What is Digg?64 Comments
- Tiabin, on 10/12/2007, -1/+37Someones going to do it at some point, at least they can do it with a foot in the right direction: by providing free useful services, and easier accessibility to information. At least we know they're not likely to start any book burning or condemning anyone for reading... ;-)
- Kimera, on 10/12/2007, -1/+33Google's long term plan is to index all information, everywhere.
- rocke86, on 10/12/2007, -1/+19http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/IPv6
- DBCubix, on 10/12/2007, -1/+14Well... Auction 66 by the FCC is coming up in August. That auction will nearly double the amount of wireless spectrum available and rumor has it that Google is -interested- in it for their wi-fi deployment.
- futurepastnow, on 10/12/2007, -2/+14Nah. GoogleNet's customer service policy will be "don't complain about free." If that doesn't work, well, it'll be beta until 2020 and no one supports beta.
- stoops, on 10/12/2007, -3/+15I was wondering something, if IPv6 is the new thing, do we have to buy new routers?
For example, I have DD-WRT on my WRT54GSV4 and there is an IPv6 option, does this mean I can use it when IPv6 takes over?
I don't even know what connection technology IPv6 uses, DHCP requests, PPoE, etc... - phbradley, on 10/12/2007, -1/+10Google is such a huge organisation, could it possible have special dispensation from those ARIN criteria?
In fact, looking further into this, Yahoo has a big block of these, too. - riffic, on 10/12/2007, -2/+11running out of IPv4 addresses is not the only reason to implement IPv6
- vermin, on 10/12/2007, -1/+10"Most transport- and application-layer protocols need little or no change to work over IPv6"
- MikeSD34, on 10/12/2007, -5/+14"Google's long term plan is to index all information, everywhere."
And then destroy the source so no more information can be created. - JewFro, on 10/12/2007, -1/+8This looks like google's response to the telcos wish for net favorism and not net neutrality.
- jellyroll713, on 10/12/2007, -5/+12Whether or not bowing to Chinese government censorship laws counts as "wrong" is a matter of some contention.
- phytar, on 10/12/2007, -0/+7For those curious, this is exactly how many IPv6 addresses they have:
79,228,162,514,264,337,593,543,950,336 = 16 ^ 24
Yeah, that's a lot of IPs.
Source: http://ws.arin.net/whois/?queryinput=%21%20NET6-2001-4860-1 - Daem0nX, on 10/12/2007, -2/+8No one supports beta? You might want to convince all the Gmail users of that, or the users of a large number of other betas (how about games for example?). I'd gladly use and beta test a free ISP service if they created one.
- dgolding, on 10/12/2007, -2/+8Unreal. Lightman is one of the least intelligent and more poorly informed folks I've ever spoken to. It doesnt reflect well on Burton Group that he was invited to speak at Catalyst, My only guess is that they invited him to the IPv6 debate because they knew he could be beated easily (most of the Burton guys are pretty anti-ipv6, and rightly so). Lightman is incorrect about Google's IPv6 allocation - its a /32, not a /20. This isn't even close. Google is NOT buying up dark fiber in large quantities - they are linking their data centers with metro fiber and long haul wavelengths, like every other well run content provider network. IPV6 and fiber are largely orthogonal.
I sent a bunch of corrections to ZDNet on this already, but they seemed to have ignored them. If you want some real information about ipv6 deployment, check out the streaming video archive of the last IPv6 panel at the NANOG conference about 5 months ago. Real information, not Alex Lightman propaganda. - GrantTheGr8, on 10/12/2007, -0/+6Google's long term plan is "to organize the world's information and make it universally accessible and useful."
http://www.google.com/intl/en/corporate/index.html - RobotCitizen, on 10/12/2007, -1/+7If Google's plan is to break the telcos' balls, I'm 100% on Google's side.
- Atomic1fire, on 10/12/2007, -1/+7more like long term search empire if they make huge amounts of searchable content or at least provide tools to allow people to then they will be able make all that content searchable and create a huge collection that carrys more goodies then msn or yahoo
- inactive, on 10/12/2007, -7/+13Isn't everything going on inside Google a secret?
Isn't that why the investors are pissed? - Snuffkin, on 10/12/2007, -0/+6Yes, of course, awesome. Let's totally cripple connecting to people. Then we can watch as two people on different ISPs that do this try and initiate a VoIP call with each other without having to resort to a proxy. Oh, we can also cripple P2P and BitTorrent at the same time too. It's like an ISP's dream come true!
'Technically shouldn't be running servers anyway'? I'd better never connect to IRC, because if I do the IRC server will check against my ident (port 113) *gasp* server.
Also, address space is not the only reason to implement IPv6. Anycast as well as mandatory multicast implementations mean very good things for the internet. An example 'good thing' -- http://bbc.co.uk/multicast/ - blackb0x, on 10/12/2007, -1/+7I agree.
every network i've come across has at least 60% of their ip space wasted. One I came across had a single windows server with a whole /24 on it, just for web hosting.
What needs to happen is ARIN needs to start taking back large blocks of unused space from big companies. There's no reason for a big company to have control over a whole /8.
Check out IANA's ip list and see how many of those are relevant anymore: http://www.iana.org/assignments/ipv4-address-space - duffman03, on 10/12/2007, -3/+9I would gladly switch my isp from the local, overcharged, monopoly to google's. Assuming they make one.
- Zreitan, on 10/12/2007, -2/+7this is going to blindside the telcos and be a real slap in the face for them. i hope net neutrality works out and google is at the fore-front of making sure the Internet stays free in America.
- inactive, on 10/12/2007, -3/+7Well, Google has done no wrong thus far. I want to see what they come up with.
- ivanbev, on 10/12/2007, -3/+7This is tedious, and has been written about (and digg-linked) several times in the past 24-odd hours. Numerous organisations are planning, testing, or doing initial roll-out of IPv6. Google will have become an LIR to get its IPv4 space, AS number, etc, well before anything to do with IPv6.
Furthermore, when the registries (such as ARIN) started giving out IP address space they were a lot more lenient on the documented requirements and the amount of address space given out.
There is so much speculation about google all the time .. I have to say, this has to be one of the least interesting and blown most out of proportion.
With respect to IPv6, there is no killer application (yet) to require moving from v4 to v6 for the Internet as a whole ... it's mainly a techie's playground. [Before someone jumps on me, yes there are companies that are needing it for their own private use, for scalability reasons]. If mobile phone operators didn't use NAT / "walled gardens" and gave each mobile its own IP, and if NAT wasn't so prevalent for broadband & corporate use then there would be the requirement .. but we're not at that point yet. - dh8r, on 10/12/2007, -10/+14Oh great.... First, "M$", then "AT$T". Then it'll be "V$r$z$n" and "C$mc$st" and "$$$$$$$$".....
- longboarder543, on 10/12/2007, -2/+5That's pretty solid to me, and good news to boot. Just to get that range of IP's google has to plan on becoming a provider. Hopefully a net neutral alternative to the future SBCs and Comcasts. If a big proponent of net neutrality comes online as a nationwide ISP, all of a sudden SBC's and Comcast's networks are walled gardens, rather than "premium content" providers that they are claiming they want to become.
- solosoft, on 10/12/2007, -0/+3What you need to do is simply run a tunnel. Hurricane Electric offers these for free ... I have a little page on setting up exactly what you want (and a DHCP style service to keep all your computers connected).
http://www.solosoft.org/projects/ipv6
This should do you :)
If you got any troubles my email is in that page and just contact me and i'll give you a hand. But it will let you use IPv4 and IPv6 transparently on your network (ie if a site has a AAAA address (IPv6) it'll use that and if not ... it will simply not use it. You need to be running Windows XP , Windows 2000, or linux/unix/osx for it to work. Getting IPv6 into XP is as simple as "ipv6 install" in the cmd line
good luck - CharlesDarwin, on 10/12/2007, -1/+3RTFM
- CharlesDarwin, on 10/12/2007, -1/+3What the ***** are you talking about?
- phrosty, on 10/12/2007, -0/+2This isn't speculation, it's common sense. Of course they are going to buy a chunk of IPv6 addresses, they have a massive amount of machines, and they want to future proof.
The part about buying dark fiber is irrelevant - they could just as easily run IPv4 over it, and I think everyone can agree Google needs as much bandwidth as it can get as the size of the web increases. - Splizxer, on 10/12/2007, -10/+11Just remember, Scootie Puff Junior suuuuucks...
- deanlowe, on 10/12/2007, -0/+1"Yahoo! is making far more money"
You should tell that to Yahoo! Finance.
http://finance.yahoo.com/q/is?s=GOOG&annual
http://finance.yahoo.com/q/is?s=YHOO&annual - inactive, on 10/12/2007, -1/+2Well known for customer service? What the ***** are you smoking? It takes 1+ days to get a reply as an adwords publisher, several days as a publisher, and if you're reporting someone for violating the tos you might as well just forget about it.
- seventoes, on 10/12/2007, -0/+1But yahoo is already an isp... kinda... they partner with SBC to provide DSL.
- Ryosen, on 10/12/2007, -1/+1@johneganz - You talk about printers, switches, et al that are stuck in the IPv4 space but these are all on internal networks. Why would this be affected by the Internet switching to IPv6? And why would there be a problem with your PC or router running two networking protocols at once? It wouldn't and, to be sure, it is not uncommon to be running multiple protocols simultaneously.
Even if you were running IPv6 on a LAN (and I can't think of a reason why you would need to), the translation from IPv4 to IPv6 would be a trivial matter for a router.
Am I misunderstanding something? - MrPaulAR, on 11/08/2007, -4/+4IMHO the US doesn't have any address space concerns for the very long future considering the following
1. Quite a few broadband ISPs use 10. (RFC 1918) for their *residential* customers. Makes sence since they technically shouldn't be running "servers" anyway. Good motivation for someone to purchase a commercial account.
2. If the US does begin running low on address spaces they can make some of the companies that have [a|several| /8 addresses cut back a bit like the rest of the country. Take a look at http://www.iana.org/assignments/ipv4-address-space to see the rediculous number of IP addresses some companies have that have no need for them.
3. The continued use of NAT. - Joe_rigby, on 10/12/2007, -1/+1The Google has you.
= ) - egrumling, on 10/12/2007, -0/+0But it's a story about Google! GOOOOOOGLE! They have to be hiding something. Why else would the press waste so much ink on them? They're trying to take over the world! Through ADVERTISING!
It's in Revelations, PEOPLE! - iSlayer, on 11/08/2007, -1/+1I have already submitted a story on this which contains a link from my page to the page linked here. So its a duplicate.
- inactive, on 10/12/2007, -2/+2Googlezon is coming.
- Exstatica, on 10/12/2007, -1/+01. As an ISP we were also assigned a 72 nonillion /30 ip block
Arin assigns that size of a block to any medium size ISP.
2. Google is buying up fiber and building this network most likely as a backup plan to the whole net neutrality thing. especially being that this will scare the big telcos into doing the right thing or google with build their own network with free/ad supported access.
just my 2 cents - dharm, on 10/12/2007, -6/+5essenstially the $ only work for S replacements
- egrumling, on 10/12/2007, -1/+0@johneganz - I just attended the SCTE expo in Denver. I spent a few minutes at the Cisco booth, where the tech head explained 2 things: 1) The US is way, way behind in IPv6 planning/implementation, and 2) the 3 biggest proponents of IPv6 in the US are the government, Comcast and Time Warner cable. The cable companies are gearing up for settop boxes to become IPTV devices. Comcast alone has more cableboxes than a class A subnet can provide (not to mention computers, phones and other CPEs), and they plan on eliminating analog television in the next 3-5 years. NAT is not the answer. Routable subnets assigned to a household gateway will make it much easier to autoprovision devices in the home, allow for network sharing for the masses, and make transferring from one house to another much easier. You just can't do that easily today (at least not for your average Nascar viewer).
- returnofmalv, on 10/12/2007, -2/+1Probably just a typo =).
- templest, on 10/12/2007, -4/+2Durr, I think he means no company offers technical support for their own BETA products.
Because they're just that, not-fully-complete products that are still in testing stages. - Petrarch1603, on 10/12/2007, -4/+2Good link as update to previous story posted on Digg
- johneganz, on 10/12/2007, -8/+6Sorry, but Mr. Lightman is flat out wrong.
There is no reason to move to IPv6. The "Internet is running out of address space tomorrow!" has been a popular doomsday scenario since the pre-CIDR days ('95ish?). Go take a look at the BGP tables vs. all address space. There's still plenty left, ten years later.
IPv6 brings exactly one benefit to the table- more address space. And you only really get to benefit from that when you're free of IPv4 space and are IPv6 native. That's not going to happen any time soon. If google switches to IPv6, what does that mean for you, or anyone else here? Nothing, because you're still using IPv4.
Since so many devices are effectively stuck at IPv4 (think hp laser jets, managed switches, all those plug in and forget devices) that you will still need to run IPv4.... so that means you still need IPv4 address space, pretty much eliminating the entire reason for switching to IPv6. Anyone who's running IPv6 is also either running dual stack, or they go through an IPv6 to IPv4 NAT device- which is pretty much what you'd do if you just stuck with IPv4 in the first place.
Oh, and there's no apps that take advantage of IPv6 (for all practical purposes), and so many things that are for all practical purposes hard coded and stuck using IPv4 that you'll never get away from it.
You know, maybe there's a reason why no one has switched to IPv6 in the ten years since the first RFC was published. RFC 1883, published December 1995. Ten and a half years! - inactive, on 10/12/2007, -4/+2I love when people say orthogonal.
- Iterion, on 10/12/2007, -4/+1"Don't be evil" It's great but sometimes it takes more than just not being evil. It's more about doing the right thing.
... but I guess "Do the right thing" doesn't sound as nice as "Don't be evil" -
Show 51 - 61 of 61 discussions
Browsing Digg on your phone just got easier with our enhancements to the 
© Digg Inc. 2009
— Content created and posted by Digg users is