Will Anantech support IPv6?

[imported_Gatak]

As IPv6 is becoming more and more accepted I think that Anandtech should be in the foremost front and also support IPv6.

If your ISP/webhotel does not support IPv6 natively you can sign up for a IPv6-on-IPv4 tunnel freely with many of the available "tunnel brokers".

here is a few:

http://www.sixxs.net
http://ipv6tb.he.net
https://tb.ipv6.btexact.com
http://www.freenet6.net

There are plenty on google. Also join #ipv6 on irc.freenode.net or on irc.ipv6.freenode.net (very good source of information and help to setup)

I also suggest that everyone else also get themselfs a IPv6 connection. =) It is easy and will allow you to have millions of IP addresses on your own!

Windows XP, 2003, *BSD and Linux support IPv6 natively.
Windows 2000 need a recent service pack and a "Advanced networking" patch which is available freely from Microsoft.

 

[InlineFive]

1. Anandtech doesn't need millions of IP address. They only have a couple servers.
2. You probably have something to do with all of those "brokers".
3. So long...

 

[n0cmonkey]

Definitely a spammish first post.

 

[imported_Gatak]

Originally posted by: PorBleemo
1. Anandtech doesn't need millions of IP address. They only have a couple servers.
2. You probably have something to do with all of those "brokers".
3. So long...

1. True. The multitude of IP addresses weren't the reason in the first place.
2. No, not at all. I am just a user. Why do you have to be rude?
3. .. Ok.

 

[n0cmonkey]

I don't think ipv6 really matters to Anandtech. The site is more geared towards gaming enthusiasts.

I only know of one site that was on ipv6 that I visitted, but it's gone now. Not sure if the new one is on it or not.

 

[sharq]

From what I know IPv6 still is a ways off. It's getting alot of attention, but there is a while (my guess would be more than 5 years) before it starts becoming an issue.

 

[imported_Gatak]

Just so you know the ICANN has already accepted IPv6 to some of the root servers. Some top level domain servers has too (like .de). the university networks in many areas for example the Swedish SuNET and Finnish FiNET has already IPv6 incorporated in their nets.

You say "issue", but I'd rather be pioneering and supporting of new technologies.

 

[JackMDS]

Originally posted by: Gatak
As IPv6 is becoming more and more accepted I think that Anandtech should be in the foremost front and also support IPv6.

I want IPv6. but tell me what I can do with it.:shocked:

 

[imported_Gatak]

I want IPv6. but tell me what I can do with it.:shocked:

Surf the net =)

For example, because of the many IP addresses (2^128) you will not ever have a problem with NAT etc because each machine - and even application, if you like, can have their own IP.

 

[alexXx]

that's it? the only thing that it offers is the increase in the number of ip addresses available..

 

[spidey07]

Originally posted by: alexXx
that's it? the only thing that it offers is the increase in the number of ip addresses available..

nah, it offers a lot more.

But for now we just don't need it. we're making IPv4 do what we want it to do.

 

[nightowl]

Yep, exactly as Spidey said. Advances in technology has mitigated the need to migrate to IPv6. There is a multitide of addresses that are being wasted right now that could be put to better use.

 

[Nothinman]

For example, because of the many IP addresses (2^128) you will not ever have a problem with NAT etc because each machine - and even application, if you like, can have their own IP.

Which opens security issues that NAT already takes care of. Why would i want every PC in my organization to have a public IP address?

 

[stash]

^^
Couldn't agree more. It's hard enough time getting home users to get their machines somewhat secure behind a NAT device. Why would we want to go back to having those machines directly on the Internet?

 

[imported_Gatak]

Even though people could have external IPs directly on thier LAN it is still possible to run a firewall on each machine (everyone ought to) and also on the router!

Other benefits iwth IPv6 is mobile IP (allows you to keep the same IP even if you move around), IPsec etc. It also has multicast.

IPv6 doesn't have the problem with open broadcast networks etc.

 

[InlineFive]

Originally posted by: Gatak
Even though people could have external IPs directly on thier LAN it is still possible to run a firewall on each machine (everyone ought to) and also on the router!

Other benefits iwth IPv6 is mobile IP (allows you to keep the same IP even if you move around), IPsec etc. It also has multicast.

IPv6 doesn't have the problem with open broadcast networks etc.

Yes but for large business' it's much easier to have one centralized location.

 

[spidey07]

Originally posted by: Gatak
Even though people could have external IPs directly on thier LAN it is still possible to run a firewall on each machine (everyone ought to) and also on the router!

Other benefits iwth IPv6 is mobile IP (allows you to keep the same IP even if you move around), IPsec etc. It also has multicast.

IPv6 doesn't have the problem with open broadcast networks etc.

everything you've described is availible for IP4

 

[imported_Gatak]

Indeed most of IPv6 features do exist in IPv4. Management wise, IPv6 is a little simplier even for large networks.

The firewalling isn't any more difficulet or have to be de-centralized either.

In any case. IPv6 is what will be and as a tech site I think anandtech.com should support it. The more people supporting IPv6 the faster it will be adopted.

 

[Nothinman]

Even though people could have external IPs directly on thier LAN it is still possible to run a firewall on each machine (everyone ought to) and also on the router!

We don't run firewall's on each machine because we don't need to now and I wouldn't want the extra work either. There is no good reason for every machine to have a public IP where I work, all it would do is cause headaches and increase the alerts on our IDS boxes.

 

[imported_Gatak]

Then do not run external IPs on the internal boxes. Use local IPs instead =)

 

[Nothinman]

But then what incentive is there for IPv6? We've already got all the infrastructure we need for IPv4 to be easily managed and work well.

 

[Kilrsat]

Originally posted by: Nothinman

Even though people could have external IPs directly on thier LAN it is still possible to run a firewall on each machine (everyone ought to) and also on the router!

We don't run firewall's on each machine because we don't need to now and I wouldn't want the extra work either. There is no good reason for every machine to have a public IP where I work, all it would do is cause headaches and increase the alerts on our IDS boxes.

You can still give all machines external IPs and have them behind a single firewall. We do this with our NetScreen NS50 firewall, works quite nicely.

 

[imported_Gatak]

I suppose if you have that view we could stick with paper and pen and fax "because if works". After all IPv4 is nearly 20 years old.

You say easilly managed. I doub't most home users think their IPv6 NAT boxes are easilly managed to get things like GnomeMeeting, MSN, BitTorrent, Streaming video, IPsec, etc etc to work. Ever been in a BitTorrent forum? The most common problem is NAT errors.

Some info on IPv6:

http://www.linuxreviews.net/features/ipv6/
http://www.ipv6.org/other-sites.html

 

[imported_Gatak]

No matter if you have internal IPs or not you should still have firewalls on each machine to prevent internal problems (for example virusen) and security risks. That would have nothing to do if you run IPv6 or IPv4

 

[JackMDS]

Hmm. So IPv6 is dangerous because I do not need a NAT?