Who cares about IPv6?

My interest in IPv6 was first peaked a few months ago when someone on the local computer society chat room was ranting and joking about how no one’s ready for IPv6. I think found this article on the society website, which made me make a note to have a look at IPv6 when I had some time.

But then yesterday I found this, and thought I’d share.

http://www.youtube.com/v/zIUgH2wVt_0?fs=1&hl=en_GB

I’m about to go try that IPv6 tunnel thing right now.

IPv6 is something that majority of hardware can support nowadays. It is laziness of network admins what is stopping it from wider spread. Conventional NAT is also huge problem. It still works well with only few public IPv4 and overload so IT people are reluctant to go any further. I work for ISP, “my” network is fully IPv6 ready and we already have Customers requesting IPv6 block. It is in use, more and more “conscious” people is giving it a go… IPv6 has a lot of advantages over IPv4 - is faster (less overhead), more secure (build-in IPSec) and future proof (for a while)…

For those interested another link to web resources: http://ipv6.he.net/

It is laziness of network admins what is stopping it from wider spread.

Yeah, I know what you mean, I spend most of my time with my feet up on desk drinking coffee, can’t be arsed to do anything most of the time (!)

:frowning:

Out here in the real world, you might find that it’s a lack of IT funding in general coupled with the over-complicated nature of IPV6 that is actually the issue, rather than the laziness of the people actually doing the work (!)

  • probably a knock-on of people spending all their IT budget on crappy M$ software and having nothing left to pay people to actually do something useful with it …
  • the astronomical cost of re-training everyone in the industry to use something a number of orders of magnitude more difficult then IPV4
  • having to replace every end-user router on the planet with something pre-configured to work with IPV6 tunneling
  • and having to deal with support requests when things go wrong
  • (and I’m not even going to go into incompatibilities, security issues and potential DDOS holes in a relatively untested protocol)

It was never a good option.
They said it was imminent in 1995, I laughed.
I’m going to be laughing for a little longer just yet so don’t hold your breath.
Large corporations are going to have to give up large blocks of addresses that they’re sitting on before IPV6 becomes mainstream … watch this space (!)

First of all: I’m not saying that network admins are lazy in general, I’m saying they are reluctant in pushing IPv6 implementations and in consequence we getting what we have. I am network administrator as well. I do have similar problems as every admin. Nothing new here.

IPv6 is a good option and always was. I do not understand why implementing IPv6 would be more complicated than IPv4 - DHCP works equally well on both, setting up static on any machine is done the same way… I disagree that IPv6 is more complicated than IPv4 - yes is longer and is hex but it is complicated in the same way comparing to IPv4. Cost of implementations - the same. Nobody’s asking you to replace all equipment on every site at once, do it in steps that can be accommodated. Replace hardware when needed due to capacity, features, faults. Implement IPv6 capable hardware, how complicated this can be?? I’m doing this every day and honestly it is starting to be difficult to find decent router not supporting IPv6 nowadays. Time spend on rebuilding infrastructure you can use as good training.

I know exactly what you saying about irrational spendings on M$ stuff, I have seen this a lot of times. I disagree with this type of issues every single time anyone asks for my opinion. My company works on Macs - because they just do work and we do not have to spend hours on internal support, I use Linux because it works, majority of our servers for internal use are Macs or Unix boxes but I have participated in building network this way, I was recommending hardware and software, showing where company can save money and how to make infrastructure better so my work is focused on real problems rather than problems with blue screens… I have converted few people to proper Linux users after showing them my laptop… OK, I may be on the mission but it works for me… But that is different problem not related to IPv6…

Chill man, I’m not trying to offend anyone, I’m sorry you feel this way, I’m sorry if I hurt your feelings…

IPv4 addresses will soon run out. I read an article not to long ago in the Metro (yes, that free news paper you get on the bus) and they did a report on how IPv4 was soon to be full by next year because there’s only something like 250,000 spaces left. So IPv6 WILL have to be pushed forward sometime soon if people wish to continue using the internet. Lol. Not only that, but if IPv6 is pushed forward, we could achieve much higher speeds, meaning I could possibly upgrade my 100Meg connection to maybe 2/3 hundred. :smiley:

You’re right… indeed the last top level blocks of IPv4 have already been assigned by IANA.

But (I think) one of MP’s points was that a HUGE number of available IPv4 addresses are being sat on.

I’m sure I remember reading somewhere that 75% of IPv4 addresses aren’t being used (don’t quote me on that figure), and are just being sat on… so it’s likely that companies sitting on HUGE blocks of unutilised IPv4 addresses will be forced to release them rather than a quick shift to IPv6.

Although I’m in NO way responding for the Mad Penguin… and could be totally wrong in my assumption of his meaning.

Just thought I’d add a disclaimer there :wink:

First of all: I’m not saying that network admins are lazy in general

→ “It is laziness of network admins what is stopping it from wider spread.”

I’m finding it a little difficult to reconcile these two statements … (!)

I do not understand why implementing IPv6 would be more complicated than IPv4

Ok, just because you don’t understand why, doesn’t meant it isn’t.

I disagree that IPv6 is more complicated than IPv4

Memorise 10 IPV4 addresses, then memorise 10 IPV6 addresses, then tell me the latter isn’t more difficult.

Chill man, I’m not trying to offend anyone, I’m sorry you feel this way, I’m sorry if I hurt your feelings…

Not at all, it’s just there are many things in the press (this is one) that people read and take as gospel, then propagate without necessarily understanding the implications, then other people read it and the myth propagates.

This is incredibly frustrating when spread over 20 years, it wasn’t imminent then and it isn’t now, what’s imminent now it a shortage of address space, but that doesn’t automatically mean IPV6 will solve the problem or is even the preferred solution.

I would LOVE to move to IPV6 (no sarcasm). It would mean reconfiguring around 50 servers, and on each server changing the routing, nameserver, web server, ssh server, firewall, then any number of other applications such as core routers and BGP servers … I could probably do it in 3-4 months full time, and it would be worth it to get access to unlimited address space.

However;

There are many people in the World who won’t get IPV6 anytime soon due to practicalities and cost, this includes people in Africa, South America, India, China etc. There are also many businesses with IPV4 networks which simply aren’t in a position to upgrade their networks, they don’t have the time, expertise, resources or money. So, while some people globally can’t get IPV4, hosters will be obliged to provide IPV4 services in parallel with IPV6 services, and this could easily be for the next 20-30 years.

Heck, the NHS still standardises on IE6 … goodness knows how long it would take them to upgrade, maybe 20 years if they started yesterday AND had if they could find a tekkie who hadn’t just been handed a P45 by Dave …

So, given people will HAVE to run IPV4 for the next 10-30 years, what benefit is there in running IPV6 AS WELL as IPV4?

For the most part IPV4 is quicker than IPV6 (it shifts less data as there’s less address/header information) and indeed to get it running you’re going to end up tunneling IPV6 “though” IPV4 to get to where you want to go to , which is horribly inefficient. In addition you need to maintain a dual stack on each machine, so every time you change something in terms of address space, you need to do it twice every time, and even if IPV6 wasn’t “more” complicated than IPV4, you’re still doubling your workload AND increasing your chances of making a mistake by a factor of two, every time you make a change.

So, do I want to dual-stack 50 machines and double my maintenance workload?
Not an issue, I simply can’t.

Now it’s nice that companies with unlimited IT budgets (Like Google and Facebook) can provide their flagship sites on IPV6 for a day, but how long do you think they’ll be dual stacking for? - I’m thinking a long time!

Now the real myth; there IS plenty of available address space, it’s just that large blocks are allocated to big companies (for historical reasons) and they won’t let them go … in addition there are pools allocated to companies who don’t really use them, and there are lots of dialup providers who issue REAL static IP’s to every customer when they could get away with issuing non-routed addresses via NAT routers to the majority of their customers.

So, what’s more likely to happen (than global adoption of IPV6) is an operational shift by companies with lots of address space and the reclamation of address space by the powers that be. (RIPE etc)

IMHO, you won’t see IPV6 as an operational standard within the next 10 years. I’d like to say you heard it here first, but if you read-around the headlines it’s not news … (!)

→ There are many people in the World who won’t get IPV6 anytime soon due to practicalities and cost, this includes people in Africa, South America, India, China etc.

Not true. China & Japan in some cities are actually throughly beta testing IPv6. Although given what you’ve just written… I don’t fancy all that workload lol.

And why would I do that?? Network schematics, show commands etc. There is no need to memorize any IP addresses regardless their structure…

What do you suggest?? I’m fully aware what kind of “problems” I can expect implementing something new in the network but it does not mean it can not be done. Complaining about possible problems is not going to solve them.

I do not see any reason to take this post as a gospel. It is forum post. For many it may be something they do not care about, some will certainly see it as gospel but some will actually dig deeper to find more about problem and their knowledge will grow. That’s what I would like to achieve… Everything starts from scratch, nothing new here.

Actually you may surprised. Places like Africa or China has been given very little IPv4 addresses to use. Implementation of IPv6 may be faster there where users are lacking public IPs. USA is a different story - they do have spare/not used IPv4 just sitting there doing nothing. With this type of reserves USA is way behind Europe in IPv6 implementation .

**

@Mad Penguin: You’re right saying that IPv6 implementation will take ages. But there is not much that can be done. Or may be. It is actually us who can do things. Ordinary PC user does not have a clue how packets are traversing from one place to another, actually ordinary user does not have a clue what packet is. That’s us who can make thing happen. I agree that implementation of anything anywhere is not simple task but for me it would better to think what can be done to make this process more efficient/convenient and speed things up instead of shielding our selves from “this big bad world”…

Not intent on annoying overworked sysadmins… are you now trying to annoy everyone else too ?

Ordinary PC user does not have a clue how packets are traversing from one place to another, actually ordinary user does not have a clue what packet is.

Point is, IPv6 isn’t necessary (at least for now), and there’s no real world benefit over the redistribution of unused IPv4 addresses, on the contrary it will be more expensive, harder to implement, and may (as these things usually are) be superceded by a better idea before it becomes necessary.

I fully understand system administrator’s reluctance to implement a technology that causes more work for no benefit when there’s no guarantee it will be necessary.

I don’t see it as laziness, I see it as a common sense approach to a fairly unproven technology, that at best is just something else to break.

But hey, what would I know. :wink:

Seriously though, convince me there are real world benefits to IPv6, and that it’s necessary (at the moment), and I’ll happily change my position.

Oh, and I can think of quite a few times I’ve found it beneficial to “remember” a few IP addresses, rather than have to check documentation (that may or may not exist) at every step.

Hell, from what I gether, there’s not even a general consensus on how IPv6 addresses should be documented.

Skipping blocks of zero’s and replacing with ::, or a single zero, etc.

All feels a bit “bandwagon” to me… I’m waiting for someone to tell me IPv6 is greener :wink:

Not true. China & Japan in some cities are actually throughly beta testing IPv6. Although given what you’ve just written… I don’t fancy all that workload lol.

True, but then only a few 10’s of millions of Chinese have Western lifestyles while billions live in mud huts, either relatively in terms of IP or physically - the majority (which was my intended meaning) WON’T be getting IPV6 anytime soon!
If you don’t go with the lowest common denominator you deny the majority of the population access to the Internet.

There is no need to memorize any IP addresses regardless their structure…

So, I’m guessing you’re not a network admin then. There’s no “need” to eat, but after a while you will get hungry, and after a while you will need to type in an IP address.
As you will be aware routers don’t tend to have GUI’s, so cut and paste really isn’t an option, and when you get caught in a DC with a major outage, you won’t have every schematic you’ve ever made available nor will the ones you have be completely up to date … so when you can’t remember the IP’s of the machines you need to access, you’re going to end up with egg on your face, and a dead parrot for a network.

Anyway;

o there is no “need” for IPV6 at the moment
o IPV6 is more complex to manage than IPV4, at lest for those of us who DO have to remember addresses
o IPV6 is far less efficient than IPV4
o IPV6 is far less tried and tested then IPV4, hence far more risky to use
o IPV6 requires a LOT of work to implement server-side
o IPV6 will require at the very least a configuration upgrade if not new hardware for every user on the planet
o IPV6 will require (to a degree) that everyone on the planet involved with networks “re-train”
o IPV6 will require brand new support procedures and FAQ’s in the business from the ground up for every ISP in the industry for a completely new set of issues
o Network Admins, more often than not, aren’t “free” for 50% of the time so maintaining dual-stacks on every server is going to be a non-starter

Think about this logically.
If there is ANY other way to use IPV4, people will find it - as they have been doing for the last 15 years when router manufacturers first started hounding me to buy IPV6 devices because “the end was neigh”.

And incidentally, IPV4 address space (with regards to RIPE) ran out during the first quarter this year - and the planet is still spinning.
You can however still get address space, it’s just that you now need to buy it rather than it effectively being ‘free’.

Actually I am. I’m involved in managing probably biggest wireless network in UK. I manage around 1500 devices. It is collection of switches, radios, routers and other devices. I’m Cisco boy, I know the difference between GUI and CLI…

That would be actually all from me, I will send you PM asking to remove my account as this post showed me that free discussion may become “which hunt”. I’m sorry that few people here feel insulted by me sharing my own opinion.

There’s no witch hunt, going on here ???.. just people expressing “their” opinions, some of which seemed to agree with you, others that didn’t.

I’m sorry you fell that way.

Actually I am. I’m involved in managing probably biggest wireless network in UK.

Wow!

I manage around 1500 devices. It is collection of switches, radios, routers and other devices.

Ok.

I’m Cisco boy, I know the difference between GUI and CLI…

I’m impressed!

But apparently none of this stopped you from posting;

“It is laziness of network admins what is stopping it from wider spread.”

Now incredibly bad grammar aside, I think we’ve established that not only is it complete tosh, but it’s actually quite insulting to readers of these Forums.

Indeed since you seem to think that you are yourself a network admin, the implication is that you are slowing down wider adoption of IPV6 … and given you’ve told us that you are running IPV6 on your network, this is a little contradictory.

Incidentally, I think you’ll find this isn’t called a “which hunt” (that should be “witch” rather than “which”) but rather a reaction to your inaccurate accusations. Some might refer to it as a flame.

Woo an IP address for every grain of sand on the planet (aparently)