IPv6

Oct. 2nd, 2006 06:31 pm
jbailey: (Default)
[personal profile] jbailey
Slashdot had a post this evening about the update to the O'Reilly IPv6 book.

I took a scan of the comments, and got the usual bits - why would someone bother? What's the killer app? We're not running out of oil^Waddresses! While I don't claim to be an expert on the topic, where I have used IPv6 succesfully is on my home network. Where NAT is really annoying for geeks is that our ISPs give us one IP address, make it move around occasionally, and tell us we can't run servers on it. Add an IPv6 tunnel to this, and it doesn't really matter what my ISP thinks. My machines remain trivially addressable. Scanning the address space to try and hammer on the boxes is a non-trivial task and by-and-large, Windows zombies aren't usually talking on IPv6.

This isn't a permanent nirvana, but if general attitudes about v6 are the same as the drones on /., then my little workaround hack will persist for a while.

Date: 2006-10-03 06:31 pm (UTC)
From: [identity profile] terminal-pariah.livejournal.com
I agree that v6 could be driven faster by consumers, but the problems with that are:
a) you'd need a v6 tunneling provider who doesn't mind gigs upon gigs of torrent/porn/etc. traffic
b) you'd need these same users to stop making NATs work.

As it stands I can fire up uTorrent, KCeasy, Skype or whatever and have it all work out of the box. Hamachi (http://www.hamachi.cc/) is the equivalent when it comes to remoting/VPNs.

April 2010

S M T W T F S
    123
45678910
11121314151617
18192021222324
252627282930 

Style Credit

Expand Cut Tags

No cut tags
Page generated Feb. 4th, 2026 12:14 am
Powered by Dreamwidth Studios