If you can read this, either the style sheet didn't load or you have an older browser that doesn't support style sheets. Try clearing your browser cache and refreshing the page.

(BBC-US)   Europe just ran out of tubes   (bbc.com) divider line 36
    More: Interesting, Europe, Internet Protocol, RIPE, ISPs  
•       •       •

6338 clicks; posted to Geek » on 14 Sep 2012 at 5:57 PM (1 year ago)   |  Favorite    |   share:  Share on Twitter share via Email Share on Facebook   more»



36 Comments   (+0 »)
   
View Voting Results: Smartest and Funniest

Archived thread
 
2012-09-14 02:21:11 PM
We could start breaking up those 1970s chunks that were sold off when IPv4 was deemed inexhaustible. That would buy some time for the Europeans and start massively upgrading to IPv6.
 
2012-09-14 02:42:24 PM

Snarcoleptic_Hoosier: We could start breaking up those 1970s chunks that were sold off when IPv4 was deemed inexhaustible. That would buy some time for the Europeans and start massively upgrading to IPv6.


What I don't understand is why companies need so many IPv4 IPs to begin with. If you NAT everthing to the 10.xx.xx.xx or 172.16.xx.xx or 192.168.xx.xx...you don't need to have as many public-facing IP addresses.
 
2012-09-14 05:43:09 PM
Good! That means they can't go down them. Fiscal crisis averted!
 
2012-09-14 06:17:02 PM
Having worked for many ISPs, I can tell you that they are all INCREDIBLY wasteful when it comes to IP addresses - they are mis-sold to customers who do not need them all the time, they are not cancelled properly when customers move on, they are poorly subnetted... the list is endless.

The only real solution is to move to a system that allows this wasteful system - IPv6 of course, is the answer - however, I am disappointed with its incompatibility with IPv4... this has made the take-up on it slow and a real pain.

However, like most things in life - we will only make the drastic change when it becomes ABSOLUTELY necessary - such as when my toaster needs an IP address to make me my toast in the morning.
 
2012-09-14 06:18:24 PM

slayer199: Snarcoleptic_Hoosier: We could start breaking up those 1970s chunks that were sold off when IPv4 was deemed inexhaustible. That would buy some time for the Europeans and start massively upgrading to IPv6.

What I don't understand is why companies need so many IPv4 IPs to begin with. If you NAT everthing to the 10.xx.xx.xx or 172.16.xx.xx or 192.168.xx.xx...you don't need to have as many public-facing IP addresses.


carrier-level nat? no thanks.
 
2012-09-14 06:38:06 PM

russlar: slayer199: Snarcoleptic_Hoosier: We could start breaking up those 1970s chunks that were sold off when IPv4 was deemed inexhaustible. That would buy some time for the Europeans and start massively upgrading to IPv6.

What I don't understand is why companies need so many IPv4 IPs to begin with. If you NAT everthing to the 10.xx.xx.xx or 172.16.xx.xx or 192.168.xx.xx...you don't need to have as many public-facing IP addresses.

carrier-level nat? no thanks.


Well, not carrier level, but at least enterprise level. My work computer here has a 159.0.0.0 IP Address. I don't need to access it from outside, and if I do, there's always VPN. No reason for it, or our printers, most of our servers, etc, to have publically accessible IP Addresses.

Check out XKCD's map of the Internet. HP, Ford, Xerox et al each have 16.7 million public IP Addresses. I'd wager they don't need them all, but according to Wikipedia, only a few have released them, with only one, Stanford, being named.

I'd even argue that mobile comms could/should be NAT'ed. I don't really need to run a server from my S3, especially when it's on the cellular network. YMMV, of course.
 
2012-09-14 06:40:12 PM
IPv6 is just another example of kicking the can just a short ways down the road. We've run out of IPv4 addresses based on a 32-bit space, and the answer is to provide a 64-bit address?
The world internet population has doubled in the last five years. At this rate, we'll run out of IPv6 addresses before 2020.

IPv6 needed to have at least a 128 bit address to meet the next generation's need.
 
2012-09-14 06:45:57 PM
I will issue you your own lifetime personal IP4 address for a onetime fee of only $199!

Dramatization:

You: "Here's $199!"

Me: "One sec.." *tap* *tap* *tap* "Your lifetime IP address is: 127.0.0.1. Enjoy!"

Me: Next!
 
2012-09-14 06:48:04 PM

nmemkha: I will issue you your own lifetime personal IP4 address for a onetime fee of only $199!

Dramatization:

You: "Here's $199!"

Me: "One sec.." *tap* *tap* *tap* "Your lifetime IP address is: 127.0.0.1. Enjoy!"

Me: Next!


Heh - I'm too lazy to dig out the related bash.org quote... but thanks for making me think about it and making me laugh.
 
2012-09-14 06:49:34 PM
news.bbcimg.co.uk

What the internet may look like.
 
2012-09-14 06:53:41 PM

Nexzus: russlar: slayer199: Snarcoleptic_Hoosier: We could start breaking up those 1970s chunks that were sold off when IPv4 was deemed inexhaustible. That would buy some time for the Europeans and start massively upgrading to IPv6.

What I don't understand is why companies need so many IPv4 IPs to begin with. If you NAT everthing to the 10.xx.xx.xx or 172.16.xx.xx or 192.168.xx.xx...you don't need to have as many public-facing IP addresses.

carrier-level nat? no thanks.

Well, not carrier level, but at least enterprise level. My work computer here has a 159.0.0.0 IP Address. I don't need to access it from outside, and if I do, there's always VPN. No reason for it, or our printers, most of our servers, etc, to have publically accessible IP Addresses.

Check out XKCD's map of the Internet. HP, Ford, Xerox et al each have 16.7 million public IP Addresses. I'd wager they don't need them all, but according to Wikipedia, only a few have released them, with only one, Stanford, being named.

I'd even argue that mobile comms could/should be NAT'ed. I don't really need to run a server from my S3, especially when it's on the cellular network. YMMV, of course.


OK, that I have no problem with. And, I'm pretty sure my mobile already has a nat IP.
 
2012-09-14 06:57:50 PM

Nexzus: ...each have 16.7 million public IP Addresses. I'd wager they don't need them all, but according to Wikipedia, only a few have released them, with only one, Stanford, being named.


In a perfect world, sure, they'd give them all back, free of charge, for the benefit of humanity.

But, they know that it's a resource they got free a long time ago, and now they are becoming more scarce by the day. What happens when a resource becomes scarce? The price goes up.

So from an "evil business" point of view, it's foolish to get rid of them now at all, they will be worth far more once the unallocated address space is exhausted completely. (You know most of the management drone types won't do a thing until they are unavailable, then panic, and find they have to pay extremely for their incompetence and lack of foresight.)

At that point, unused IP v4 addresses become golden. The guys with billions of addresses will laugh all the way to the bank as they sell it /12 at a time.

But it's also a balancing act, as they become less than worthless once the IP v6 switchover is fully complete, but v6 will probably not happen in full force until the last of the v4s are gone and the cost of "re-allocated private" IPs go up and up. 

And don't forget how worthless IP v6 addresses become once the nanotech revolution finally happens:
imgs.xkcd.com
 
GTP
2012-09-14 07:00:11 PM

Babwa Wawa: IPv6 is just another example of kicking the can just a short ways down the road. We've run out of IPv4 addresses based on a 32-bit space, and the answer is to provide a 64-bit address?
The world internet population has doubled in the last five years. At this rate, we'll run out of IPv6 addresses before 2020.

IPv6 needed to have at least a 128 bit address to meet the next generation's need.



Ummm...IPv6 does use 128 bit addresses.
 
2012-09-14 07:02:35 PM

GTP: Babwa Wawa: IPv6 is just another example of kicking the can just a short ways down the road. We've run out of IPv4 addresses based on a 32-bit space, and the answer is to provide a 64-bit address?
The world internet population has doubled in the last five years. At this rate, we'll run out of IPv6 addresses before 2020.

IPv6 needed to have at least a 128 bit address to meet the next generation's need.


Ummm...IPv6 does use 128 bit addresses.


I thought it a strange troll attempt myself... But apparently it's nerd sarcasm, or something.
 
2012-09-14 07:14:20 PM

Babwa Wawa: IPv6 is just another example of kicking the can just a short ways down the road. We've run out of IPv4 addresses based on a 32-bit space, and the answer is to provide a 64-bit address?
The world internet population has doubled in the last five years. At this rate, we'll run out of IPv6 addresses before 2020.

IPv6 needed to have at least a 128 bit address to meet the next generation's need.


You do know that IPv6 is 128 don't you.

It's like enough addresses to give every cubic millimeter on earth about 100k addresses.

In other words just about enough to give every farker an address for each bit of pron on their machine. Almost
 
2012-09-14 07:15:01 PM

Klom Dark: So from an "evil business" point of view, it's foolish to get rid of them now at all, they will be worth far more once the unallocated address space is exhausted completely.


Hmm, that makes me curious. What will happen when the address space is completely exhausted, and if we haven't made enough of a switchover? I imagine providers still have a decently sizeable buffer, but even that will become exhausted if nothing is done. Every new smartphone, every new internet subscriber is one less from the reservation pool.

Will we have rolling internet blackouts?
 
2012-09-14 07:20:25 PM

slayer199: What I don't understand is why companies need so many IPv4 IPs to begin with. If you NAT everthing


And I think that's where we can all safely stop reading what you have to say...
 
2012-09-14 07:25:38 PM
Alrigiiiiiiht...
Hey bud! Wanna buy a /8?
www.clusterfake.net
 
2012-09-14 07:35:31 PM

Nexzus: What will happen when the address space is completely exhausted, and if we haven't made enough of a switchover?


Black market. Some people will sell their IP addresses to companies deperate for connectivity and cash in. I was actually thinking about getting a block of v4 IPs as an investment, but I expect the window of profitability is going to be pretty narrow and I don't want to spend the effort monitoring it. Maybe I'll just grab a class C or two as a self-proof-of-concept and maybe I'll profit enough for a few free pizzas.
 
2012-09-14 07:36:25 PM

Babwa Wawa: IPv6 is just another example of kicking the can just a short ways down the road. We've run out of IPv4 addresses based on a 32-bit space, and the answer is to provide a 64-bit address?
The world internet population has doubled in the last five years. At this rate, we'll run out of IPv6 addresses before 2020.

IPv6 needed to have at least a 128 bit address to meet the next generation's need.


Somehow I think it will take a little longer than 8 years. It's actually ever so slightly more than just doubling.
 
2012-09-14 07:49:58 PM
But they assured me that there's lots of room infinity.

/ Risking an obscure?
 
2012-09-14 07:51:01 PM

Klom Dark: GTP: Babwa Wawa: IPv6 is just another example of kicking the can just a short ways down the road. We've run out of IPv4 addresses based on a 32-bit space, and the answer is to provide a 64-bit address?
The world internet population has doubled in the last five years. At this rate, we'll run out of IPv6 addresses before 2020.

IPv6 needed to have at least a 128 bit address to meet the next generation's need.

Ummm...IPv6 does use 128 bit addresses.

I thought it a strange troll attempt myself... But apparently it's nerd sarcasm, or something.


CujoQuarrel: You do know that IPv6 is 128 don't you.

It's like enough addresses to give every cubic millimeter on earth about 100k addresses.

In other words just about enough to give every farker an address for each bit of pron on their machine. Almost


picturescrazy: Somehow I think it will take a little longer than 8 years. It's actually ever so slightly more than just doubling.


Even if it were only 64 bits (which it isn′t, but even if it were), Babwa Wawa apparently doesn′ understand how binary (or place value numeration in general) works.

Doubling the number of bits does not merely double the resulting addressing space. Each and every individual bit you add does that. When you double the number of bits, you square the original addressing space! So, going from eight bits (256 possible values) to sixteen bits does not just give you 256×2=512 possible values, it gives you 256² = 65,536 possible values!

32 bits is over four billion possible values. That turned out to be insufficient. But 64 bits is nearly 18½ quintillion possible values! That alone would be more than enough to give every multicellular living being on Earth its own IP address!

128 bits squares even that, and has over 340 unodecillion possible values! That's more than enough to give every living cell on Earth its own IP address!
 
2012-09-14 08:08:40 PM

The Voice of Doom: Alrigiiiiiiht...
Hey bud! Wanna buy a /8?
[www.clusterfake.net image 460x327]


"...for a nickle."

"A NICKLE!?"

"SHH!!!"

"a nickle?"

"riiiight..."
 
2012-09-14 08:24:35 PM

COMALite J: Klom Dark: GTP: Babwa Wawa: IPv6 is just another example of kicking the can just a short ways down the road. We've run out of IPv4 addresses based on a 32-bit space, and the answer is to provide a 64-bit address?
The world internet population has doubled in the last five years. At this rate, we'll run out of IPv6 addresses before 2020.

IPv6 needed to have at least a 128 bit address to meet the next generation's need.

Ummm...IPv6 does use 128 bit addresses.

I thought it a strange troll attempt myself... But apparently it's nerd sarcasm, or something.

CujoQuarrel: You do know that IPv6 is 128 don't you.

It's like enough addresses to give every cubic millimeter on earth about 100k addresses.

In other words just about enough to give every farker an address for each bit of pron on their machine. Almost

picturescrazy: Somehow I think it will take a little longer than 8 years. It's actually ever so slightly more than just doubling.

Even if it were only 64 bits (which it isn′t, but even if it were), Babwa Wawa apparently doesn′ understand how binary (or place value numeration in general) works.

Doubling the number of bits does not merely double the resulting addressing space. Each and every individual bit you add does that. When you double the number of bits, you square the original addressing space! So, going from eight bits (256 possible values) to sixteen bits does not just give you 256×2=512 possible values, it gives you 256² = 65,536 possible values!

32 bits is over four billion possible values. That turned out to be insufficient. But 64 bits is nearly 18½ quintillion possible values! That alone would be more than enough to give every multicellular living being on Earth its own IP address!

128 bits squares even that, and has over 340 unodecillion possible values! That's more than enough to give every living cell on Earth its own IP address!


There's no way near that many jails on the planet. WTF are you talking about?

// ;)
 
2012-09-14 08:29:25 PM

COMALite J: 128 bits squares even that, and has over 340 unodecillion possible values! That's more than enough to give every living cell on Earth its own IP address!


You know, the problem with this is that is that allocation inefficiencies will mean we can never get anywhere near that.

For instance, the U.S. Defense Department has a /13 block of IPv6 addresses. There can be only 8192 organizations with allocations that large, before IPv6 runs out. I have no idea why the Defense Department can't manage to scrape by with a /16 block, but whatever. IPv6 will probably last 50 years, but I'm not betting on it.
 
2012-09-14 09:44:08 PM

Honest Bender: And I think that's where we can all safely stop reading what you have to say...


You know what I meant.

Businesses like Ford, Boeing, etc do not need that many public-facing IP addresses.
 
2012-09-14 09:57:23 PM

GTP: Ummm...IPv6 does use 128 bit addresses.


Fair point, but even with 128 bits, we still have a 32 bit address system in IPv4. So we're still only going to have 4x the internet addresses that we have now.

News flash for you: the world is eating up internet addresses at a crazy rate..We'll be lucky if IPv6 doesn't run out of addresses in like 10-15 years.
 
2012-09-14 10:02:14 PM

CujoQuarrel: It's like enough addresses to give every cubic millimeter on earth about 100k addresses.


COMALite J: 128 bits squares even that, and has over 340 unodecillion possible values! That's more than enough to give every living cell on Earth its own IP address!


picturescrazy: Somehow I think it will take a little longer than 8 years. It's actually ever so slightly more than just doubling.


Last I checked, 128=32*4. And we've doubled the addresses needed over the last five years and it's accelerating. So you all can just stick your heads in the sand. In 10-15 years, we're going to have the same problems with the number of internet addresses.
 
2012-09-14 10:07:09 PM

Babwa Wawa: GTP: Ummm...IPv6 does use 128 bit addresses.

Fair point, but even with 128 bits, we still have a 32 bit address system in IPv4. So we're still only going to have 4x the internet addresses that we have now.

News flash for you: the world is eating up internet addresses at a crazy rate..We'll be lucky if IPv6 doesn't run out of addresses in like 10-15 years.


You're either hilariously trolling, in which case I salute you, or really bad at math, in which case I pity you.

IPv6 basically means a million times a billion times a trillion IP addresses for every person on the planet today.
 
2012-09-14 10:37:58 PM

Babwa Wawa: Last I checked, 128=32*4. And we've doubled the addresses needed over the last five years and it's accelerating. So you all can just stick your heads in the sand. In 10-15 years, we're going to have the same problems with the number of internet addresses.


The threads kind of over, but you overdid it here. In fact, you probably shouldn't have followed up at all; the first troll was pretty good.
 
2012-09-14 10:55:54 PM

slayer199: What I don't understand is why companies need so many IPv4 IPs to begin with. If you NAT everthing to the 10.xx.xx.xx or 172.16.xx.xx or 192.168.xx.xx...you don't need to have as many public-facing IP addresses.


I suppose my status here as a math troll has been outed here, so I'll respond. I'm totally with you here. Back in 2000-2001, I was managing a DARPA facility - one of the original nodes on the ARPANET. In fact, the UNIX sysadmin before me, launched UUNET from the same joint after DARPA told the place to divest itself of key internet facilities (ah... timing)...

Anywho, I found myself with a Class B address space, and had no more than maybe 200 nodes. Could have gotten away with a dozen internet IPs. I left in 2002, but not before feeling slightly guilty about all the IPs I was hogging.
 
2012-09-15 07:47:51 AM

Babwa Wawa: IPv6 is just another example of kicking the can just a short ways down the road. We've run out of IPv4 addresses based on a 32-bit space, and the answer is to provide a 64-bit address?
The world internet population has doubled in the last five years. At this rate, we'll run out of IPv6 addresses before 2020.

IPv6 needed to have at least a 128 bit address to meet the next generation's need.


This is pretty clearly a nerd troll attempt.
 
2012-09-15 08:38:04 AM
So we know ipv4 has run its course, or it will eventually...
And we've made ipv6 to replace it, and every computer and device has it built in...

So why hasn't someone just pushed the button to make it happen?
There doesn't seem to be an advantage in putting it off.
 
2012-09-15 01:15:22 PM

way south: So we know ipv4 has run its course, or it will eventually...
And we've made ipv6 to replace it, and every computer and device built after a certain point above a certain price point (albeit falling over time) has it built in...

So why hasn't someone just pushed the button to make it happen?
There doesn't seem to be an advantage in putting it off.


That's why. Nobody wants to (pay to) replace the 10 year old server or the 15 year old routers. Or force Grandma to replace her 12 year old desktop that still plays Solitaire just fine, thank you.

/Remember all the troubles with the digital TV switch. That x1,000,000, because you basically have to scrap every piece of infrastructure before a certain point. Give it 5 more years, and some serious government support to force the ISP's to support it (because a lot still don't, which is the equivalent of Fox, NBC, and CBS not supporting digital signals), and then maybe.
//Also, wouldn't be surprised if the switch broke certain legacy apps, but I haven't done enough any networking to tell you for certain.
 
2012-09-15 02:05:02 PM

meyerkev: way south: So we know ipv4 has run its course, or it will eventually...
And we've made ipv6 to replace it, and every computer and device built after a certain point above a certain price point (albeit falling over time) has it built in...

So why hasn't someone just pushed the button to make it happen?
There doesn't seem to be an advantage in putting it off.

That's why. Nobody wants to (pay to) replace the 10 year old server or the 15 year old routers. Or force Grandma to replace her 12 year old desktop that still plays Solitaire just fine, thank you.

/Remember all the troubles with the digital TV switch. That x1,000,000, because you basically have to scrap every piece of infrastructure before a certain point. Give it 5 more years, and some serious government support to force the ISP's to support it (because a lot still don't, which is the equivalent of Fox, NBC, and CBS not supporting digital signals), and then maybe.
//Also, wouldn't be surprised if the switch broke certain legacy apps, but I haven't done enough any networking to tell you for certain.


I think it's a lot like going to digital tv in that there isn't much to risk losing after all this time.
Ill admit I don't know the full extent of damage to legacy software, but ipv6 didn't come out very long before the tech boom that expanded the Internet. I'd be willing to bet the majority of what's out there is either ready to go or needs to be retired anyhow.

Having survived the y2k hysteria and congressional daylight savings time updates, I think this is a bullet best bitten sooner rather than later. Because its going to be more expensive if you wait for the panic to set in.
Set the date, give yourself five years, and tell those who still havnt updated that they'll either have to get over it or suck salt.
 
2012-09-15 03:55:42 PM

Babwa Wawa: IPv6 is just another example of kicking the can just a short ways down the road. We've run out of IPv4 addresses based on a 32-bit space, and the answer is to provide a 64-bit address?
The world internet population has doubled in the last five years. At this rate, we'll run out of IPv6 addresses before 2020.


Uhm, you seem to think that 64bit gives twice as many adresses as 32bit. That is not so (IPv6 is actual two 64bit adresses, but never mind).

IPv4 offers a bit more than 4,000,000,000 adresses.

IPv6 offers 340,282,366,920,938,463,463,374,607,431,768,211,456 unique IP adresses.

With IPv6 you can assign an unique IP adress to every single atom on the planet earth, and still only use a small fraction, less than 1%.
 
Displayed 36 of 36 comments

View Voting Results: Smartest and Funniest


This thread is archived, and closed to new comments.

Continue Farking
Submit a Link »






Report