Weekly edition	Kernel	Security	Distributions	Contact Us	Search
Archives	Calendar	Subscribe	Write for LWN	LWN.net FAQ	Sponsors

v6

Posted Mar 16, 2007 5:46 UTC (Fri) by gvy (guest, #11981)
In reply to: They use the KAME stack by jd
Parent article: A second remote hole for OpenBSD

Maybe rare folks really need v6 right now, right? (judging on some recent conclusions it well might be the situation for at least a dozen years more)

(Log in to post comments)

What have the V6 folks ever done for us?

Posted Mar 16, 2007 17:33 UTC (Fri) by jd (guest, #26381) [Link]

This reminds me of that sketch in Monty Python's "Life of Brian". Here are some things that v6 supplies (aside from addresses):

IP Mobility (move your laptop between networks or entire Internet providers without dropping any connections and with minimal risk of even dropping packets)
Network Mobility (move an entire network between networks, without anybody losing connections - useful for a WAP on a bus, train or aircraft)
IPSec (actual high-level security at the packet level without needing application support and no risk of contextual information exposing the protected information)
Automatic configuration (DHCP-less, clash-resistant, admin-less)
Anycasting (ask for a service/information and ye shall receive from the nearest provider)

Some of these have been backported to IPv4, but the IPv4 versions aren't always terribly interoperable and aren't efficient as they're not designed in.

Some are not obviously useful - mobility? - but when you consider the headaches they're having with IP on any mass transit system (having a single monopolistic ISP is a "popular" solution, where a current solution even exists), the sole benefit of having a static solution over a dynamic one is that one ISP gets richer. Oh, you thought you got a benefit from it? Gimme a break.

(In fact, it is very likely the anti-monopolistic nature of IPv6 that is hindering adoption. If it had allowed companies like AT&T or Telus to pwn the Internet, it would have been adopted globally in a week. It is precisely because it empowers users to do their own thing that network providers are avoiding it like the plague.)

What have the V6 folks ever done for us?

Posted Mar 19, 2007 13:14 UTC (Mon) by copsewood (subscriber, #199) [Link]

Thanks for this summary. In addition to commercial monopolistic motivation (which I'm sure exists) there is also the problem of displacing an existing network with a new one suggested by Metcalf's law. This problem is likely to be overcome by new applications e.g. requiring all mobile phones having client/server IP connectivity and OLPC which can only be achieved through availability of more addresses. ISPs will be keen to make money from these new applications even if there are fewer opportunities to monopolise them.

Posted Mar 22, 2007 9:53 UTC (Thu) by Cato (subscriber, #7643) [Link]

IPv6 is finally entering real practically-driven deployments - I'm not counting the various ISPs who've done IPv6 as a service for use by leading-edge business customers and research labs, only the companies that are deploying it because they more or less have to, driven by future IP address shortages.

Comcast is deploying IPv6 already in its core and will deploy it for customers, largely because it's already exhausted the 10.x address space and is having to use public IPv4 space for customers. With about 10 IP addresses per triple-play household, and 10s of millions of customers, there's a strong driver to do this sooner rather than later, and the cable world's DOCSIS 3.0 standards for cable modems are now out, and support IPv6.

For more details, including a presentation from Comcast on their IPv6 deployment plans, and some other indicators of IPv6 demand becoming real, see http://slashdot.org/comments.pl?sid=225734&cid=18286172