Posted on 01/03/2005 1:58:51 PM PST by FreeMarket1
ahh i see.. i didn't know if they had a way to convert it or not. I remember from preparing for the test it was like putting a square peg into a round hole...just sort of hard to do without a saw. But since ipv6 wasn't on the test, i didn't really go over it that much :)
I doubt very seriously if this will result in the proliferation of static IP addresses throughout the entire networking world. For one thing, the administrative challenges in managing the assignment of IPv4 address ranges are quite challenging enough. For another, the proliferation of laptops and other mobile devices make DHCP more necessary, not less.
As far as identification by some sinister governmental authority, IPv6 isn't all that much more effective than IPv4, especially not in comparison to such innovations as the late, unlamented Intel PSN. The real question to me is at what point some government agency, here or elsewhere, is going to arrogate to itself the management of IP address ranges overall. China is attempting something like this. It is there the problem will lie, and not in simply doubling the number of octets in an addy. All IMHO, of course, and I'd be glad of any correction by the more knowledgable.
The DoD is pushing the transistion to IPv6
DOD is developing a roadmap for getting to IPv6
http://www.gcn.com/vol1_no1/daily-updates/28090-1.html
Defense Department networks will have to demonstrate that they are capable of running securely and reliably under IP Version 6 before receiving approval to use the new protocols.
The deadline for moving to the new version of the Internet Protocol is 2008. Until then, IPv6 will be restricted to early adopter environments and will not be allowed on operational DOD networks. The DOD IPv6 Transition Office is developing guidelines to help networks get approval to operate.
Networks will receive authorizations to run at two levels before proceeding to the first level of operational capability, said James Schifalacqua, part of the Transition Office support team from SI International Inc. Information assurance will be a key element in receiving authorization to operate, Schifalacqua said Thursday at the U.S. IPv6 Summit in Reston, Va.
Developing a process for risk management will be the key element in getting authorization to operate with IPv6, he said.
“It’s not the technology, it’s the process,” he said. Not all risk on the network has to be eliminated, but administrators must be able to document how risks are analyzed and managed.
more at link above
You are going to need some device to connect to the ISP's network. They are presumably going to provide the same functionality they provide now (why wouldn't they?)
If you are knowledgable enough to build your own, then you could do that... but you could do that today, and you could buy your own block of IPv4 addresses if you wanted to, and ask the ISP to route traffic to your own homemade router, and allow whatever lack of security you felt like having. I've already got 5 IP addresses because I bought 5 from my ISP. With IPv6 I could probably buy something more like a few thousand, but it's the same principle.
The only real difference in IPv6 is that the hack that maps one set of IP addresses to another set of IP addresses isn't necessary (note that you're still allowed, if you want, to do some sort of NAT mapping, if you want to... but it's unlikely that anyone will bother.) Everything else is the same as it used to be.
I guess my point is, IPv6 is going to be a good thing because it will remove a lot of complexity involved in the current set of hacks, and will also make Internet access a lot more possible for other countries, and we don't need people generating panic where it's totally unjustified. Next thing you know we will have Congressional hearings and a bunch of Democratic congressman demogoguing it and passing legislation regulating how engineers are allowed to design networking software.
For the sake of arguing needlessly, The internet will be the commerce and communication system of the beast.
Revelations 13:17 "And that no man might buy or sell, save he that had the mark, OR the name of the beast, OR the number of his name."
You will either get a mark (implant), OR the name of the beast "www.mybeastid.com", OR the number "0000:0000:0000:0000:0000:0000". Each in itself will cross reference to a master database to uniquely identify, regulate, and control every individuals commerce and communication.
Best wishes and a happy new year!
If machines came with statically-assigned global addresses that could not be reassigned, configuring local networks would be a nightmare. Under current methods, machines are assigned local addresses (manually or automatically) when they are installed into a subnet. A router knows when it sees a packet for 192.168.254.97 that it's supposed to be delivered to some other machine on the local subnet and it can issue an ARP locally to find it. If my machine is assigned some globally-unique and unchangeable 128-bit address, how is anything supposed to route that?
I suppose it would be possible to have IP "nameservers", but if that's going to be done why use these monster IP's instead of simply using hostnames for everything?
Right now, a packet can be routed to an ISP using the first 16-24 (more or less) bits of the IP address. Each ISP, regardless of how many hosts it serves, will only have a few (often only one) continuous range of addresses it serves.
If addresses are disconnected from routing, how is any packet supposed to get where it's going? The only way I can see that working is if there's a "routeserver" that acts like a nameserver but tells a client the sequence of hosts it should use to reach a particular IP address; routeservers would have to be even bigger than nameservers (since many machines have IP addresses but not top-level domain names) and the 128-bit "address" would be no more useful for hardware routing than a hostname.
Yes, that's where things are headed. But at least they gave credit to Free Republic: "... eventually posted to a number of different reader-response sites including what may be the largest and best-managed, www.freerepublic.com. "
They didn't even label it a blog.
Does anyone remember when the DoD pushed to transition to OSI?
"Does anyone remember when the DoD pushed to transition to OSI?"
Or to Ada!
My understanding is that IPv6 incorporates VPN, making the current VPN technology obsolete.
From what you know about IPv6's implementation of VPN, would it resolve the author's concern's about privacy? For example, a company could set up a VPN for clients. All clients would tunnel encrypted data to the company, turn off all other traffic (ports and addresses), and then access the internet through them. This should take care of privacy concerns. The company could even constantly rotate addresses assigned to each client much as DHCP works today.
In a fully IPv6 home, most items could be set to only interact with other household equipment and access the outside world only through a gateway.
In addition, new IPv6 home routers will probably include some sort of mechanism to handle legacy IPv4 equipment. At a minimum, computers would have both protocols and could be set up as gateways. That in itself would need to be a NAT product between the to versions of IP.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.