New on LowEndTalk? Please Register and read our Community Rules.
All new Registrations are manually reviewed and approved, so a short delay after registration may occur before your account becomes active.
All new Registrations are manually reviewed and approved, so a short delay after registration may occur before your account becomes active.
Comments
huh? Your ISP can already hijack a specific /32 (or /128), it's as simple as just assigning it on your L2 port - This is neither special nor different in the end.
@kerouac the censorship about you talking is because of default (none) DNS settings in your modem/router. Change the default DNS = issue solved.
As @William already said the provider could easily hijack Ip addresses.
check above
@William
1. Can they spoof one single IP?
2. Can they do this easily to the whole country, or just attack a single LAN network and do it there, etc?
no reaction on IPv6 addresses, it seems to me no one is bothered, even the world is short for IPv4s
@kerouac I have not written an RFC proposal for it so I don't know
but generally speaking that would not be the primary concern or even a consideration to anyone proposing an RFC and no doubt what ever was implemented would be worked arounf for those sorts of things anyway.
Kinda hoping for some proof on this (EG: major news outlet, RFC, other?)
el Día de los Santos Inocentes
Seeing as this is probably a hoax, if this were true, how would it work? As in how would it look compared to the normal IPv4 (127.0.0.1)? Would there be an extra digit, or would it allow for letters to be added too?
The secret meeting part killed every single probability of it being true. Looks like a rant turned into a hopefully triggering fairy tail.
It has been done before: claiming something in media, that way broadcasting the idea and actually triggering people to implement it because they think it's official.
I don't recall what the number is, there was an RFC proposed several years ago for this, but RFC does not equal adoption.
Completely agreed.
This "we'll run out of IPs very soon" thingy reminds me of the Y2K bug. Quite a lot of companies and people made a big buck out of spreading fear among the non-initiated.
.
Those still having large IP blocks won't have to fight to give away what they don't use, as most of them are IPv6 ready or close to full implementation.
The major problems to solve in the coming years are in the ISPs with large end user base, as they need to run both stacks IP4 and IP6 simultaneously for the longer future; they will be the last switch before killing off ip4. No wonder why it's precisely where we see the biggest resistance to ip6 implementation.
The organizations who still have big IP4 blocks are for the most part able to run IP6 only, and just use IP4 addresses in their public internet facing systems. Releasing the IPs they don't use has usually been very straight forward.
I call this BS
Maybe if we ask Ford really nicely they'll give us some of their /8.
Dont call it BS, it is called "April Fools Day"
But 6 months after IPv4S is released, IANA will just come out with IPv5, now with more screen space! Then IPv5S 6 months later. Now with
NSA survaliance built inA fingerprint reader!it wasnt fools day?? the dec 28
page:
sábado, 28 de diciembre de 2013
IPv6, no te vistas que no vas. Ahora IPv4S
They definitely use at least some of the /8, even though it may not be publicly announced. Why would they give it up? It is valuable. They could sell it if they didn't want to hold on to it.
Stanford University previously had 36.0.0.0/8 but they gave it up to help with the IPv4 depletion so no reason why Ford wouldn't do the same if they were pressured into doing so.
I don't expect them to do anything for free but I would not be surprised if they act (by giving it up) in exchange for the good pr. Problem is that pr opportunity will only exist at the precipice of true depletion.
THIS ARTICLE WAS A JOKE
December 28th is the Spanish Equivalent of April Fools Day, el Día de los Santos Inocentes. The article in question was posted on December 28th, 2013. Looking through the article, there are several items that suggest that it's a hoax/joke article. For example,
Clearly not 100% true.
Non-profit organization. Big difference. No profit motive.
Ford interfaces with thousands of suppliers. Those suppliers probably already use RFC-1918 space, so could make interfacing with those networks more challenging. Could involve rewriting software, network redesigns, etc. Why would they spend the money on this for a little bit of PR?
So does the US Postal Service really own a /8?
And that'd be the first time the USPS returns profit.
IPv6 switch over can happen in less than few weeks if all the major sites like wikipedia, go dark for a day like how they did it for sopa.
I think it is the responsibility of all the big services out there to push for ipv6 but then there are entire infrastructures based on ipv4 scarcity like google's ranking, email, etc, last I heard google was not delivering email to ipv6 only domain.
We should push big organizations to unanimously switch to ipv6 (or at least show a message when browsing from ipv4 asking to switch to ipv6), this is like removing a band aid but all other ways may take a decade or so....
I hate paying for ipv4..... I know these $10-20 plans/year will drop to 2 or 3 bucks if there was only ipv6 and no ipv4 monopoly.
@raza19 I see your point but that would cost so much money it is insane, it would near enough break the internet
think of the hundreds of thousands of pieces of hardware that would have to be replaced.
Perhaps a ransom day each year would not hurt though to build awareness, e.g. minimum 10% additional adoption per year or facebook/google/wiki etc etc etc go dark for 24 hours
VPS in Asia cost 40$ with Ipv4 (LEB Price) and 20$ without Ipv4 and Ipv6 only.
So it would be 50% cheaper.
The only person I know who has actually done anything about this ipv4 shortage while turning it into an awesome service is you in the form of your lowendspirit brand:) I seriously respect you for that in fact I salute you.
A large scale haproxy service bundled with 10gig or more ports sold to vps providers with a NAT IPv4 implementation could do wonders in reducing costs. I have over 20 vps and I only need ipv4s at 3 or 4 locations, most of the time I can manage with a shared ipv4! You Anthony are in a position to create a masterpiece
I seriously would like to see vps providers offering ALL plans with and without ipv4 (including nat ipv4)
I was talking about Ford?
You have no idea how unprepared the majority of the Internet is for IPv6. It's years, not weeks.
I think you missed this:
--
@Skybucks100 - To answer your question, it appears so.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_assigned_/8_IPv4_address_blocks