Jump to content



Photo

Neowin's plan to go both IPv4 and IPv6 in the future?

Answered Go to the full post

  • Please log in to reply
28 replies to this topic

#1 +riahc3

riahc3

    Neowin's most indecisive member

  • Tech Issues Solved: 11
  • Joined: 09-April 03
  • Location: Spain
  • OS: Windows 7
  • Phone: HTC Desire Z

Posted 08 March 2014 - 07:16

Hello,

Saw a thread with a IPv6 issue and Im wondering what are Neowin's plan to implement IPv6 access to the site.

Do we need it? No? Do us geeks want it for no reason? Yes :laugh:

Best Answer DaveLegg , 08 March 2014 - 17:35

Once it's available to us, we'll probably enable it, but at the moment, it's not, and I currently have no idea of when it will be.

IRC already supports ipv6 though ;)

Go to the full post



#2 Hum

Hum

    totally wAcKed

  • Tech Issues Solved: 7
  • Joined: 05-October 03
  • Location: Odder Space
  • OS: Windows XP, 7

Posted 08 March 2014 - 07:18

What happened to IPv5 ?



#3 +macoman

macoman

    Neowinian

  • Tech Issues Solved: 3
  • Joined: 25-December 13

Posted 08 March 2014 - 08:00

Weird how another ipv6 issue appear under this thread:

Attached Images

  • wp_ss_20140308_0002.png.jpg


#4 The_Decryptor

The_Decryptor

    STEAL THE DECLARATION OF INDEPENDENCE

  • Tech Issues Solved: 4
  • Joined: 28-September 02
  • Location: Sol System
  • OS: iSymbian 9.2 SP24.8 Mars Bar

Posted 08 March 2014 - 08:07

What happened to IPv5 ?


It got used for a stream protocol designed for A/V in the late 70s, never caught on but did use up the version number.

#5 +BudMan

BudMan

    Neowinian Senior

  • Tech Issues Solved: 89
  • Joined: 04-July 02
  • Location: Schaumburg, IL
  • OS: Win7, Vista, 2k3, 2k8, XP, Linux, FreeBSD, OSX, etc. etc.

Posted 08 March 2014 - 13:16

"Do us geeks want it for no reason? Yes"

 

No not really - I personally would consider myself a Über Geek, and I actually use ipv6 on my home network in a testing/play mode -- and see no reason for neowin to go ipv6.  Every minute they would spend on that is one less minute they can spend on other things that make more sense.  Keeping the site running in tip top form for example..

 

Adding ipv6 would be just yet another thing that could go wrong that gets them what?

 

I have ipv6 available, which many people do not.  Both native and a tunnel - and I would not be connecting to neowin on ipv6 if they added it.  So who exactly would be using it?  Is it something they should be thinking about - sure ok, but it's years away before any actual work needs to be done.  Its a bit more complicated then just clicking a button ;)  Even if where they host the servers even has it as an option.



#6 +macoman

macoman

    Neowinian

  • Tech Issues Solved: 3
  • Joined: 25-December 13

Posted 08 March 2014 - 13:25

"Do us geeks want it for no reason? Yes"

No not really - I personally would consider myself a Über Geek, and I actually use ipv6 on my home network in a testing/play mode -- and see no reason for neowin to go ipv6. Every minute they would spend on that is one less minute they can spend on other things that make more sense. Keeping the site running in tip top form for example..

Adding ipv6 would be just yet another thing that could go wrong that gets them what?

I have ipv6 available, which many people do not. Both native and a tunnel - and I would not be connecting to neowin on ipv6 if they added it. So who exactly would be using it? Is it something they should be thinking about - sure ok, but it's years away before any actual work needs to be done. Its a bit more complicated then just clicking a button ;) Even if where they host the servers even has it as an option.

I've been hearing about ipv6 since 2001, that ipv6 is the future but we are in 2014 and we still strong on ipv4... So it looks like we are still a long way to go before you see the migration to ipv6.

#7 +BudMan

BudMan

    Neowinian Senior

  • Tech Issues Solved: 89
  • Joined: 04-July 02
  • Location: Schaumburg, IL
  • OS: Win7, Vista, 2k3, 2k8, XP, Linux, FreeBSD, OSX, etc. etc.

Posted 08 March 2014 - 14:14

^ yup, years away still..  Part of the problem is kind of chicken/egg issue..

 

Why have services on IPv6 when no users have IPv6, why enable users to have IPv6 when there are no services only on IPv6 ;)

 

It is going to be a slow process, #### still not even IPv6 on all the root server, and they started back in 2008 when 6 of them went online, but as you can see 5 of them still only IPv4

 

http://www.internic....main/named.root

 

B,C,E and G only IPv4..

 

It is coming, but slowly -- yes if your in networking I would highly suggest you play with it and learn about it.  Just puts you ahead of the curve is all - I personally don't like some of the changes, and idea that everyone should get a /64 seems pretty freaking wasteful to me even if the address space just seems endless.. They thought the same thing with IPv4, and gave universities their own /8 -- wasteful wasteful use.. If they would of been less free with handing out ipv4 space we would have plenty left.. 



#8 +macoman

macoman

    Neowinian

  • Tech Issues Solved: 3
  • Joined: 25-December 13

Posted 08 March 2014 - 14:49

i agreed budman :rolleyes:



#9 DaveLegg

DaveLegg

    Coderator at heart

  • Tech Issues Solved: 10
  • Joined: 31-October 04
  • Location: Oxford, UK

Posted 08 March 2014 - 17:35   Best Answer

Once it's available to us, we'll probably enable it, but at the moment, it's not, and I currently have no idea of when it will be.

IRC already supports ipv6 though ;)



#10 +TCLN Ryster

TCLN Ryster

    Evil Teddy Rules!

  • Joined: 02-August 04
  • Location: Uttoxeter, UK

Posted 08 March 2014 - 17:42

My previous ISP (AAISP) supported IPv6, but now I'm on BT Broadband they don't. Though I've heard it is planned to be enabled sometime this year.



#11 pratnala

pratnala

    Neowinian

  • Joined: 22-December 12
  • Location: Mumbai, India
  • OS: OS X 10.9, Windows 8.1, Ubuntu GNOME 14.04
  • Phone: Nexus 5

Posted 08 March 2014 - 17:54

^ yup, years away still..  Part of the problem is kind of chicken/egg issue..

 

Why have services on IPv6 when no users have IPv6, why enable users to have IPv6 when there are no services only on IPv6 ;)

 

It is going to be a slow process, #### still not even IPv6 on all the root server, and they started back in 2008 when 6 of them went online, but as you can see 5 of them still only IPv4

 

http://www.internic....main/named.root

 

B,C,E and G only IPv4..

 

It is coming, but slowly -- yes if your in networking I would highly suggest you play with it and learn about it.  Just puts you ahead of the curve is all - I personally don't like some of the changes, and idea that everyone should get a /64 seems pretty freaking wasteful to me even if the address space just seems endless.. They thought the same thing with IPv4, and gave universities their own /8 -- wasteful wasteful use.. If they would of been less free with handing out ipv4 space we would have plenty left.. 

They are doing the same mistake what they did with IPv4 with IPv6. Giving large swathes of addresses



#12 PGHammer

PGHammer

    Neowinian Senior

  • Tech Issues Solved: 1
  • Joined: 31-August 03
  • Location: Accokeek, MD
  • OS: Windows 8 Pro with Media Center x64

Posted 08 March 2014 - 20:29

"Do us geeks want it for no reason? Yes"

 

No not really - I personally would consider myself a Über Geek, and I actually use ipv6 on my home network in a testing/play mode -- and see no reason for neowin to go ipv6.  Every minute they would spend on that is one less minute they can spend on other things that make more sense.  Keeping the site running in tip top form for example..

 

Adding ipv6 would be just yet another thing that could go wrong that gets them what?

 

I have ipv6 available, which many people do not.  Both native and a tunnel - and I would not be connecting to neowin on ipv6 if they added it.  So who exactly would be using it?  Is it something they should be thinking about - sure ok, but it's years away before any actual work needs to be done.  Its a bit more complicated then just clicking a button ;)  Even if where they host the servers even has it as an option.

Why would IPv6 go wrong?

 

First off, it's a standard - not merely a Windows standard, but a global standard.  (Windows has supported it out of the box since the famous XP Service Pack 2, and Linux has supported it since the 2.6 kernel series.  Android and iOS have always supported IPv6 - the major driver of IPv6 for a standard was, in fact, mobile devices, and especially in developing nations, not the developed world; the Asian nations were the the first to push IPv6 out on a national basis, with Japan and South Korea leading that push.)

 

Second, the holdup with IPv6 has been embedded devices with non-changeable firmware.  XB360/PS3/XB1/PS4 all support IPv6 explicitly - no idea about Nintendo.  (Still, that does mean the consoles of both the curent-generation and previous-generation are covered.)  Routers - I know of exactly zero consumer or prosumer routers that don't support IPv6 out of the box today.  It may be disabled by default, but the support is there.

 

Thirdly, you just, without meaning to, covered the last real issue with adding IPv6 - ISP support.  Larger ISPs support IPv6 now.  So do all the tier 1 and even most tier 2 global and regional peers   The issue is smaller ISPs and hosting services.  How high up is the host of Neowin on that chain?  How compatible is the software on which Neowin.net runs with IPv6 (the biggest software issue)?

 

On the user side, the biggest concern is non-support on the client end - if you are using any OS (even XP), that will be a non-issue unless you have a lower-tier ISP that doesn't support IPv6.  (Even then, as you point out, there ARE IPv6 tunnel services that are free to use, such as Hurricane Electric's tunnelbroker.com - which I myself used before I got native IPv6 via Comcast, my ISP.)



#13 PGHammer

PGHammer

    Neowinian Senior

  • Tech Issues Solved: 1
  • Joined: 31-August 03
  • Location: Accokeek, MD
  • OS: Windows 8 Pro with Media Center x64

Posted 08 March 2014 - 20:39

They are doing the same mistake what they did with IPv4 with IPv6. Giving large swathes of addresses

That's because there is no mechanism to give small swathes - as was the initial case with IPv4.

 

However, unlike IPv4, the chances of even coming close to exhausting the swathes they are giving out are zero.

 

How many IP addresses are in a given swath that is given out for an individual today?

 

Such a super-swath is unmanageable, on an individual basis, by ANY software available today, regardless of price.

 

In short, not merely impractical, but flatly impossible.  It is beyond the capabilities of technology either current OR on the drawing board.

 

Further, unlike IPv4, IPv6 is itself expandable and extensible - it has the seeds of further expansion and extension contained within the protocol, and without requiring a complete rewrite.

 

However, we have to run out of room with IPv6 first - which I don't see happening as long as we are limited to just this planet.  (And that is even if you assign an IP address to every person, creature, and object on the planet entire, which is quite impractical.)



#14 Carbon Fiber

Carbon Fiber

    Neowinian Senior

  • Tech Issues Solved: 1
  • Joined: 26-March 10
  • Location: EU
  • OS: Win 8.1 x64
  • Phone: Android 4.4.2

Posted 08 March 2014 - 21:28

They are doing the same mistake what they did with IPv4 with IPv6. Giving large swathes of addresses

"IPv6 uses a 128-bit address, allowing 2128, or approximately 3.4×1038 addresses, or more than 7.9×1028 times as many as IPv4, which uses 32-bit addresses. IPv4 allows only approximately 4.3 billion addresses." (Source; Wiki)

Everyone can have 1 million addresses, and there would be plenty left.



#15 +snaphat (Myles Landwehr)

snaphat (Myles Landwehr)

    Electrical & Computer Engineer

  • Tech Issues Solved: 29
  • Joined: 23-August 05
  • OS: Win/Lin/Bsd/Osx
  • Phone: dumb phone

Posted 08 March 2014 - 21:32

"IPv6 uses a 128-bit address, allowing 2128, or approximately 3.4×1038 addresses, or more than 7.9×1028 times as many as IPv4, which uses 32-bit addresses. IPv4 allows only approximately 4.3 billion addresses." (Source; Wiki)

Everyone can have 1 million addresses, and there would be plenty left.

There is a nice grains of sand analogy that I've always heard: http://skeptics.stac...dressed-in-ipv6