What is Digg?53 Comments
- kbull, on 10/12/2007, -3/+25If you don't find this at least a little bit interesting, then you are probably one of the reasons why there are so many HDR links that make the front page on Digg and so few quality tech articles.
- mark076h, on 10/12/2007, -2/+21i have seen some lengthy and complicated books and articles on the subject but this article sums up what most people want to know and its short!
- Scrappy1850, on 10/12/2007, -0/+18i always thought IP addresses were like pokemon. should i stop collecting them?
- CurtHowland, on 10/12/2007, -5/+22Certainly a very good article for anyone interested in "how things work" as well as "why".
I have an objection to IPv6. v4 was designed for simplicity, on what would be considered slow machines and slow links. But because of this relative simplicity, it has scaled very well up to astronomical speeds.
Name drop time: Bob Kahn is very easy to talk to.
IPv6, if it had further simplified the packate, would have been wonderful. But no, "second system syndrome" kicks in. What worked before is now "designed by committee", and gets loaded with cruft.
v6 expands the adress space and standardizes the header size. Good.
What's left? Destination address, source address, fragment order, payload size. Maybe "port".
Everything else belongs outside the network stack.
That, in my opinion, would have been a great leap forward in TCP/IP. As it is, we get a load of cruft and a larger address space.
Oh, and now my ISP will know how many machines I have behind the router. There are some aspects of NAT that are very nice, privacy being one of them. - Niloc, on 10/12/2007, -11/+25Thanks for posting, this article seems to be very informative.
- Eywanadi, on 10/12/2007, -0/+14340,282,366,920,938,463,463,374,607,431,768,211,456
Ok any math gurus know what a number this large is called? You have hundred(456), thousand(211), million(768), billion(431), trillion(607), quadrillion(374), quintillion(463), sextillion(463), septillion(938), octillion(920), nonillion(366), decillion(282), and ??????(340). That is as far as I could find with the help of google so what is this number called?
Lol for the first time since I was a kid I get to say "I can't count that high" :( I fail at life. - CraigJ, on 10/12/2007, -2/+16A bit is a binary digit, either 0 or 1. For example, the number 10010111 is 8 bits long.
- DrDabbles, on 10/12/2007, -2/+14XP and Win2K support it too- with an add-on.
Linux and MacOS support it out of the box.
Welcome to the 21st century. - Eywanadi, on 10/12/2007, -0/+9Oops, missed my edit window.
Anyway wikipedia helped me out, it seems this number is 340 undecillion.
The more you know... - HalFTW, on 10/12/2007, -0/+8lol, dugg down for speaking the truth as usual.
- socokoolaid, on 10/12/2007, -0/+8@brianez21
It's ok, usually digg articles don't make it to slashdot until a day or two later. - MrViklund, on 10/12/2007, -5/+12Very interesting article.
- TechScribe, on 10/12/2007, -2/+8And while we're at it, MIT's...do they really need 17 million addresses?
- Sparkster185, on 10/12/2007, -1/+6I take it you're not a Computer/Software Engineer.
- affinity, on 10/12/2007, -0/+5Son of a bitch. I have trouble remembering my dynamic ip every couple months. How am I supposed to remember 16 + hex?
Really though, this article was great. Very VERY informative. And I also learned what an undecillion is. Great article ++ - JeremyBanks, on 10/12/2007, -0/+4You're funny.
- brianez21, on 10/12/2007, -3/+7So now we rip from Slashdot? Okay :)
http://it.slashdot.org/article.pl?sid=07/03/08/169206 - CurtHowland, on 10/12/2007, -4/+8s/packate/packet
Makes me wonder why the spelling checker didn't flag it. I guess I'll go to m-w.com to see what a "packate" is. :^) - CurtHowland, on 10/12/2007, -0/+4Nononono, if you want _detailed_...
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ipv6
http://www.tcpipguide.com/free/t_InternetProtocolVersion6IPv6IPNextGenerationIPng.htm
There are also several HOWTOs concerning IPv6, but they are less "information" and more "instructions". - socokoolaid, on 10/12/2007, -0/+3Once common house hold gadgets with network connections become popular we are gonna need those extra addresses. They already got network connected refrigerators, next will be stoves, toasters, and TV's. They're also talking about putting chips in cloths. If you in any way suspect these types of things will become common in the next 50 or more years, having an ass load of IP addresses is going to be a must.
- vuke69, on 10/12/2007, -1/+3@skas
Alright, well I guess I have been just faking it for the last 4 years working as a network engineer.
How about you correct me on whatever you think I have wrong then. - drewskyjones, on 10/12/2007, -0/+2Very interesting and thorough article...but then again it's Ars. They rock!
- PRlME, on 10/12/2007, -0/+2holy crap that was detailed
- ropers, on 10/12/2007, -0/+2davidrools wrote:
"And 10010111 = 295"
If that's a joke, then I don't get it.
(10010111 in binary = 151 in decimal) - inactive, on 10/12/2007, -0/+2@starguy
Well said sir. I understand your frustration towards crappy ipv6.
Companies are always messing with standards, bringing out their own proprietary 'standard' that is incompatible with any other _real_ standard. It's quite ironic. Sony has to be the worst for this. - vuke69, on 10/12/2007, -5/+7"There are some aspects of NAT that are very nice, privacy being one of them."
There are zero aspects of NAT that are very nice. It is an ugly hack that needs to go away.
If you are really that worried about "the man" knowing how many computers you have, you can still use NAT on an IPv6 segment, it's pointless since the standard IP allotment should be a /64, but you can. Or you can just send traffic through a local proxy.
The good:
Global addressability
Increased address space
Simplified, hierarchical routing
The end of NAT/Masq
The bad:
Complexity
Larger headers/more overhead.
The ugly:
Your embedded crap is borked. But that is the manufactures fault for not including support for something that has in the works for almost a decade. - CurtHowland, on 10/12/2007, -0/+1"for the last 4 years working as a network engineer."
Only 4?
I don't disagree with you that NAT was a "hack". But it was a simple, elegant "hack" that allowed such fantastic utilization of resources that entire companies could be located behind a single routable address.
All of AOL's customers behind a block of 64 addresses for _years_.
If history looks back on NAT as a "hack", then by Cromm we need more hackers! - inactive, on 10/12/2007, -0/+1I would recommend DynDNS to you:
http://dyndns.org
No need to remeber you IP address. Most modern routers (e.g. WRT54G) have a built in DDNS updater.
Plus, their basic service is free (you can get a *.ath.cx for free). - davidrools, on 10/12/2007, -0/+1Where can I buy a sextillion?
- uzytkownik, on 10/12/2007, -0/+1No. It's too much depending on them (firewalls for instance).
- socokoolaid, on 10/12/2007, -0/+1Apparently the standard is quickly becoming obsolete. The rest I agree with. Lower case letters in hex is horribly ugly. The use of colons is stupid (It already blows my IRC packet processing for users with IPv6 addresses). I think an alpha-numeric address, or even just letters, is a lot better idea than the huge hex address; in respects to making a shorter number that is easier to convey and possibly remember.
They probably went the route they did, because the address is just one huge number internally. This way requires no conversion of a numeric address to an address string and back, which would probably be required for your suggestion, making translation of these addresses into text addresses something that can always be implemented on top of IPv6 as is, just for interpretation. If it just didn't have those dumb colons! None the less, you made some interesting points. - coyo7e, on 10/12/2007, -1/+2Pretty dinky article, for it to claim to be "Everything I need to know about IPv6"
More time was spent explaining NAT, than actually telling me anything I haven't learned years ago. - estvir, on 10/12/2007, -1/+2You're welcome niloc.
brianez21, I have Ars Technica in my feeds list. - davidrools, on 10/12/2007, -1/+1And 10010111 = 295
- Endd, on 10/12/2007, -3/+3@eywanadi
its undecillion
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Names_of_large_numbers - neelb420, on 10/12/2007, -2/+2IPv8
thirsty? - uzytkownik, on 10/12/2007, -4/+4a bit = the smallest piece of information - it could be on two states (commonly called 0 and 1).
- MinaSulo, on 10/12/2007, -1/+1Sorry guys, but IPv6 is bad, and IPv4 is bad as well. The goal is to be routable and have little control information in frames as possible. Both fail in the aspect of small control information, because you are either using not all addresses, or all of them: When you run out, you're screwed; When you aren't using them all, you are wasting space. A solution? Variable length IP.
However, it isn't going to happen. I think we'll stick with IPv4 for a while. A lot of techniques have been created to compress the number of addresses used, and I expect more. Overloading NAT and just NAT in general is great---it provides low-level security, conservation of addressing space, ease of addressing changes, and much more. The only real downside to it is the overhead, which isn't really noticeable unless you are doing VoIP with some cheap router or the like. - Renton, on 10/12/2007, -1/+1The only thing I know about IPv6 is that disabling it magically makes firefox work again in ubuntu.
- inactive, on 10/12/2007, -1/+1FTA:
"we currently burn through a class A block in five weeks."
I'd like to know where he got his sources for that one. - michaelliberty, on 10/12/2007, -1/+1IPv6 "could" be memorable "if" they had a policy of distributing IP's ending with all 0's to use the IPv6 0 shorthand.
i.e. "XXXX:0000:0000:0000:0000:0000:0000:0000" is the same as "XXXX::" because if it's all zeros at the start or end, then two colons can represent that.
If "for example" you allocated 4 billion IP's at a time, e.g. 8 hex digits, then you could for example give someone "XXXX:0000:0000:0000:0000:0000:0000:0000" to "XXXX:0000:0000:0000:0000:0000:FFFF:FFFF"
i.e. they control the "XXXX:0000:0000:0000:0000:0000" prefix.
So you could allocate "XXXX::" which would be around 65,000 possibilities.
e.g. Microsoft gets "A1E5::" prefix then it can have IP's "A1E5::", "A1E5::1", "A1E5::2", etc.
The next around 4 billion allocations, e.g. all of the current internet community would get "FFFF:FFFF::", e.g. John Doe gets "AE34:0413::" prefix then he can have IP's "AE34:0413::", "AE34:0413::1", etc.
The next around 281 trillion allocations, e.g. the future generations would get "FFFF:FFFF:FFFF::", so Wu Jin Tao gets... "AAAA:AAAA:1234::" prefix then he can have ... oh you get the picture...
There will also be some lucky people, for example, in the 4 billion group, someone will get "0001:000A::", which is the same as "1:A::"
So, it could be memorable, although I have a bad feeling they won't keep it simple. - thedreaming1, on 10/12/2007, -2/+1Presonally, I'm waiting for IPV7, so we can just think to the internet...
- starguy, on 10/12/2007, -10/+9Are computer engineers total retards? I'm beginning to think so. You NEVER, I repeat NEVER, F*CK with a standard. Seriously, an 8 byte address in Hex? Are they insane?
1. Hex in lower caps, written with colons between it, looks messy and unreadable. Especially a string of 8 bytes. Back in the day hex was written in caps with spaces between them... and it was *sort of palatable* if you were a hardcore assembler programmer. But now? You've got to be kidding me. Forget it.
2. The phone company figured out long ago, the most people can remember at a time is 7 digits, in 3 and 4 digit chunks. Therefore, the XXX-XXX-XXXX format of phone numbers today. They did a lot of studies on this. Tell me how easy it is to remember your home IP6 address of 6e:3a:08:9F:FB:42:9C:CE
3. If you are going to start throwing in alphanumerics, use the whole alphabet and numbers, ie, AA, CD, 7E, Z2. 36*36 permutations. Per two characters you'd get 1236 combintations, rather than 256 in hex. Less characters, easier to type. In fact, be nice, get rid of the numbers, mixing numbers and letters is messy, stick to 26*26, and *cool people* could get an IP address that actually spelled something out: GO:OG:LE:DO:TC:OM for example.
I've been in the computer industry since 1981... and I can tell you, the only thing that hasn't gone obsolete in that time that was computer related is the ubiquitous power cord? Why? Nobody F**Ked with the standard. One made in 1981 is just as good today as it was back then.
Keyboards, Mice, Monitor connectors, Power supplies... harddrive connectiors... even molex connectors... everyone of them had a standard connector that WORKED, and worked well, and someone came along and switched up for serious compelling reason at all. Backwards compatibility people, its GOLD. POUND IT INTO YOUR BRAIN.
As such, IPV6 can eat hot death and die. Go back to drawing board and come back when you got it right. - retrofitme, on 10/12/2007, -3/+2Does anyone realize how long it took Starguy to post that over his 1981 2400 baud modem?
/Much Respect
//Not Really - Sneakernets, on 10/12/2007, -4/+2NO seriously, think about it. Those places probably use Private networks like any other company. no way in hell would they use that kind of IP address with their work? not even from one place to another across the country would you need that many addresses!
We aren't running out of space, we're just wasting it!
We don't go through 5 blocks a week/day/whatever either! - Skas, on 10/12/2007, -5/+3@Vuke:
Get back to us when you know what you're talking about. - Sneakernets, on 10/12/2007, -8/+5Can't we just take some of halliburton's IP range away? some of Xerox? seriously what the hell do they use those for?
- NikoKun, on 10/12/2007, -9/+2I dont know if its the novelty feeling or not... but I think its awesome that Vista Supports IPv6... hehe but I have to learn how it works! thanks for posting!
- one2gamble, on 10/12/2007, -13/+5that hurted my head this early
- Tatyana82, on 10/12/2007, -17/+2didn't understand a bit, sorry :(
-
Show 51 - 53 of 53 discussions
Digg is coming to a city (and computer) near you! Check out all the details on our 
© Digg Inc. 2009
— Content created and posted by Digg users is