What is Digg?126 Comments
- 350Zed, on 02/06/2008, -1/+11615 years of "We're almost out of IPv4 addresses, get ready for IPv6. It's coming next year!" have finally become reality.
- aepex, on 02/06/2008, -10/+87One day we're going to look at an address like ht tps://[2001:0db8:85a3:08d3:1319:8a2e:0370:7344]:443/
and wish we were back to four simple octets again. - chris9902, on 02/06/2008, -3/+67Somebody should invent a domain name system so we don't have to remember IP addresses.
- vyhd, on 02/06/2008, -8/+65ICANN has IPv6 pleez?
- Zaggynl, on 02/06/2008, -3/+59Sir! We've found the hacker's IP, it's 1337:1337:1337:1337:1337:1337:1337:1337!
- jeriqo, on 02/06/2008, -4/+52I'm not sure we really need IPv6, but we deadly need eMail 2.0.
Spam needs to stop, and email adress verification + acknowledgement of delivery has to be normalized.
Nobody wants "mail delivery daemon" emails. - jeriqo, on 02/06/2008, -3/+48That's why we have DNS
- swordedge, on 02/06/2008, -11/+49IPv6 is not 15 years old.
Address space is the least of the problems that IPv6 solves. But I am unable to list what problems it does solve.
This step is very welcomed by certain parts of the world, especially Asia where IPv4 address space is near non existent. People in the US are largely unaware that the US has 2 billion of the 4 billion addresses or about 6 per person. The rest of the world have about 3 people per address. - cuerty, on 02/06/2008, -3/+39This is funny: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=_y36fG2Oba0
- spyd3rweb, on 02/06/2008, -1/+31Somehow even with all these addresses cable/dsl companies will still find a way to insist that you have a dynamic ip.
- fl00d, on 02/06/2008, -1/+31There's no place like 0:0:0:0:0:0:0:1.
- MeMongo, on 02/06/2008, -1/+28I think I heard they were working on that somewhere. Maybe they'll call it a DNS (short for Domain Name System)
- BreatheRhetoric, on 02/06/2008, -0/+26Actually the cool thing about IPv6 addresses is that you can abbreviate them. You can remove all leading 0's in each octet and you can abbreviate a string (once per address) of octets full of 0's with just "::"
- pyrokld, on 02/06/2008, -1/+21Yeah... it's only 14 years old! (Defined by the Internet Engineering Task Force in 1994 to be precise...)
- ttamshadbolt, on 02/06/2008, -0/+19and another 15 till it's actually implemented
- griz, on 02/06/2008, -0/+18More likely 09F9:1102:9D74:E35B:D841:56C5:6356:88C0
- Spuy767, on 02/06/2008, -0/+16Bah, this was on 208.96.53.70 yesterday!
- Emused, on 02/06/2008, -7/+23" The new phone book's here! The new phone book's here!" /The Jerk
- RockinRoel, on 02/06/2008, -0/+16In other words: we need free public & private keys for everyone!
- cyberpear, on 02/06/2008, -0/+15actually, it's just [::1], and it's usually the loopback address (similar to 127.0.0.1 in IPv4)
- IndigoMoss, on 02/06/2008, -0/+15Seriously why are you getting dugg down? It was pretty entertaining and it was on topic. Hell you should be dugg up just for not Rick Rolling us like so many douche bags would.
- Protoss, on 02/06/2008, -0/+15::1*
- inactive, on 02/06/2008, -12/+26ICANN actually did something? *****.
Let us know when they do their second useful thing ever: GET RID OF HARD-CODED TOP-LEVEL DOMAINS. - dbr_onix, on 02/06/2008, -1/+15No. DNS still works the exact same was, so the url will still be https://somesite.com:443 (And that default SSL port :443 is automatically hidden by most modern browsers)
- 350Zed, on 02/06/2008, -0/+13Eventually 100% will. Otherwise the "out" you refer to, will be "out of business".
- Spuy767, on 02/06/2008, -1/+14Thank god I can finally access all of those sites that are using ipv6 addresses without manually entering the whole thing.
oh, wait. . . - dikwad, on 02/06/2008, -0/+12more of a pistol then
- Spuy767, on 02/06/2008, -0/+11If you don't get a dynamic IP with the regular cable package, how are they going to charge you 125$/mo just for the right of having a static IP with no more bandwidth than before?
- gadgetuk, on 02/06/2008, -0/+11*whisper* They're hexadecimal - the only "oh" is a number. But don't sweat it - no-one noticed.
- aywwts4, on 02/06/2008, -1/+11Because nobody has to troubleshoot problems with DNS not syncing up with the IP address. Or enter addresses that arent domains, like other computer's in your lan environment.
I can't wait until I am diagnosing problems over the phone and needing to get into "D as in delta" "B as in beta" and if someone goes 'oh' 'oh' 'nine' I just have to hope they mean letters.
(wrong reply, this is to jeriqo) - manitoba98xp, on 02/06/2008, -0/+10The most obvious improvement is the enlarged address space, but other improvements include better multicast, stateless address configuration, link-local addresses, jumbograms, and required IPsec.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/IPv6#Features_and_dif ... - inactive, on 02/06/2008, -0/+9Yeah, because google.com is so much harder to remember than 64.233.169.103.
- ollien, on 02/06/2008, -1/+9I shotgun [:::::::1]
- MWeather, on 02/06/2008, -0/+8"and if someone goes 'oh' 'oh' 'nine' I just have to hope they mean letters"
You are aware that hexadecimal doesn't go up to O, right? - cigawoot, on 02/06/2008, -0/+7IP Addresses are also easily spoofed.
- MeMongo, on 02/06/2008, -1/+8You're confusing MAC addresses and IP addresses. MAC addresses belong to the Ethernet card, work at the data link layer and can easily be spoofed, while IP addresses work at the Network layer.
http://www.richland.edu/staff/dkirby/141macaddress ...
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/TCP/IP#Layers_in_the_ ... - falafelkiosken, on 02/06/2008, -3/+10is there really a need to include the port number? https is an equivalent of :443
- weeeezzll, on 02/06/2008, -1/+7We're gonna party like it's 19 99!!
(Because that is when they should have done this...*sigh*) - cohortq, on 02/06/2008, -2/+8We invented the address space! Why shouldn't we have almost all of it?!
- inactive, on 02/06/2008, -1/+7wth is a HARD-CODED TOP-LEVEL DOMAIN
http://www.google.com/search?aq=f&hl=en&safe=off&c ... - unusualbob, on 02/06/2008, -3/+9spell 'bury' right
- ElbertF, on 02/06/2008, -1/+7It makes sense actually, 'digg' and 'burry'.
- rkuchiki, on 02/06/2008, -2/+7And how many ISPs support IPv6? Count mine out.
- TritonX, on 02/06/2008, -0/+5ISPs will be the last ones to switch. Ipv6 is bad for them, it will allow for much better communication from the internet to devices inside your local lan without having to fiddle with ports, thus increasing the bandwith on the ISP's side. I'm sure at first they will charge you a premium to be on Ipv6.
- dood, on 02/06/2008, -0/+4If DNS is the proposed solution to the IPV6-addresses-are-hard-to-memorize, then replacing addresses with an essentially random assortment of letters and numbers won't help anything. It's going to have to use words, or pseudo-words.
- weeeezzll, on 02/06/2008, -0/+4Well done!
- SysstemLord, on 02/06/2008, -1/+5I CAN HAS IPv6 ?
- trisweb, on 02/06/2008, -0/+4And words in combination with other words, and those same words permutated with symbols and other characters. As many as can fit in 255 characters. So it's really the number of character-unique phrases (in any language) less than or equal to 255 characters long. That's many orders of magnitude more than just single words, and still plenty to have one for every person, home, and place on the earth.
So you may have icantrememberipv6addresses.com, someone else may have icantremember-ipv6addresses.com, and don't forget the other TLDs, but the point is, there will be plenty of easy-to-remember domain names as well. - underdog138, on 02/06/2008, -1/+5That's absurd. If you believe that the only need for routers is NAT (which you are implying here), then you need to pick up a book and do some research every once in a while. Layer 3 routing will always be needed. I shouldn't even have to explain this to you.
As for security and private address spacing, the 10/8, 172.16/ and 192.168.0/24 networks were only created to address simplicity within an organization, and also the inherent limitations of the relatively small number of addresses in IPv4. Sure, there's over 4 billion of them, but if every device in every organization in the world of IPv4 had a globally routable IP, we'd run out a lot faster than you'd think. The "security" from this comes from the fact that none of those addresses are designed to be routable outside a private organization. That's what NAT is for: To translate private addresses into globally routable addresses. Nothing more. Nothing less.
IPv6 addresses are designated this way: the first 48 bits are the global prefix, made for use at the ISP level. The next 16 bits are for enterprise networks to subdivide their share of the global network they're given by their ISP. The last 64 are for interface IDs, derived from MAC addresses in the EUI-64 format. It's designed in a way where there aren't designated private address spaces for private networks, since there are so many.
Security should be left for firewalls and access lists, but I digress. Someone that believes NAT is a security implementation and not simply "Network Address Translation" which is what it was built for, really wouldn't understand any of that anyway. - ollien, on 02/06/2008, -10/+14Do you know your IP address? Try remembering 2001:0db8:85a3:08d3:0370:7344:1319:8a2e
-
Show 51 - 100 of 125 discussions
The Digg Toolbar for Firefox lets you Digg, submit content, and keep track of Digg even when you're not on the Digg site. Download the official 
© Digg Inc. 2009
— Content created and posted by Digg users is