Author Topic: Thoughts on switching to IPv6 (Read 18563 times)

Edvard · « **on:** October 21, 2008, 11:14 AM »

I just noticed in the new Ubuntu 8.10 beta that the network configuration dialog has wireless connections and IPv6 stuff front-and-center.
Configuring hard-wire IPv4 was buried on the third tab down. IPv4 is so easy to remember; it's almost like a phone number, why are they taking it away?That got me thinking... Is IPv4 going away? And why? And how easy will it be to switch?

I googled around and found a few articles:
http://www.egovmonitor.com/node/21606
http://tech.blorge.c...out-of-ip-addresses/
http://www.vnunet.co...running-ip-addresses

Yes, I realize this all sounds very alarmist and somehow we'll all get along, but as f0dder once said:

...ipv6 can bite my not-so-shiny not-so-\m/etal hiney, NAT'ing works fine

So will Network Address Translation save IPv4?
Or what?

f0dder · « **Reply #1 on:** October 21, 2008, 04:13 PM »

Well... if every Chinese and Indian want their own static IP, we'll probably run into problems. And because NATing wasn't done originally and some organizations were assigned too large blocks, and because of some of the reserved/non-routable blocks, it is a problem. But imho not as big a problem as some people are trying to blow it up to be.

Would be nice if we could wave a magic wand and make the entire internet (and all applications) IPv6+IPSEC capable at once. But it doesn't really work like that... also, protocol overhead increases, and good luck trying to memorize IPv6 addresses

Edvard · « **Reply #2 on:** October 21, 2008, 05:04 PM »

... and good luck trying to memorize IPv6 addresses
-f0dder

Oh man, you're not kidding...

Although for home and small business intranet use, I'm sure IPv4 is more than adequate. I don't see support for that dropping with widespread adoption of v6, and the typical user never needs to see those numbers anyways, right? As long as the DNS matches up, nobody's the wiser...

While we're on the subject, where do MAC addresses fit in the equation?

f0dder · « **Reply #3 on:** October 21, 2008, 05:11 PM »

MAC addresses are tied to your NIC, and are (basically) used for packet delivery on your LAN. DHCP servers also use your MAC when assigning IP addresses.

Gothi[c] · « **Reply #4 on:** October 21, 2008, 05:20 PM »

While we're on the subject, where do MAC addresses fit in the equation?

MAC addresses are tied to your NIC, and are (basically) used for packet delivery on your LAN. DHCP servers also use your MAC when assigning IP addresses.

And remember, just like DNS resolves between hostnames and IP addresses, there is also a mechanism needed to translate IP addresses to hardware (MAC) addresses. That mechanism is ARP

40hz · « **Reply #5 on:** October 21, 2008, 06:08 PM »

Well... if every Chinese and Indian want their own static IP, we'll probably run into problems. And because NATing wasn't done originally and some organizations were assigned too large blocks, and because of some of the reserved/non-routable blocks, it is a problem. But imho not as big a problem as some people are trying to blow it up to be.

Would be nice if we could wave a magic wand and make the entire internet (and all applications) IPv6+IPSEC capable at once. But it doesn't really work like that... also, protocol overhead increases, and good luck trying to memorize IPv6 addresses
-f0dder (October 21, 2008, 04:13 PM)

Spot on f0dder!

The degree of complexity IPv6 introduces doesn't offer enough "benefit to grief" for it to be happily embraced by most organizations. Especially when IPv4 and NAT works so well for internal use. Content providers (telcos, movie studios, e-commerce providers, etc.) are all chomping at the bit because they envision a whole new range of products and services they could be selling with an expanded address space.

The rest of us could probably care less.

I strongly suspect what will ultimately happen is that IPv4 will continue to be used on most internal networks. Those addresses will route out via a new NAT schema to IPv6. IPv6 addressing will only be used where it is actually required, such as the Internet backbone. Newer routers will be built to arbitrate between the two different address schemes.

Probably the only major change will be that all IPv4 addresses and subnets (0.0.0.0 thru 255.255.255.255) will become the new private non-routable address space.

Yay! No more 192.168.x.x/24 or 10.x.x.x/8 nonsense!

There has been some talk of eventually getting the governments to enforce the use of IPv6. I don't see that happening any time soon. The costs involved in forcing that significant a change onto the world's infrastructure doesn't even bear thinking about. And all it would take is one major holdout to end the discussion. That holdout could even emerge from the grass roots level. Much like back in the early 70s when the American public and business community refused to adopt the metric system despite all the efforts of the US Government to persuade them otherwise.

IPv4...IPv6...why choose one when you can have the benefits of using both?
We'll just let the backbone, internal routers, and DNS handle the details for us.
And why not? That's what we built the little buggers for to begin with!

Carol Haynes · « **Reply #6 on:** October 21, 2008, 06:14 PM »

I don't really understand why they couldn't simply add an extra number to IPv4 addresses - say a country code. Existing users/companies could have a default code of 0 (implied by a 4 figure IP) and then new users/companies could have an extra number allocated.

f0dder · « **Reply #7 on:** October 21, 2008, 06:24 PM »

I don't really understand why they couldn't simply add an extra number to IPv4 addresses - say a country code. Existing users/companies could have a default code of 0 (implied by a 4 figure IP) and then new users/companies could have an extra number allocated.
-Carol Haynes (October 21, 2008, 06:14 PM)

It would still require the same scale of changes that IPv6 requires - so, to be fair, it's better that they extend it properly so we don't have to repeat the dance in 10 years. AFAIK it's also more than just extending the address space, but I haven't paid enough attention

nosh · « **Reply #8 on:** March 08, 2009, 04:17 PM »

I was getting some nasty freeze-ups in Firefox, the status bar showed "Looking up [site]" whenever it got stuck. I dumped OpenDNS and switched to Treewalk, just in case it was a DNS retrieval delay but it didn't help.

Someone in an old post on ubuntuforums had recommended turning IPv6 off in FF via network.dns.disableIPv6 and it seems to have sorted out the problem.

One particular bug that has appeared exists not in Mozilla, but in IPv6-capable DNS servers: an IPv4 address may be returned when an IPv6 address is requested. It is possible for Mozilla to recover from this misinformation, but a significant delay is introduced.
http://kb.mozillazin...work.dns.disableIPv6

Edvard · « **Reply #9 on:** April 12, 2011, 03:14 PM »

THREAD NECRO!!
BWAHAHAhahaha....!!

OK, so it looks like IANA finally allocated the last remaining blocks of IPv4:
http://www.iana.org/...v4-address-space.xml
(read: no more UNALLOCATED entries in the "Status" column)

It's going to take a little more time before the RIRs finish handing out their allotted space, and the estimates for that are anywhere from 3 months to a year.
Either way, I'm going to be in the market for a new router, not because I think the sky is falling, but because whatever changeover needs to happen, it WILL happen sooner than later.

Thoughts?

Deozaan · « **Reply #10 on:** April 12, 2011, 04:52 PM »

Do I really need to get a new router for this? I just bought one last year.

Hmmm... I wonder if that means I'd also (or instead) need to get a new Cable modem. I also just bought that last year. . .

Shades · « **Reply #11 on:** April 12, 2011, 05:19 PM »

Most of the recent cable modems (DocSis 3.0) will be upgradable by software.

But for your home router you really have to look for one with full support. Most of these only have partial support and are possibly upgradable. As far as I could with Google is that the latest high(er) grade D-Link routers have this, but others are severely lacking. So at this time it is tricky to get one for home use.

Ath · « **Reply #12 on:** April 12, 2011, 05:26 PM »

If your current router is 'good enough', I'd just wait until you really have to upgrade to IPv6, before you buy a new one. By that time there will be quite a choice of good products available, and they will all include IPv6 support

Carol Haynes · « **Reply #13 on:** April 12, 2011, 07:08 PM »

It's going to be interesting to see what happens to ISPs that hand out free routers (like most of them in the UK). If they suddenly have to provide their whole infrastructure with new routers there will be a lot of bankruptcies but if they don't offer free routers there will either be a massive shift around ISPs by customers looking for a freebie or all ISPs will have to start charging!

I see BT is now releasing BTHomeHub version 3 to new customers but they want existing customers to cough up £46 for a less feature rich router and no it doesn't seem to be IPv6 compat. - surprising really! If I am going to spend £46 on a router I will buy something a bit better than that offering.

f0dder · « **Reply #14 on:** April 12, 2011, 10:44 PM »

We'll probably see a lot of interesting schemes where you're still on IPv4, but are able to access IPv6 HTTP servers through proxies.

Ath · « **Reply #15 on:** April 13, 2011, 01:56 AM »

And other ISP's offer no direct IPv6 access but instead hide that from the consumer by putting up a NAT between their networks and the real world, supplying a local IPv4 only...

Edvard · « **Reply #16 on:** April 13, 2011, 05:25 AM »

We'll probably see a lot of interesting schemes where you're still on IPv4, but are able to access IPv6 HTTP servers through proxies.
-f0dder (April 12, 2011, 10:44 PM)

You can do that today, with a tunnel broker:
http://en.wikipedia....g/wiki/Tunnel_broker
Can't say there's a huge benefit to it now (it's not like IPv6 comes with a free box of donuts or something...), but when IPv6-only nets start kicking in, you'll want it.

And other ISP's offer no direct IPv6 access but instead hide that from the consumer by putting up a NAT between their networks and the real world, supplying a local IPv4 only...
-Ath (April 13, 2011, 01:56 AM)

That actually is the way many private intranets would work (for a while anyways) so it wouldn't be a disadvantage unless bandwidth became a problem.

Either way, Tunneling and NAT'ing will likely be the only option for legacy systems running critical services that simply will not be upgradeable, so that may be a healthy chunk of the ISP biz in the future.
I just fear the eventual changeover ends up being a long, messy ride...

40hz · « **Reply #17 on:** April 13, 2011, 06:16 PM »

It's going to be interesting to see what happens to ISPs that hand out free routers (like most of them in the UK). If they suddenly have to provide their whole infrastructure with new routers there will be a lot of bankruptcies but if they don't offer free routers there will either be a massive shift around ISPs by customers looking for a freebie or all ISPs will have to start charging!

-Carol Haynes (April 12, 2011, 07:08 PM)

Don't know about the UK, but over in the USA I'm guessing the ISP/Telcos will offer free routers - BUT - use that as an excuse to kick you off your unlimited DSL plan if you have one. That's what AT&T did if you took them up on their iPhone4 discount and had unlimited internet on your old contract.

I'm also guessing the new residential routers will have IPv6 only on the WAN side. Or at least initially. Good ol' IPv4/NAT will continue to rule the roost on the LAN side for many more years until the world's governments finally force everything onto IPv6. Which they eventually will. Because once that happens, an IP address can be permanently assigned to people and devices. Just like a social security number or VIN on a motor vehicle - each address is unique and registered. No more anonymity.

At which point it become possible to enforce surveillance and control over all network activity - with only as much privacy as our politicos care to grant us.

(This isn't 'tinfoil hat' stuff BTW. It's already being seriously discussed.)

Ehtyar · « **Reply #18 on:** April 13, 2011, 08:15 PM »

Before all the haters (pot, kettle, black - i know) tire themselves out jumping up and down about how awful change is, please take the opportunity to educate yourselves about this.

Perhaps the best person to explain why IPv6 is necessary is the man credited with the majority of the work involved in developing IPv4 Dr Vinton Cerf (known in many circles as "the father of the Internet"). He spoke recently at linux.conf.au, and discussed many challenges facing the open Internet, including the exhaustion of the IPv4 address space. You can find that talk here. I'd encourage everyone who has an interest in the Internet to seek out videos of other talks he's given on the subject.

There's another, by John Curran, President and CEO of ARIN (The American Registry for Internet Number, the corporation that assigns IP addresses within the United States) given at DEFCON 18 that also explains quite well how IPv6 is going to work. That video can be found here.

For those interested in what adoption will involve, I recommend following Hurricane Electric's "certification" program. It walks you though the main aspects of implementing IPv6 connectivity, and you get a free t-shirt at the end.

In trying to keep this from turning into a flame war I'll leave it to you guys to check out the links above and see if you can wade through the FUD to reach a sensible conclusion.

Ehtyar.

Edvard · « **Reply #19 on:** April 13, 2011, 11:58 PM »

I'm totally with you, Ehtyar.
This change was foreseen and is necessary, and Mssrs Cerf and Curran explain everything very adequately.

However, 40Hz has a point; the plan is to assign everything it's own IP address.
With ~340 Undecillion (2^128) addresses possible, it's feasible to have a separate IP address for everything on the face of the planet and still have plenty left over.
Yes that could possibly mean no more anonymity, but it could also mean anonymizer services would have a lot more ground to play on.

Time will tell...

P.S. Thanks for the links, very informative.
Hehe... I want this on the t-shirt:

ewemoa · « **Reply #20 on:** April 14, 2011, 12:13 AM »

@ Ehtyar:

Thanks for the links

IPv6 transition...reminds me of:

http://cr.yp.to/djbdns/ipv6mess.html

Ehtyar · « **Reply #21 on:** April 14, 2011, 12:43 AM »

I'll admit I'm not at all a fan of the "open Internet", and I like my home NAT for all the wrong reasons. But that, to me, is no reason not to embrace IPv6. I'm happy to set up my home NAT just the same way even once I have an IPv6 address from my ISP (which I expect I'll have to do regardless, can you imagine your ISP giving you free reign of more than a single IP address?), and you can be damn sure my workplace won't be assigning globally routable addresses to each machine.

I'll also admit that the transition won't be in way simple, swift, or enjoyable, and that for the most part people will notice absolutely no improvement in their Internet experience. Then again, who enjoyed, for example, the transition from the imperial to the metric measuring system? Nothing weighed any more or less in the end, yet no one who's made the adjustment will claim that imperial was better (and your kids certainly appreciate it).

Ehtyar.

@edvard, I must have that shirt.

ewemoa · « **Reply #22 on:** April 14, 2011, 12:56 AM »

Then again, who enjoyed, for example, the transition from the imperial to the metric measuring system? Nothing weighed any more or less in the end, yet no one who's made the adjustment will claim that imperial was better (and your kids certainly appreciate it).
-Ehtyar (April 14, 2011, 12:43 AM)

lol

In the various places I've lived, it's been one of:

1. We still use non-metric
2. We use metric and something else together

ewemoa · « **Reply #23 on:** April 14, 2011, 05:54 AM »

I found the speaker of "Who Cares About IPv6" entertaining (the preface to the main talk was fun too).

(Found via Ehtyar's link to "IPv6: No Longer Optional".)