Sky starting customer trials of IPv6

[Kushan]

http://www.ispreview.co.uk/index.php...s-of-ipv6.html

Hope Virgin starts soon.

[qasdfdsaq]

Urgh. I still hate IPv6.

[Ignitionnet]

Enthralling. Hopefully their trials of not leeching off BT's copper to supply obsolete, slow ADSL as a freebie with their overpriced TV will proceed apace too.

[Kushan]

Originally Posted by qasdfdsaq

Urgh. I still hate IPv6.

Why?

Originally Posted by Ignitionnet

Enthralling. Hopefully their trials of not leeching off BT's copper to supply obsolete, slow ADSL as a freebie with their overpriced TV will proceed apace too.

I'm not sure this is even remotely relevant...

[Ignitionnet]

It's about as relevant as IPv6 is to most people for right now.

For those worried about the Internet suddenly not working if there's no IPv6 support don't worry - Virgin trials won't be that far away now, they have been working at it and there are IPv6-ready components across core, transport and access network.

[qasdfdsaq]

Originally Posted by Kushan

Why?

Try typing or memorizing any addresses, especially when :: notation is used in the middle of one...

Also, EUI-64. Urgh.

[Kushan]

Originally Posted by Ignitionnet

It's about as relevant as IPv6 is to most people for right now.

For those worried about the Internet suddenly not working if there's no IPv6 support don't worry - Virgin trials won't be that far away now, they have been working at it and there are IPv6-ready components across core, transport and access network.

I don't think anyone's really worried about the internet not working. I don't think IPv4 is going to go away any time soon, not this decade, not the next decade. Still, IPv6 makes a lot of sense for IoT.

Originally Posted by qasdfdsaq

Try typing or memorizing any addresses, especially when :: notation is used in the middle of one...

Also, EUI-64. Urgh.

That's what DNS is for. Sure, you could memorise the IP address for a few devices on IPv4, but realistically on any reasonably sized network you'll be hard pressed to memorise all of them anyway.
The only way to remember more addresses on IPv4 is to come up with some sort of system (i.e. server 01 is 123.123.123.101, server 02 is 123.123.123.102, etc.) and you can do that on IPv6 just as easily. Most of the IPv6 address is going to be the same on your entire network, so it's just the last part you have to "Remember" and if you use DHCPv6 then you have complete control over it.

As I said though, DNS is a far better way of doing it.

[Stuart]

Originally Posted by Ignitionnet

It's about as relevant as IPv6 is to most people for right now.

For those worried about the Internet suddenly not working if there's no IPv6 support don't worry - Virgin trials won't be that far away now, they have been working at it and there are IPv6-ready components across core, transport and access network.

This is why I don't understand why people have made such a fuss about various ISPs not supporting IPV6. As long as the sites I visit carry on working, I don't care what protocols are in use carrying my data. Nor, I suspect, do most people.

Any ISP that wants to carry on trading will have plans in place to upgrade, so no point in us worrying.

[Kushan]

Originally Posted by Stuart

This is why I don't understand why people have made such a fuss about various ISPs not supporting IPV6. As long as the sites I visit carry on working, I don't care what protocols are in use carrying my data. Nor, I suspect, do most people.

Any ISP that wants to carry on trading will have plans in place to upgrade, so no point in us worrying.

It's certainly not a deal breaker for me, Sky could roll out IPv6 tomorrow and I'd really not be bothered about switching, but it interests me because it's a genuine improvement to the internet and one that will see huge benefits once everyone starts using it. That's probably at least 5 years away and most likely 10 years or more but it's coming slowly and I'm looking forward to it.

[qasdfdsaq]

Originally Posted by Kushan

That's what DNS is for. Sure, you could memorise the IP address for a few devices on IPv4, but realistically on any reasonably sized network you'll be hard pressed to memorise all of them anyway.
The only way to remember more addresses on IPv4 is to come up with some sort of system (i.e. server 01 is 123.123.123.101, server 02 is 123.123.123.102, etc.) and you can do that on IPv6 just as easily. Most of the IPv6 address is going to be the same on your entire network, so it's just the last part you have to "Remember" and if you use DHCPv6 then you have complete control over it.

As I said though, DNS is a far better way of doing it.

And thus the main reason for typing or memorizing IP addresses at all, to set up the DNS to begin with, when DNS isn't suitable or isn't available. Say you're testing a new/migrated/upgraded website without modifying the "live" site, by running it on an alternative IP. Or you want to move a machine between subnets without altering the DNS. Or you're doing a traceroute with non-compliant reverse-DNS entries. Or god forbid, when your DNS is just plain broke.

It's not like I type in the IP address for GMail for fun every time I visit...

And no, I don't agree you can do that on IPv6 just as easily. Dealing with something like 2001::3fa5:7b:7b:7b:cf 2001::3fa5:7b:7b:7b:d0 2001::3fa5:7b:7b:7b:da really just isn't as comprehensible as 123.123.123.207 123.123.123.208 123.123.123.218

Want 123.123.123.101 as a block of 512 addresses on IPv4? That'll be 123.123.122.0/23 (to 123.123.123.255). Want 123.123.123.101 as a block of 512 addresses on IPv6? That'll be 2001::abcd:7b:7b:7b:0/119 (to 2001::abcd:7b:7b:7b:1ff). Yeah, "just as easy". Sure, you could type 2001::abcd:123:123:123:101 but the computer would take that to mean 291.291.291.257. Great for if you want to do easily memorable IPv4 to IPv6 remapping... Maybe we should just teach all kids to think in hexadecimal in primary school...

[Kushan]

I'd say if your DNS is broken, you've got much bigger issues as that'll break a lot more stuff. Unless your entire network is configured to use static IP addresses for everything.

Say you're testing a new/migrated/upgraded website without modifying the "live" site, by running it on an alternative IP.

I genuinely don't see why this is any different. Not unless you have bothered to memorise the IP addresses of both your hosts, the process is the same - you edit your hosts file to point to a different IP address.

And no, I don't agree you can do that on IPv6 just as easily. Dealing with something like 2001::3fa5:7b:7b:7b:cf 2001::3fa5:7b:7b:7b:d0 2001::3fa5:7b:7b:7b:da really just isn't as comprehensible as 123.123.123.207 123.123.123.208 123.123.123.218

Maybe I'm just used to hexadecimal because I use it extensively in my day job. To me, you've got that first part that you'll possibly need to memorise but the rest is up to you to do as you please if you really want. All you end up with is something like this:

2001:0000:3fa5:7B::1
2001:0000:3fa5:7B::2
2001:0000:3fa5:7B::3
etc.
all the way up to...
2001:0000:3fa5:7B::ffff

That's not hard, surely?

I get that IPv6 autoconfig makes for completely unmemorable addresses but like with any infrastructure, you probably don't care about most end points and just want your servers to be static anyway.

And about the subnetting 512 addresses...well why bother? Take advantage of IPv6's stupid amounts of addresses and subnet it in a way that makes it even easier to remember:

2001:0000:3fa5:7B:1:1
2001:0000:3fa5:7B:2:1
2001:0000:3fa5:7B:3:1

Don't treat IPv6 like IPv4 and you'll find it's probably easier to work with.

[qasdfdsaq]

Originally Posted by Kushan

I'd say if your DNS is broken, you've got much bigger issues as that'll break a lot more stuff. Unless your entire network is configured to use static IP addresses for everything.

Sounds like you've never messed around with experimental networks or have had to run a manually assigned DNS.

I genuinely don't see why this is any different. Not unless you have bothered to memorise the IP addresses of both your hosts, the process is the same - you edit your hosts file to point to a different IP address.

You seem to be missing the point.

Editing your hosts file takes twice as long each time (as does everything else involving an IP address) because you have to type twice as many letters (not to mention, dots can be entered on the numpad, colons can't).

Maybe I'm just used to hexadecimal because I use it extensively in my day job. To me, you've got that first part that you'll possibly need to memorise but the rest is up to you to do as you please if you really want. All you end up with is something like this:

2001:0000:3fa5:7B::1
2001:0000:3fa5:7B::2
2001:0000:3fa5:7B::3
etc.
all the way up to...
2001:0000:3fa5:7B::ffff

That's not hard, surely?

Sure, if you're keen on wasting an entire /64 and 18 billion billion addresses, and enjoy counting to 65536 in your head.

Maybe because I'm just too used to 8-bit decimal math but I find 64+63 easier than adding 16383 + 16384.

[Kushan]

Originally Posted by qasdfdsaq

Sounds like you've never messed around with experimental networks or have had to run a manually assigned DNS.


You seem to be missing the point.

Editing your hosts file takes twice as long each time (as does everything else involving an IP address) because you have to type twice as many letters (not to mention, dots can be entered on the numpad, colons can't).

Is that really a massive issue? Really? That you have to copy/paste a slightly longer address? Hell if you're doing that a lot, you're just going to comment one out anyway. Besides, what happened to testing sites on Test domains? https://beta.mysite.com works just as well.

Originally Posted by qasdfdsaq

Sure, if you're keen on wasting an entire /64 and 18 billion billion addresses, and enjoy counting to 65536 in your head.

Maybe because I'm just too used to 8-bit decimal math but I find 64+63 easier than adding 16383 + 16384.

Again, you're treating IPv6 like IPv4, where wasting addresses is a terrible thing because there's so few to go around. That's the beauty of IPv6, you can waste billions and billions of addresses and still have plenty to spare. You can segregate your network nicely, logically.

And hey, if you have a problem with 2001:0000:3fa5:7B::3, then why not 2001:0000:3fa5:7B:7B::3 or 2001:0000:3fa5:7B:7B:7B:3.

You can have something like this -

2001:0000:3fa5:7B:1::3 // Servers
2001:0000:3fa5:7B:2::3 // VoIP
2001:0000:3fa5:7B:A::3 // Desktops
// etc.

You know, if you want. It's easy.

[qasdfdsaq]

Originally Posted by Kushan

Is that really a massive issue? Really? That you have to copy/paste a slightly longer address? Hell if you're doing that a lot, you're just going to comment one out anyway. Besides, what happened to testing sites on Test domains? https://beta.mysite.com works just as well.

Not when the server relies on name-based vhosting that requires digging through a month's worth of project management and change contrl and RFCs to modify.

That's the beauty of IPv6, you can waste billions and billions of addresses and still have plenty to spare.

They thought the same about IPv4 when it was invented.

And hey, if you have a problem with 2001:0000:3fa5:7B::3, then why not 2001:0000:3fa5:7B:7B::3 or 2001:0000:3fa5:7B:7B:7B:3.

You can have something like this -

2001:0000:3fa5:7B:1::3 // Servers
2001:0000:3fa5:7B:2::3 // VoIP
2001:0000:3fa5:7B:A::3 // Desktops
// etc.

You know, if you want. It's easy.

If you enjoy it so much, go ahead and do it. I'm not stopping you.

Meanwhile I'll continue to dislike IPv6 just as much as I dislike ATM or IPSec or salt and vinegar crisps regardless of whether you agree with my reasons or not.

[Kushan]

Originally Posted by qasdfdsaq

Not when the server relies on name-based vhosting that requires digging through a month's worth of project management and change contrl and RFCs to modify.

Yuck! But you really should have a better way of testing deployments.

Originally Posted by qasdfdsaq

They thought the same about IPv4 when it was invented.

Perhaps, but that was more short sightedness in terms of how big the internet (Arpanet?) would get at that time. I don't think they intended IPv4 to be in use for as long as it has been. IPv6 has been specifically designed to scale for a long, long time.

I mean think about what you're saying, wasting billions of addresses but you're only wasting billions of addresses within the scope of your network. Unless you expect your network to have to support a few billion devices in the next few years, it's really a non-issue.

You've been assigned those addresses via that scope, they've already been "wasted" by the ISP.

Originally Posted by qasdfdsaq

If you enjoy it so much, go ahead and do it. I'm not stopping you.

Meanwhile I'll continue to dislike IPv6 just as much as I dislike ATM or IPSec or salt and vinegar crisps regardless of whether you agree with my reasons or not.

That's your call, but eventually the IPv6 train will come. Choo Choo!