >> KyOSS-Discuss mailing list
>> >> KyOSS-Discuss at kyoss.org
>> >> http://kyoss.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/kyoss-discuss
>> >>
>> >
>> >
>> > _______________________________________________
>> > KyOSS-Discuss mailing list
>> > KyOSS-Discuss at kyoss.org
>> > http://kyoss.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/kyoss-discuss
>> >
>> _______________________________________________
>> KyOSS-Discuss mailing list
>> KyOSS-Discuss at kyoss.org
>> http://kyoss.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/kyoss-discuss
>>
>
>
> _______________________________________________
> KyOSS-Discuss mailing list
> KyOSS-Discuss at kyoss.org
> http://kyoss.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/kyoss-discuss
>
>


-- 
There's a reason they call two-seater canoes "divorce boats".
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://kyoss.org/pipermail/kyoss-discuss/attachments/20120917/b4d4bb57/attachment-0001.html>


More information about the KyOSS-Discuss mailing list