The official TPU IPv6 thread

[Mussels]

i think we got lucky with that here, they're starting to roll out a large australia wide fiber network - perfect time to upgrade along the way to IPv6. that way as people migrate across, they also migrate to IPv6

 

[qubit]

I don't think that getting rid of NAT and having every device individually visible on the internet is good for the home user and here's why:

- No natural hacker protection from NAT. Even one computer benefits from this
- Much greater attack surface for hackers. Where they previously had one IP address to attack, they now have many, all belonging to you
- Easier for the RIAA/MPAA/Big Content to attack you with lawsuits over bogus losses from file sharing. The usual and reasonable defence argument is that an IP address doesn't identify an individual user and can be spoofed, which does help in court. However, with so many IP addresses all pointing to your account, it makes this defence much weaker

For these reasons, when IPv6 becomes standard, I aim to be running NAT and an IPv4 network at home, with translation between the two protocols in my gateway (the router). Hopefully, it won't significantly impact performance.

 

[Mussels]

For these reasons, when IPv6 becomes standard, I aim to be running NAT and an IPv4 network at home, with translation between the two protocols in my gateway (the router). Hopefully, it won't significantly impact performance.

it might delay DNS lookups and such, but i really doubt there will be any significant delay.

 

[Hybrid_theory]

I don't think that getting rid of NAT and having every device individually visible on the internet is good for the home user and here's why:

- No natural hacker protection from NAT. Even one computer benefits from this
- Much greater attack surface for hackers. Where they previously had one IP address to attack, they now have many, all belonging to you
- Easier for the RIAA/MPAA/Big Content to attack you with lawsuits over bogus losses from file sharing. The usual and reasonable defence argument is that an IP address doesn't identify an individual user and can be spoofed, which does help in court. However, with so many IP addresses all pointing to your account, it makes this defence much weaker

For these reasons, when IPv6 becomes standard, I aim to be running NAT and an IPv4 network at home, with translation between the two protocols in my gateway (the router). Hopefully, it won't significantly impact performance.

NAT truly provides minimal security at best. With many to one it just sort of hides what local IP your using. But any good hacker can get around that. The real key is just to keep as many ports closed as you can and be careful about what websites you browse at.

While you may have many IP addresses youre still likely going through a router of some sort, which has a firewall, which means one protected entrance for the hacker to try and get through.

Last point, well do what you wish with the internet. If you pirate with just one of your machines, no difference. If you pirate with all of them, yea that defense wont work. I cant say I read into the cases of where people get charged and goto court. But I would assume they would have to find the files somewhere to actually prove that person "stole" their data.

But yeah NAT does sound like a good way to stay for home users just because ISPs could very well gouge if you want your own network of addresses. Could just be an issue in the future if new applications no longer support it.

 

[Mussels]

NAT truly provides minimal security at best. With many to one it just sort of hides what local IP your using. But any good hacker can get around that. The real key is just to keep as many ports closed as you can and be careful about what websites you browse at.

While you may have many IP addresses youre still likely going through a router of some sort, which has a firewall, which means one protected entrance for the hacker to try and get through.

Last point, well do what you wish with the internet. If you pirate with just one of your machines, no difference. If you pirate with all of them, yea that defense wont work. I cant say I read into the cases of where people get charged and goto court. But I would assume they would have to find the files somewhere to actually prove that person "stole" their data.

But yeah NAT does sound like a good way to stay for home users just because ISPs could very well gouge if you want your own network of addresses. Could just be an issue in the future if new applications no longer support it.

NAT blocks the ports, its a great hardware firewall. that is its key. If you dont have port forwards or a port opened up by Upnp, then worms/random hack attempts cant get in to you.

 

[Hybrid_theory]

NAT blocks the ports, its a great hardware firewall. that is its key. If you dont have port forwards or a port opened up by Upnp, then worms/random hack attempts cant get in to you.

Its not NAT that blocks the ports. It's the firewall. It looks at the traffic and permits or denies it based on a set of rules defined on the device. In the case of home routers it is typically deny all incoming, allow all outgoing. When you forward a port over NAT, it is saying to NAT that any incoming traffic on that port to forward to that specific machine on your network. This also creates an allow rule for that traffic.

 

[Easy Rhino]

hey guys, 5 days until IPV6 day!! check it out!

http://www.worldipv6day.org/

 

[qubit]

Here's an easy to read article on IPv6: www.reghardware.com/2011/05/10/wtf_is_ipv6/

 

[Easy Rhino]

since ipv6 is 128bit it supports 2^128 amount of ip addresses. thats 3.4x10^38 or

340,282,366,920,938,000, 000,000,000,000,000, 000,000 ip addresses.

think of it this way...the earth's surface in square centimeters is 5.0970966 x 10^18

so you can fit seveal dozen ip addresses inside every square centimere of the earth's surface. i think that will hold us over for awhile!

 

[Hybrid_theory]

since ipv6 is 128bit it supports 2^128 amount of ip addresses. thats 3.4x10^38 or

340,282,366,920,938,000, 000,000,000,000,000, 000,000 ip addresses.

think of it this way...the earth's surface in square centimeters is 5.0970966 x 10^18

so you can fit seveal dozen ip addresses inside every square centimere of the earth's surface. i think that will hold us over for awhile!

several? hot damn. i remember a teacher telling me one per square inch. of course those are usually random estimates

 

[qubit]

since ipv6 is 128bit it supports 2^128 amount of ip addresses. thats 3.4x10^38 or

340,282,366,920,938,000, 000,000,000,000,000, 000,000 ip addresses.

think of it this way...the earth's surface in square centimeters is 5.0970966 x 10^18

so you can fit seveal dozen ip addresses inside every square centimere of the earth's surface. i think that will hold us over for awhile!

It would actually be a damn site more than that.

Using your figures, we can work out the basic order of magnitude. Dividing the square centimeters into the IP addresses, you subtract the powers, so 38-18 = 20.

So, that's on the order of 1x10^20 IP address per square centimeter! Astronomically huge.

 

[blu3flannel]

Would one have to convert their network to IPv6 by upgrading the router firmware or purchasing a new, IPv6-compatible one? I have a WRT54G and was just wondering what the procedure would be.

 

[qubit]

Would one have to convert their network to IPv6 by upgrading the router firmware or purchasing a new, IPv6-compatible one? I have a WRT54G and was just wondering what the procedure would be.

Depends on the support the manufacturer provides. If they don't supply a firmware update, then you'll have to buy a new router.

 

[Hybrid_theory]

Would one have to convert their network to IPv6 by upgrading the router firmware or purchasing a new, IPv6-compatible one? I have a WRT54G and was just wondering what the procedure would be.

pretty sure custom firmwares support it. ddwrt and such

 

[Mussels]

not that home users need to upgrade, not like you're running out of IP addies in your LAN.

 

[remixedcat]

damn Imma haveta get a new router mine don't support DDWRT

 

[Mussels]

damn Imma haveta get a new router mine don't support DDWRT

why? IPv6 wont matter to you.

 

[qubit]

damn Imma haveta get a new router mine don't support DDWRT

You sound like an enthusiast so you may be interested in these two roll-your-own firewalls that install on a PC and take it over completely. Both are based on Linux and are completely free:

www.ipcop.org

www.astaro.com

Astaro is a commercial paid for product, that comes on dedicated hardware and is very expensive. However, there's a couple of free versions that run on a PC. Get the home use one, which has the least features cut out.

 

[Easy Rhino]

damn Imma haveta get a new router mine don't support DDWRT

no. does your isp provide you with a router? if so it may be ipv6 compliant. if not, when they switch (which wont be for a long time) then they will send you a router than can handle ipv6. for lan stuff you dont need ipv6.

 

[remixedcat]

no the isp didn't give it to me it's an old netgear.

 

[Easy Rhino]

no the isp didn't give it to me it's an old netgear.

meh, you wont have to buy a new one for a while anyway. your isp may not even change over for years.

 

[remixedcat]

awww ok well I kinda new that but thanks a lot!!!!

 

[Mussels]

awww ok well I kinda new that but thanks a lot!!!!

dont bother upgrading unless your router cant keep up with your net connections speed, you want newer wifi security (EG, your old one can only do WEP) or you need newer wifi standards (EG, wifi N 300)


the changeover to IPv6 is going to be very, very slow - and you could always just use an ipv6 capable modem before your current router in the event your ISP switches over completely anyway (which is very unlikely and they'd give tons of warning)

 

[qubit]

It's finally here: It's world IPv6 day today!

www.worldipv6day.org

Access sites like Google, Facebook, Yahoo!, Akamai and Limelight Networks using IPv6.

 

[Easy Rhino]

most ISPs havnt bothered with IPv6 yet. i have verizon, one of the USA's largest providers and i get

Your IPv6 connection appears to be using Teredo, a type of IPv4/IPv6 gateway; currently it connects only to direct IP's. Your browser will not be able to go to IPv6 sites by name. This means the current configuration is not useful for browsing IPv6 web sites.

from this test http://test-ipv6.com/