SoylentNews is people
SoylentNews
In an article in the Hindustan Times, The American Registry is quoted as telling us that they are running out of IPV4 addresses.
On Wednesday July 1, the ARIN - in charge of North America - was forced to turn down a request for a block of IP addresses for the first time in history. The CIO Richard Jimmerson told CBS news "We are weeks away from having zero left."
On the same subject, Arstechnica details the emerging IPv4 address trading market.
We spoke to Janine Goodman, vice president of Avenue4, a broker of IPv4 addresses, about what to expect in the short term.
"IPv6 is going to happen, that's the direction it's going," she said. "But it's going to take a while. Organizations are not ready to turn to IPv6 tomorrow; this will take a few years. A transfer market allows for the transition from IPv4 to IPv6 in a responsible way, not a panicked way."
"The price for blocks of IPv4 addresses of 65,536 addresses (a /16) or smaller is about $7 to $8 per address in the ARIN region. In other regions, which have fewer addresses out there, the price tends to be a little higher," Goodman said. "We expect the IPv4 market to be around for at least three to five years. During that time, the price per address will likely go up and then finally come back down as IPv6 is being widely deployed."
Original Submission
(Score: 4, Insightful) by isostatic on Sunday July 05 2015, @05:42PM
They should have just doubled the allocation to 8 bytes. 4 billion times as many addresses would have been fine. If you get an IP address range of 0.0.0.0.123.64.56.88 it's an IPv4 one too, and just allocate as normal, just allocate "1.21.78.76.136" next.
Instead they made it complicated, so who the hell wants to use it?
(Score: 2) by ThG on Sunday July 05 2015, @06:04PM
www.facebook.com. 9 IN AAAA 2a03:2880:10:1f02:face:b00c::25
Questions?
(Score: 1, Offtopic) by kaszz on Sunday July 05 2015, @06:53PM
Too much petty socidrama and useful idiots used as spy-zoombies on Tube-6. Now if Farcebook would be hard to reach.. "oops" :P
(Score: 0) by Anonymous Coward on Sunday July 05 2015, @06:39PM
I believe there were several RFC proposals out there that said to do exactly that. Too lazy to search for them.
There are several 'problems' out there currently.
One is the old equipment problem. People out there with docsis 1.1 modems that do not know they need a new modem. People out there with that old wrt54g wifi that is still chugging along. People out there who still cling to using windows XP.
ISPs who are not moving forward with it and pushing it in all areas.
Old software. There is a metric ton of old software out there that only can talk ipv4. It is never going to be updated.
All three of these have something working for ipv6. Most of it 'breaks down' and gets replaced with newer stuff. That can talk ipv6.
Now that ARIN has given out the last of them ISPs will have to get more forceful about ipv6. It will quickly get on the radar of all managers that deal with network allocations. Until now they could just ignore it and tell some poor shlub 'make it work'. The poor shlub will have to say 'we must buy hardware'. Many meetings will occur. But this is a case of evolve or die.
(Score: 2) by kaszz on Sunday July 05 2015, @06:51PM
The ISP and modem-firmware is the hardest ones to crack as user. So perhaps that are the two areas to focus on. And one can leave local network (WiFi hardware) and old software to users to deal with themselves. As for firmware, perhaps it could be a one off chance to get rid of old bugs and prevent additional landfills while making existing hardware capable of continued use.
Perhaps OpenWRT could offer a "we'll update your equipment firmware for money and docs" ..? to manufacturers and larger ISPs.
(Score: 4, Informative) by number6 on Sunday July 05 2015, @07:41PM
Windows XP includes IPv6 implementation, but it must be manually installed.
To install IPv6 on your Windows XP computer,
Open a Command Prompt window and enter: netsh int ipv6 install
To uninstall IPv6 on your Windows XP computer,
Open a Command Prompt window and enter: netsh int ipv6 uninstall
---
Reference:__https://support.microsoft.com/en-us/kb/2478747
(Score: 2) by frojack on Sunday July 05 2015, @08:21PM
It might be more useful to explain how to install an operating system on your Windows XP computer.
No, you are mistaken. I've always had this sig.
(Score: 0) by Anonymous Coward on Sunday July 05 2015, @08:25PM
An OS that requires you to type stuff at the command line?
That will never catch on.
...and eXPee has been obsolete since April 14, 2014.
BTW, how is your Windoze Server 2003 doing? (EoL July 14, 2015)
-- gewg_
(Score: 0) by Anonymous Coward on Sunday July 05 2015, @09:53PM
Not 100% true. The POS version goes to 2017.
You can switch your WinXP to POS by this reg hack:
http://www.zdnet.com/article/registry-hack-enables-continued-updates-for-windows-xp/ [zdnet.com]
==
Windows Registry Editor Version 5.00
[HKEY_LOCAL_MACHINE\SYSTEM\WPA\PosReady]
"Installed"=dword:00000001
(Score: -1, Flamebait) by Anonymous Coward on Sunday July 05 2015, @11:48PM
Hmmm. I was under the impression that any new code being created by M$ is -not- being tested against old OSes--an at-your-own-risk situation.
(We discussed such Registry hacks here previously.)
I know that UK.gov was paying a pretty penny to get extended "support" for eXPee from Redmond.
Whether that "support" ever actually delivered any additional code would be interesting to know.
-- gewg_
(Score: 1, Funny) by Anonymous Coward on Monday July 06 2015, @03:07AM
Isn't all of windoze a POS?
(Score: 0) by Anonymous Coward on Sunday July 05 2015, @09:39PM
I knew it was possible when I wrote that. However ipv6 on XP is to put it rather nicely, buggy. It will also get 0 fixes for those bugs. Bugs which are being fixed and have been fixed in vista and up. 64 bit support is spotty and flaky as well. There is a list of known '0 day' items that will never get fixes. and so on...
Also that command does not get you native dhcpv6 or proper DNS resolution. Oh and hopefully you do not need PPP.
It is 2015 it is time to put down the OS from 14 years ago. I would not recommend a linux or a BSD from that era either. They are all interesting footnotes in history at this point. If you are running XP you probably have other issues to deal with. People that really want to run it and know what they are getting into are a tiny subset of the XP population (much like the guys who still run win98se). I ran it for a long time myself. I bought it the month it came out and gladly gave them my 300 bucks for it. The rest of the population probably does not know or care what they have. They will only care when their buddy swings buy and says 'you will have to change to another OS or buy another computer to get on the internet AND a router AND a modem'. Only then will they care.
I get requests all the time to fix these computers from this era. I usually do not bother with them. I then list down the items that usually need to be fixed and how much they will cost fix. The cost to fix is usually higher than buying a new computer. Out of the 10 or so in the past year someone has asked me to look at it only 1 was not a cost > rebuy. I will fix them if they really want to keep it. But the benefits of a 10-15 year jump in tech is usually well worth doing. Many times people are better served by an ipad, android, or kindle. Unfortunatly the android is a bit flaky with ipv6 as well.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Comparison_of_IPv6_support_in_operating_systems [wikipedia.org]
(Score: 3, Interesting) by number6 on Sunday July 05 2015, @11:56PM
I'm sure that when IPv6 judgement day comes, I will see a fully working IPv6 stack for WinXP; I have full confidence in my die-hard WinXP hacking brethren.
Security exploits and bugs may exist in any operating system at any time, past present and future; If I get p0wned then I'll pull the electrical plug out of the wall and think of a solution. Until that day comes, I'm not going to work myself into a froth over this or any other kind of scaremongering from people whose interests don't align with mine anymore. I will never ever criticize somebody over his or her choice of operating system or computing environment, no matter how abandoned or marginalized they have become. I prefer solutions at all times; solutions being hacking, cracking, piracy, copyright infingement, reverse engineering....whatever it takes; I like forward movement towards solutions and nothing else; criticism and negative comments and scaremongering can GET FUCKED.
I have given thorough details in other posts (sometimes posting as AC) why I prefer not to move on to the Windows NT6 systems. As far as I'm concerned, Microsoft are fully to blame here and not me.
Yeah, maybe one day I will move on to a non-Microsoft non-Apple computing system, but when that day comes is totally up to me.
(Score: 2) by sjames on Monday July 06 2015, @10:59AM
Until my ISP started supporting native v6, I set up my old wrt54gl to do 6to4 and it worked well enough. Of course, I had to put dd-wrt on it.
(Score: 1) by rickatech on Monday July 06 2015, @01:15AM
its not too late?
(Score: 0) by Anonymous Coward on Monday July 06 2015, @07:59AM
Somebody said the same thing not that long ago. The result was called IPv4. And now we're out again.
Your suggestion would probably last 10 years (less if the "internet of things" MBAs get what they want, rather than the "security by desgn" engineers). Then we would have the same problem for the third time.
Instead somebody came up with the idea to make the address space large enough to last at least half a century.
The amount of work to switch over is the same in either case, so one would have to be stupid to switch twice when we have the option of switching once.
(Score: 2) by isostatic on Monday July 06 2015, @11:25AM
Really. 2 billion addresses per person isn't enough?
It's not just the stupidly long address space either, it's the things like auto-configuration. Rather than delivering "here's IPV6, it solves the address space problem", it's "here's IPv6, it solves the address space problem, and changes dhcp, and builds in ipsec (which is hated by many), and throws in multicast (which is hated by many).
(Score: 2) by tangomargarine on Monday July 06 2015, @07:26PM
It's the same idea as computing hardware. Due to Moore's Law our PCs are exponentially more powerful than a decade or two ago, but the software expanded in complexity and resource use to fill all available hardware.
I imagine there will be little delay in some marketing idiots figuring out a way to waste as many IPv6 addresses as possible, as quickly as possible.
"Smart" appliances hooked up to the Internet just sounds like a terrible idea. I don't *need* to be able to access them across town, and I don't *want* other people to be able to get into them. Because you know that's what's going to happen. How would you like to get home to find out somebody hacked your refrigerator and all your food went bad? Or your air conditioner, the place is now 40 degrees Fahrenheit inside, and your electricity bill for the month quadrupled?
"Is that really true?" "I just spent the last hour telling you to think for yourself! Didn't you hear anything I said?"
(Score: 2) by sjames on Monday July 06 2015, @10:56AM
Given that getting the 4->6 transition has been like pulling teeth, it's probably best to do somethingh that will last a long time, like v6. Little known fact (apparently), 32 bits was NEVER considered to be enough other than for testing and then only because the hardware of the day was so limited. Alas, nobody ever got around to 64 biot or larger addresses before the thing took off.
Go ahead, try to send an IPv4 packet to 0.0.0.0.123.64.56.88. Please do let me know where you stuffed the extra bits that didn't make the router barf.
That's the thing, you still have to upgrade the protocol stacks everywhere, so you might as well make the address BIG so we don't have to go through all this crap again in 2020.
(Score: 2) by TheRaven on Thursday July 09 2015, @09:18AM
If you're going to make the addresses bigger, then you need a new IP header and you're going to break absolutely everything that relies on the old address format or the old header format. Allowing the kind of bridging that you suggest would have required the same level of complexity as 6to4 and ended up with some IPs being reachable and others not, with the same protocol stack, which just gets messy.
If you're going to make the address field bigger, then you may as well solve some other problems. One of the big scalability issues with the Internet currently is the size of routing tables. If you're a handing out class Cs (which we are, because address exhaustion is not a binary thing) then every backbone router needs to know where every class C is, which means that the fast path needs 2^24 entries in the routing table. Companies that build big TCAM chips love this, but no one else does. With IPv6, the address space is sparse enough that you can assign addresses more hierarchically, so most of a continent will have the same prefix (meaning the decision whether to route something across a transatlantic cable or onto the local network is very easy, for example), then ISPs within a country can each have a prefix within that, and you can leave enough gaps that as new ISPs emerge this structure can be maintained.
Sparse addressing is also useful at the endpoints: it's required for the stateless autoconfiguration to work. IPv6 devices can discover the network prefix and just pick a local address, ask if anyone else is using it, and retry if they're not. With a 64-bit subnet, even with a lot of computers there's a tiny chance of collision and a minuscule chance of more than one collision, so this works very well.
So who the hell wants to use it? People who run large networks, people who build routers, and people who want to use peer-to-peer protocols. Basically, everyone except ISPs who like being able to sell static IP addresses for a lot of money.
sudo mod me up