Free Republic
Browse · Search
General/Chat
Topics · Post Article

Skip to comments.

Last of the IPv4 Addresses Allocated
Enterprise Networking Planet ^ | 1 February 2011 | Sean Michael Kerner

Posted on 02/01/2011 9:40:20 AM PST by ShadowAce

click here to read article


Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first 1-2021-23 next last

1 posted on 02/01/2011 9:40:24 AM PST by ShadowAce
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | View Replies]

To: rdb3; Calvinist_Dark_Lord; GodGunsandGuts; CyberCowboy777; Salo; Bobsat; JosephW; ...

2 posted on 02/01/2011 9:40:45 AM PST by ShadowAce (Linux -- The Ultimate Windows Service Pack)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: ShadowAce

They need to add more tubes to the series!


3 posted on 02/01/2011 9:46:11 AM PST by jpl ("If they bring a knife to the fight, we bring a gun." - Barack Obama)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: ShadowAce

Bad news for current Mozilla users.


4 posted on 02/01/2011 9:48:04 AM PST by Psycho_Bunny (Hail To The Fail-In-Chief)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: ShadowAce

IT budgets are going to rise on this news!


5 posted on 02/01/2011 9:54:03 AM PST by MeganC (Soli Deo Gloria)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: ShadowAce
I've built and tested IPv6 into the network we intend to roll out by 2Q, 2011. Upstream provider availability may be an issue. We'll be using some v4 to v6 work-arounds.

Those with existing networks may have more problems with equipment, but what we are doing is all new, and I've spec'ed the correct equipment. I'm just glad I'm no longer maintaining a (soon-to-be) legacy network.

/johnny

6 posted on 02/01/2011 10:04:04 AM PST by JRandomFreeper (Gone Galt)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Psycho_Bunny
Bad news for current Mozilla users.

Why? Mozilla implemented IPv6 in 2000.

7 posted on 02/01/2011 10:06:59 AM PST by ShadowAce (Linux -- The Ultimate Windows Service Pack)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 4 | View Replies]

To: ShadowAce

Would someone please logoff, I need to check my email!


8 posted on 02/01/2011 10:14:45 AM PST by rockrr ("I said that I was scared of you!" - pokie the pretend cowboy)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: rockrr

Good cover for surfing pron.

Um, I need to, check my email too! In private!

LOL!


9 posted on 02/01/2011 10:20:31 AM PST by TSgt (Colonel Allen West & Michele Bachman - 2012 POTUS Dream Team Ticket!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 8 | View Replies]

To: ShadowAce; JRandomFreeper

All the way back in 1991, when I first started using the internet, I was astonished that there were so few IP addresses. I honestly don’t understand how the heck anyone engaged in planning for the future could, at that time, allocate fewer digits than the number of people in the world. By 1997, when I was working in a single lab where there were on the order of 3 computers for every employee, all networked together, I realized with certainty the situation had to be addressed rather soon. About that time, even our utility providers had assigned unique IPs to various equipment that was connected to the home office.

I am somewhat concerned that IPv6 (which I think is 2^16, ~65,000, more addresses than current) will prove insufficient, and that instead we should be going to an IPv8 configuration instead.


10 posted on 02/01/2011 10:22:53 AM PST by AFPhys ((Praying for our troops, our citizens, that the Bible and Freedom become basis of the US law again))
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: AFPhys; ShadowAce; JRandomFreeper

Oops -—

Read and digest article!


11 posted on 02/01/2011 10:24:34 AM PST by AFPhys ((Praying for our troops, our citizens, that the Bible and Freedom become basis of the US law again))
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 10 | View Replies]

To: ShadowAce
Yes, but the way they implemented it substantially slows down the browser.

The first thing to do with any new install of Firefox is to about:config and disable IPv6.

It's a problem that's most noticeable in Linux.

My assumption is that they're addressing it in 4 because I never disabled IPv6 in my builds of that, and they're running as well as when it's disabled in previous versions.

12 posted on 02/01/2011 10:28:19 AM PST by Psycho_Bunny (Hail To The Fail-In-Chief)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 7 | View Replies]

To: ShadowAce; JRandomFreeper
I misunderstood this scheme before just now... I was under the impression that they were going to a 48 bit address and I believed that quite insufficient, but would have been more comfortable with 64 bit. I see that instead they are going to 128 bit addressing, which proves to me that the architects are now thinking ahead like an engineer would - build it well then multiply by 3π ;-) That is encouraging.
13 posted on 02/01/2011 10:33:12 AM PST by AFPhys ((Praying for our troops, our citizens, that the Bible and Freedom become basis of the US law again))
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 11 | View Replies]

To: ShadowAce

There is an easy way to encouage businesses to give up addresses that they are sitting on. Start charging $.01 per address annually. I suspect that many firms that are sitting on litterally millions of addresses will start to rethink that policy and turn more address space back.

Further, if IPv6 is left as free, then there will be new drive to make the move and convert. This will in turn free up more address space.

Another move would be to make the local host address 255.0.0.1 instead of 127.0.0.0. Likewise the local network would be 255.0.0.2 - 255.255.254.0 - .255


14 posted on 02/01/2011 10:34:10 AM PST by taxcontrol
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: AFPhys

It’s not that bad. There are public and private IPs. Many public IPs are used on corporate or other managed networks. A gateway plus the use of Network Address Translation (NAT) can convert many of the public IPs to private IPs. This frees up a substantial percentage of the public IPs. Many intranets already do this when they’re running out of their public IPs.

Chances are if you’re on a cable modem you’re NAT-ed to private IP space.

Most mid-level network engineers know how to do implement the conversion.


15 posted on 02/01/2011 10:34:49 AM PST by Justa
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 10 | View Replies]

To: AFPhys
There's an interesting story behind the original numbering scheme. In fact, the guy responsible has a GoogleTechTalk lecture on YouTube where he explains it.

Turns out that the original addresses were for the ARPA development, and no-one knew that the internet was coming, or would be world-wide.

So the orginal addressing space was plenty for the military testing that was contemplated.

/johnny

16 posted on 02/01/2011 10:37:21 AM PST by JRandomFreeper (Gone Galt)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 13 | View Replies]

To: ShadowAce; Ernest_at_the_Beach; dayglored; Swordmaker

17 posted on 02/01/2011 10:46:41 AM PST by martin_fierro (< |:)~)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: taxcontrol

The company I work for, we use a 10.x.x.x subnet which is local. My previous company, we used actual real IP numbers but they were not accessible from the outside but they could go to a local IP like 10.x.x.x, 192.168.x.x and forgot the other one. I know companies like HP have a block where it is Class A -> 4.x.x.x. Those who still have Class A’s should be encouraged to give them up.


18 posted on 02/01/2011 11:11:52 AM PST by CORedneck
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 14 | View Replies]

To: ShadowAce
Well drat. I was just about to have my IPv4 beeber stuned, and now I can't.


Today is a good day to die.
I didn't say for whom.

19 posted on 02/01/2011 11:18:31 AM PST by The Comedian (It's 3am all over the planet.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: AFPhys

Are you serious? When IP was developed, in the 60’s, there was ‘plenty to go around’. No one envisioned half the planet carrying phones that have distinct IP addresses.

Of course, my phone doesn’t need a publicly routed IP address - it needs a PRIVATE address on my carriers network, that goes through a NAT pool to reach whatever site I want/need.

Additionally, IPv6 allows for a number (even larger than the US national debt!) that is rather unimaginable. It’s roughly 340,282,366,920,938,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000 IP addresses. Divide that by 6,500,000,000, and you’ve got 5,235,113,337,245,200,000,000 per PERSON. I don’t have that many devices that are IP capable, and I work as a network architect at a university. IPv6 will be sufficient (and then some).

IPv6 is 2^128. It’s a truly astounding number of addresses.


20 posted on 02/01/2011 1:14:22 PM PST by Ro_Thunder (Nov 2nd, 2010 - The adults get home, and are back in charge)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 10 | View Replies]


Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first 1-2021-23 next last

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.

Free Republic
Browse · Search
General/Chat
Topics · Post Article

FreeRepublic, LLC, PO BOX 9771, FRESNO, CA 93794
FreeRepublic.com is powered by software copyright 2000-2008 John Robinson