# The official TPU IPv6 thread



## qubit (Feb 18, 2011)

*IPv6 is coming very soon now, so post all your IPv6 news, talk, tips and problems here!*

EDIT: This site has definitive info on IPv6: *www.ipv6.com* The name isn't all that surprising, huh? 

Here's another one: *http://ipv6.net*

And finally, the Microsoft angle: *http://technet.microsoft.com/en-us/network/bb530961*

Amazing what 10 seconds on google brings up. 

ANOTHER EDIT:

I think the following info is so useful, that I lifted it from a later post I made and then deleted the post.







Thinkbroadband has some useful info on IPv6. Here's the best bits:

*IPv6 test sites*

These are unreacheable on your standard IPv4 connection. An odd feeling, knowing they're there! If anyone can browse them let us know.

http://ipv6.google.com/
http://www.v6.facebook.com/
http://www.thinkbroadband.com/
http://ipv6-speedtest.net

*Does my ISP support IPv6?*

These British ISPs do at the moment (19FEB11). Note how the biggest one, BT, is absent:

AAISP
clara.net
Entanet
Exa Networks
IDNet

Get the rest of the Thinkbroadband goodies here.


----------



## W1zzard (Feb 18, 2011)

ipv6 has been here for ages, don't expect any changes soon that will affect you


----------



## qubit (Feb 18, 2011)

Actually yes of course, since 1995. I just meant with IPv4 addresses running out now, it's use is finally gonna start ramping up.

My ISP  is fully IPv6 capable and can give me an IPv6 address any time I want.

I wonder if there are any standard consumer routers that support it yet?


----------



## scooper22 (Feb 18, 2011)

IPv4 walks into a bar...

_An IPv4 address space walks into a bar: "A strong CIDR please. I'm exhausted."_


----------



## scooper22 (Feb 18, 2011)

scooper22 said:


> IPv4 walks into a bar...
> 
> _An IPv4 address space walks into a bar: "A strong CIDR please. I'm exhausted."_



IPv6 walks into a bar...

_IPv6 walks into a bar, ordered something to drink, but nobody understood him._


SCNR


----------



## scooper22 (Feb 18, 2011)

Also, 
1. the IPv4 adresses have been registered, this does not mean all registered addresses are in use yet
2. having run out of IPv4 does not mean IPv6 is coming, just that NAT is going to become more ofted used. Be prepared to shed extra $ for a unique IP

Or look more CSI *facepalm*


----------



## qubit (Feb 18, 2011)

Great posts scooper, especially the first one. 

Perhaps we should call this the IPv6 joke thread!


----------



## m4gicfour (Feb 19, 2011)

I can reach those sites, but it may not be my ISP.

My router, Netgear WNR3500L
 supports IPv6 over IPv4 tunnel. Meaning the router's LAN address and any IPv6 capable computers attached to it get assigned an IPV6 addresss, and then the router auto-detects what the ISP supports and deals accordingly.

My ISP, SaskTel, does not appear to support IPV6 on the client side, at least (the router can only get an IPv4 address from the ISP, and displays "connection type: 6to4 tunnel. Router's IPv6 address on WAN: Not Available.)

I can deal with SaskTel's little quirks because they don't cap bandwidth. At all.

I bought this router with the intention of flashing DD-WRT because it supports open-source firmwares out-of-the box and I was tired of the 2wire unit the ISP provided as a modem/router overheating and overloading but haven't gotten around to installing DDWRT since the router is working so well on stock. (they actually advertise the WNR3500L as being Open-source compatible. For anyone wanting to buy it, note: needs to be the WNR3500*L*. The WNR3500 is not, to my knowledge, meant to be used with third-party firmwares.)


EDIT:
ipv6-speedtest.net detects that I'm on IPv4, and tells me so. The other sites just connect like there was no difference.


----------



## Aceman.au (Feb 20, 2011)

Australia is on its last batch of 1Pv4 address I heard.

IPv6 will bring something like 3 trillion more?


----------



## Mussels (Feb 20, 2011)

l33tGaMeR said:


> Australia is on its last batch of 1Pv4 address I heard.
> 
> IPv6 will bring something like 3 trillion more?



not quite, australian ISP's simply bought out the last IPv4 batches there was available. so we got more leftover than you


----------



## Aceman.au (Feb 20, 2011)

Mussels said:


> not quite, australian ISP's simply bought out the last IPv4 batches there was available. so we got more leftover than you



Hey Im from Shepparton, Vic mate I got told this in a TAFE course


----------



## Mussels (Feb 20, 2011)

l33tGaMeR said:


> Hey Im from Shepparton, Vic mate I got told this in a TAFE course



ya know, i shoulda checked where you are.


aus bought up the last IPv4 addresses available, way more than we actually need. just another step by telstra to make sure they dont have to do any real upgrades for a few more years.


----------



## Aceman.au (Feb 20, 2011)

Mussels said:


> ya know, i shoulda checked where you are.
> 
> 
> aus bought up the last IPv4 addresses available, way more than we actually need. just another step by telstra to make sure they dont have to do any real upgrades for a few more years.



Telstra... What a bunch of idiots. Anything to save money.


----------



## Aceman.au (Feb 20, 2011)

Hey my Win 7 says that Im IPv6 capable, is it my router or just my PC with the necessary software??


----------



## Hayder_Master (Feb 20, 2011)

after discover the "NAT" IP v4 will hold longer than expect


----------



## Mussels (Feb 20, 2011)

l33tGaMeR said:


> Hey my Win 7 says that Im IPv6 capable, is it my router or just my PC with the necessary software??



that just means your OS is. you need OS, LAN and WAN to be IPv6.

(your PC, your router, your ISP)


----------



## Aceman.au (Feb 20, 2011)

Ah kk


----------



## Black Panther (Feb 20, 2011)

Mussels said:


> (your PC, your *router*, your ISP)



How can I check whether my router is up to it?
It seems to show nothing on the specs..


----------



## Mussels (Feb 20, 2011)

Black Panther said:


> How can I check whether my router is up to it?
> It seems to show nothing on the specs..



then its probably not compatible.


its not a huge deal really, dont forget about NAT and IP tunneling.

say, google could have one IPv4 site as a tunnel for all its websites on IPv6 - yes, in the future that may well be slower than native IPv6 but you WONT lose connectivity to websites, just because you're on one side or another.


----------



## 95Viper (Feb 20, 2011)

Tech giants to enable IPv6 on "World IPv6 Day" in June

World IPv6 Day
"This is a 24 hour event June 8, 2011, from 0000 to 2359 UTC."

Test your IPv6 Readinesss! <click to test with Internet Explorer, Firefox, Safari, or Chrome and other browsers(most should work)


Edit: Couple of interesting sites.

The NSA's take on router security.
Router Security Configuration Guide Supplement - Security for IPv6 Routers

Microsoft's take on Home routers.
IPv6 Support in Home Routers


----------



## Hybrid_theory (May 27, 2011)

I was at an IPv6 summit at a university which had several talks from different companies.

One of the important things mentioned was to only use tunneling, NAT or Dual stack as a temporary solution. The idea is to get rid of NAT and have public IPv6 addresses for all your machines. Ill admit it sounds kinda scary to have my machine IP internet wide, but I suppose it still goes through your router/firewall.


----------



## Mussels (May 28, 2011)

Hybrid_theory said:


> I was at an IPv6 summit at a university which had several talks from different companies.
> 
> One of the important things mentioned was to only use tunneling, NAT or Dual stack as a temporary solution. The idea is to get rid of NAT and have public IPv6 addresses for all your machines. Ill admit it sounds kinda scary to have my machine IP internet wide, but I suppose it still goes through your router/firewall.



it takes us back to the modem days, where port forwards werent needed.


i can see the advantages for businesses and whatnot, but i dont really want/need it for mysef. i'd likely stick with one IP and NAT (ISP's will probably charge per unique WAN IP anyway)


----------



## FordGT90Concept (May 28, 2011)

I can't see that ever taking hold namely because of the costs to ISPs.  Instead of issuing customers a single IP per modem/gateway, they would have to issue one per device.  It's pretty obvious how that can be used to screw customers.

Not to mention, wireless.  I doubt NAT is going anywhere simply because no one wants to give ISPs anymore power than they already have.


Very, very few ISPs in North America are IPv6 anyway.


----------



## Mussels (May 28, 2011)

FordGT90Concept said:


> I can't see that ever taking hold namely because of the costs to ISPs.  Instead of issuing customers a single IP per modem/gateway, they would have to issue one per device.  It's pretty obvious how that can be used to screw customers.
> 
> Not to mention, wireless.  I doubt NAT is going anywhere simply because no one wants to give ISPs anymore power than they already have.
> 
> ...



i think part of it might be related to 3G (and whatever comes after it) devices - being behind NAT can screw them over for various applications such as VOIP, so unique IP's makes sense there.


the way i see it however, the more devices move over to IPV6, the more v4 IP's open up for legacy devices anyway. the transition will be slow.


----------



## FordGT90Concept (May 28, 2011)

Yeah, cellphones, smartphones, etc. are going to keep their own IP address because, think about it, they essentially are Internet gateways.  I'm talking businesses and homes where there are multiple stationary computers.  Although I could see laptops getting their own IP address with an ISP if wireless WANs improve to a point where there's no need to log into a WLAN.


The infrastructure has to be updated before devices can.  For example, TV stations had to be broadcasting in digital before it made sense for consumers to buy digital televisions.  Likewise, it doesn't make sense to buy IPv6 devices when most routers nor ISPs support it.  Someone, somewhere with a lot of influence is going to have to make the push.  So far, it hasn't happened.


----------



## Mussels (May 28, 2011)

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 (May 28, 2011)

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 (May 28, 2011)

qubit said:


> 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 (May 28, 2011)

qubit said:


> 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
> ...



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 (May 29, 2011)

Hybrid_theory said:


> 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.
> 
> ...



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 (May 29, 2011)

Mussels said:


> 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 (Jun 3, 2011)

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

http://www.worldipv6day.org/


----------



## qubit (Jun 5, 2011)

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


----------



## Easy Rhino (Jun 6, 2011)

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 (Jun 6, 2011)

Easy Rhino said:


> 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.
> 
> ...



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


----------



## qubit (Jun 6, 2011)

Easy Rhino said:


> 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.
> 
> ...



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 (Jun 6, 2011)

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 (Jun 6, 2011)

blu3flannel said:


> 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 (Jun 6, 2011)

blu3flannel said:


> 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 (Jun 6, 2011)

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


----------



## remixedcat (Jun 6, 2011)

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


----------



## Mussels (Jun 6, 2011)

remixedcat said:


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



why? IPv6 wont matter to you.


----------



## qubit (Jun 6, 2011)

remixedcat said:


> 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 (Jun 6, 2011)

remixedcat said:


> 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 (Jun 6, 2011)

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


----------



## Easy Rhino (Jun 6, 2011)

remixedcat said:


> 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 (Jun 6, 2011)

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


----------



## Mussels (Jun 6, 2011)

remixedcat said:


> 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 (Jun 8, 2011)

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 (Jun 8, 2011)

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/


----------



## qubit (Jun 8, 2011)

Easy Rhino said:


> most ISPs havnt bothered with IPv6 yet. i have verizon, one of the USA's largest providers and i get
> 
> 
> 
> from this test http://test-ipv6.com/



That's a shame, Easy. The less these companies drag their feet the better.

My ISP, www.aaisp.net.uk has this fully implemented and I can have an IPv6 address if I want.


----------



## Easy Rhino (Jun 8, 2011)

yea, not sure why they are dragging their feet. i wonder if comcast or any of the larger ISPs in the US are ready.


----------



## qubit (Jun 8, 2011)

Looking on their website might tell you (it does mine) but I wouldn't consider it gospel.


----------



## Easy Rhino (Jun 8, 2011)

ahhh now i see. NEW YORK – June 7, 2011 –

Today Verizon helps the industry mark an important Internet milestone by participating in the World IPv6 Day.

People around the world have been eagerly waiting to try the new Internet addressing system, which is called Internet Protocol version 6, or IPv6. Verizon is expecting that many users will take advantage of the Internet Society's (ISOC) World IPv6 Day "test flight," which begins today at 8 p.m. ET (0000 Universal Coordinated Time).  The company has made preparations to handle the increased traffic and to answer customers' questions.

edit: doesnt work for me. 



> During the 24-hour test period, users with IPv6 connectivity to the Internet will be able to connect to two IPv6-enabled Verizon websites, http://ipv6.verizonbusiness.com and http://wwwv6.verizon.com/fiostvv6/web/. Users also can connect to the ISOC test site at http://test-ipv6.com/ to test their IPv6 hardware, software and operating systems.



can anyone see those ipv6 test sites?


----------



## El_Mayo (Jun 8, 2011)

scooper22 said:


> IPv4 walks into a bar...
> 
> _An IPv4 address space walks into a bar: "A strong CIDR please. I'm exhausted."_



I don't get it


----------



## qubit (Jun 8, 2011)

*IPv6 day is more than just larger internet addresses, says Verisign*

Here's one for you, Easy. 



> TODAY IS THE DAY that the internet community has to stop running away from IPv6, with some of the largest websites and content distribution networks switching over to IPv6 for 24 hours.
> 
> IPv6 day is an initiative sponsored by outfits such as Akamai, Bing, Facebook, Google, Limelight Networks, Yahoo and many others to push IPv6 into the view of their customers. It's been a long time coming, and one of the firms involved, Verisign, claims that companies have to do much more than just ask their local regional internet registry (RIR) for a set of IPv6 addresses.
> 
> Verisign, known primarily as the registry that handles the .com and .net top-level domains, also works with its clientele in the areas of network security and high availability services. It told The INQUIRER that since hearing of IANA's final allocation of IPv4 addresses to RIRs, its customers have shown more interest in IPv6.



The Inquirer


----------

