Happy IPv6 Day!!

Cthu1hu

Web companies test Internet's readiness for future | Reuters

Devilsbane

I am sad to see IPv4 go because of how simplistic it is. It has been nice to tell someone an IP address or even to memorize some. But it is a change that needs to be done.

Overdash

CthulthuDawn wrote: »

Web companies test Internet's readiness for future | Reuters

I think I am going to change my career path back to straight routing and switching. At first it seemed I needed to branch out to be highly marketable but now I am thinking if I specialize in migrating networks to IPV6 I can make at least a 20 year career in IPV6 alone.

The market might be even hotter in other country's so thats a good chance to travel! I am working on MCTS Win7 so I'll focus on IPV6 for that and then go CCNP and push EIGRP/OSPF IPV6 routing.

Sett

IPv6 is complicated just by the first sight. I also hated it at first, but after I red some things about it I started to love it. It's advantage is not just the larger address space, it has much better header and cool applications.

Overdash

Sett wrote: »

IPv6 is complicated just by the first sight. I also hated it at first, but after I red some things about it I started to love it. It's advantage is not just the larger address space, it has much better header and cool applications.

I agree,

It's no wonder Todd Lammle has been excited about this since forever. I wish I could have understood sooner what this would mean. Now I am a firm believer that in 2013 IPV6 will be so hot it burns up the market!

vinbuck

I put a router on a free Hurricane Electric tunnel just so I could ping this....

router#ping 2620:0:1cfe:face:b00c::3 rep 10000

Type escape sequence to abort.
Sending 10000, 100-byte ICMP Echos to 2620:0:1CFE:FACE:B00C::3, timeout is 2 seconds:
!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!
!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!
!!
Success rate is 100 percent (142/142), round-trip min/avg/max = 128/130/136 ms

...still working on getting it rigged to browse

Overdash

MississippiGuardsman wrote: »

I put a router on a free Hurricane Electric tunnel just so I could ping this....

router#ping 2620:0:1cfe:face:b00c::3 rep 10000

Type escape sequence to abort.
Sending 10000, 100-byte ICMP Echos to 2620:0:1CFE:FACE:B00C::3, timeout is 2 seconds:
!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!
!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!
!!
Success rate is 100 percent (142/142), round-trip min/avg/max = 128/130/136 ms

...still working on getting it rigged to browse

lol, nice.

it_consultant

Sett wrote: »

IPv6 is complicated just by the first sight. I also hated it at first, but after I red some things about it I started to love it. It's advantage is not just the larger address space, it has much better header and cool applications.

The education surrounding IPv6 is not necessarily stellar. I think that is why most people are afraid of it. My understanding is that backbone routing will become significantly simpler while the number of addresses is astronomically higher. It will take a little while for us to forget "private vs public" network. It will be like the days of old, where every PC and printer gets a routable IP.

Devilsbane

it_consultant wrote: »

The education surrounding IPv6 is not necessarily stellar. I think that is why most people are afraid of it. My understanding is that backbone routing will become significantly simpler while the number of addresses is astronomically higher. It will take a little while for us to forget "private vs public" network. It will be like the days of old, where every PC and printer gets a routable IP.

That is kind of a scary thought though. What if I don't want the workstations in my company to be routable?

Sett

Devilsbane wrote: »

That is kind of a scary thought though. What if I don't want the workstations in my company to be routable?

You can always NAT them behind a firewall...

Asif Dasl

I feel it will be the exact opposite. IPv4 internal private IPs and using IPv6 externally.

Bl8ckr0uter

Sett wrote: »

You can always NAT them behind a firewall...

Exactly. It will be awhile before people start using ipv6 for desktops and end points (imo). However cell phones, tablets and anything public will almost have to be ipv6. I think in the next 2-3 years real ipv6 skills will start to make it on job requirements.

it_consultant

NAT is not supported in IPv6 as far as I know. There was an RFC to the point but now not even Cisco recommends using it. Just because they are routable does not mean that you have to let the bad people in, your trusty firewall appliance will still be used. A world without NAT is a good place.

instant000

First Geek: Awesome! "ping ::1"
"I'm glad that IPv6 knows that I truly am number 1."
Second geek walks over: Hey, I'm number one, look, "ping ::1"
Third geek walks over: Hey, I'm number one, look, "ping ::1"
Fourth geek walks over: Hey, I'm number one, look, "ping ::1"

Obnoxious Geek: "ping FF::1"

Geeks 1-4: "Stop yelling at us!"

demonfurbie

i can see the internet switching to ip 6 (what happened to ip5 que csi music) but not networks i see most small to med networks still using ip 4

it_consultant

demonfurbie wrote: »

i can see the internet switching to ip 6 (what happened to ip5 que csi music) but not networks i see most small to med networks still using ip 4

That will just be too complex. You will have to configure your router or firewall for teredo so 6to4 or whatever and that will just be a serious pain. All modern OS distros support IPv6 natively, the only thing holding us back is ourselves and our fear of learning a new addressing scheme.

Bl8ckr0uter

it_consultant wrote: »

NAT is not supported in IPv6 as far as I know. There was an RFC to the point but now not even Cisco recommends using it. Just because they are routable does not mean that you have to let the bad people in, your trusty firewall appliance will still be used. A world without NAT is a good place.

6 to 4 tunneling isn't supported (that's what I meant by nat).
Cisco IOS IPv6 Configuration Guide, Release 12.4 - Implementing Tunneling for IPv6 [Cisco IOS Software Releases 12.4 Mainline] - Cisco Systems

Sidenote: It took my a while to understand that NAT is not for security.

bertieb

Everyones been on about IPv6 today. My twitter feeds are full of it, the news is full of it, my colleagues have been talking about it...........

This is all well and good, but what is IP?

demonfurbie

it_consultant wrote: »

That will just be too complex. You will have to configure your router or firewall for teredo so 6to4 or whatever and that will just be a serious pain. All modern OS distros support IPv6 natively, the only thing holding us back is ourselves and our fear of learning a new addressing scheme.

and all the old hardware

we still have stuff we use at work that is dos based

Asif Dasl

It's easier to configure 1 router or firewall with IPv6 than convert every server, workstation etc. to IPv6.

vinbuck

MississippiGuardsman wrote: »

I put a router on a free Hurricane Electric tunnel just so I could ping this....

router#ping 2620:0:1cfe:face:b00c::3 rep 10000

Type escape sequence to abort.
Sending 10000, 100-byte ICMP Echos to 2620:0:1CFE:FACE:B00C::3, timeout is 2 seconds:
!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!
!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!
!!
Success rate is 100 percent (142/142), round-trip min/avg/max = 128/130/136 ms

...still working on getting it rigged to browse

Finally got everything going and i am now browsing www.v6.facebook.com over v6 wifi. Using DD-WRT on a Cisco/Linksys E1000 and a Hurricane Electric tunnel. Using radvd to issue IPv6 addresses to my wifi clients.

it_consultant

Asif Dasl wrote: »

It's easier to configure 1 router or firewall with IPv6 than convert every server, workstation etc. to IPv6.

Thats not really true, turning ON ipv6 does not mean you turn OFF ipv4. I assume you would run a dual stack for a period of time. Windows network supports this configuration and you could maintain connectivity to your legacy devices using this method. Assuming your workstations are DHCP and have IPv4 the principle of IPv6 and stateless autoconfiguration suggests that converting workstations to IPv6 would be as simple as enabling your router to answer IPv6 network discovery requests.

Asif Dasl

it_consultant wrote: »

Thats not really true, turning ON ipv6 does not mean you turn OFF ipv4. I assume you would run a dual stack for a period of time. Windows network supports this configuration and you could maintain connectivity to your legacy devices using this method. Assuming your workstations are DHCP and have IPv4 the principle of IPv6 and stateless autoconfiguration suggests that converting workstations to IPv6 would be as simple as enabling your router to answer IPv6 network discovery requests.

I'll admit my dealings with IPv6 are very minimal (what was covered in the Windows 7 book) but I can't see consumer grade hardware offering DHCPv6 to configure devices. It would make sense to keep simplier IPv4 for internal networks and to use IPv6 externally. I'd love to know how they handle it in Asia, seen as they are mostly IPv6 already...

ConstantlyLearning

Asif Dasl wrote: »

I feel it will be the exact opposite. IPv4 internal private IPs and using IPv6 externally.

Yeah, i'd say so alright, for organisations that are migrating anyway.

it_consultant

Asif Dasl wrote: »

I'll admit my dealings with IPv6 are very minimal (what was covered in the Windows 7 book) but I can't see consumer grade hardware offering DHCPv6 to configure devices. It would make sense to keep simplier IPv4 for internal networks and to use IPv6 externally. I'd love to know how they handle it in Asia, seen as they are mostly IPv6 already...

They wouldn't offer DHCPv6 necessarily, they just have to be able to respond to IPV6 network discovery requests, then the clients configure themselves. I would be very surprised if home networks werent the first to move. Take mine for example, my DSL modem and wifi access point are provided by Qwest (now Century Link), they could change the firmware on CPE and my computers would use IPv6 without me even noticing. I am not sure how my android would handle it though...

demonfurbie

here at work they have already stated they will not change due to cost they will just use a ip6 to ip4 bridge when the internet does switch over

it_consultant

demonfurbie wrote: »

here at work they have already stated they will not change due to cost they will just use a ip6 to ip4 bridge when the internet does switch over

Those costs are what, exactly?

demonfurbie

it_consultant wrote: »

Those costs are what, exactly?

new network ... we still use token ring terms

unless i can get ip6 on a ibm token ring ... hummmm

it_consultant

demonfurbie wrote: »

new network ... we still use token ring terms

unless i can get ip6 on a ibm token ring ... hummmm

Holy...crap...

demonfurbie

it_consultant wrote: »

Holy...crap...

yea it hurts some times ... but then again no blue screens of death every thing is green

MrRyte

it_consultant wrote: »

My understanding is that backbone routing will become significantly simpler while the number of addresses is astronomically higher.....

Astronomically higher as in about 340 trillion, trillion, trillion addresses.....
The TCP/IP Guide - IPv6 Address Size and Address Space

And when combined with NAT-oh boy....