Obama Highlights IPv6 Issue 442
alphadogg writes "The Obama Administration bills itself as the most tech-savvy political team ever, but until now it has ignored one of the biggest issues facing the Internet: the rapid depletion of IPv4 Internet addresses and the imminent need for carriers and content providers to adopt IPv6. Today, the National Telecommunications and Information Administration (NTIA) will host a workshop on IPv6 that features high-profile executives from government, industry and Internet policymaking organizations. Some observers are hoping the Obama Administration will use the workshop to issue a deadline for all federal agencies to support IPv6 on their public-facing Web sites."
NAT (Score:5, Insightful)
Can we at least all agree that NAT is evil, and destroys one of the nicest features of TCP/IP (and a free Internet): it creates a network of peers?
Re:NAT (Score:2, Insightful)
Re:NAT (Score:2, Insightful)
Already Run Out (Score:3, Insightful)
Re:NAT (Score:3, Insightful)
Yes, there still is a need for NAT if you don't like showing the world how many hosts you have behind your firewall.
Cool, I can't wait... (Score:5, Insightful)
Gee, I hope while they are at it, they can make sure they can track all the content, every citizen and device that get's "plugged" into the internet.
Hopefully, they are bringing in the vast collective knowledge of the **IA's to ensure that the rest of the world is represented as well.
Re:NAT (Score:3, Insightful)
Re:NAT (Score:2, Insightful)
Eventually, every network gets subdivided at some piece of equipment, be it a transparent bridge or router somewhere. The idea of being a "peer" is an imaginary one really - other than boxes plugged into the exact same switch or router on the same subnet, you're doing a network traversal somewhere. NAT makes this traversal more explicit, perhaps, but evil?
Hell, if you really want other "peers", there's all kinds of VPN stuff you can do that will effectively give you the same thing.
agreed (Score:5, Insightful)
and you see this in all sorts of problems in life, from coworker's agendas, to politicians and their bombast:
you can win attention in the short term by describing a threat in worse language than it actually is
but by doing that, you pay the longterm cost of people just not trusting what you say anymore
Re:NAT (Score:3, Insightful)
There are quite a few "peers" I don't want connecting to my network.
tech-savvy (Score:3, Insightful)
tech-savvy != good leadership
Re: tech-savvy (Score:5, Insightful)
Re:Deadline (Score:3, Insightful)
I suspect the point was that Obama won't be death for America, just like all the other presidents who have made mistakes did not result in the death of America.
Re:Deadline (Score:4, Insightful)
I think it's disgusting to do that to any American President.
It has nothing to do with the "sanctity" of the office, but the fact that no American President comes even close to the atrocities that Hitler inflicted on other people. It's a bad analogy, one which indicates a ignorance at best and an outright denial of facts at worst.
Re:"Obama Highlights IPv6 Issue" (Score:2, Insightful)
The original article actually points out the real problem that the headline misrepresents. The real problem is that the Obama administration is almost comically clueless about Internet engineering issues related to governance.
Sigh... (Score:4, Insightful)
Where's Jon Postel when you need him...
Re:Already Run Out (Score:3, Insightful)
Re:Deadline (congrats first post) (Score:2, Insightful)
Join comcast then, they have high performance local 6to4 gateways.
Re:agreed (Score:1, Insightful)
There once was a boy who thought it was funny to raise alarm over the presence of a wild, four-legged carnivore. And then one day...
Proving once again that nearly everything you need to know in life, mom taught you before you left home.
The real issue (Score:1, Insightful)
The real issue is that IPv6 was horribly badly misconceived and misdesigned right from the start, in such a way that it was doomed to become the epic fail we know and love today. I am very skeptical that ipv6 can be fixed.
Re:Deadline (Score:1, Insightful)
I'm sure Fox News will bill it as Obama trying to take over the internet. Your IP address will have to face a death panel!
It's FAUX news - as in fake news.
I hate them. But I love Obama.
I hear this so very clever "faux news" pun a LOT, with the usual unreferenced claims of fake news.
To be honest, I don't watch TV news networks, and haven't for many years. What EXACTLY is the problem people have with Fox? Is it their political bent? Is there some factual complaint that couldn't also be leveled at CNN, MSNBC, etc by people from the other side?
If it's a lack of "objective journalism" that's the problem, then Fox hardly stands alone atop that dung heap.
Re:Deadline (congrats first post) (Score:3, Insightful)
Congratulations on the first post.
Very difficult to do these days.
First Post is easy. A GOOD first post is hard. This guy nailed it.
Re:The real issue (Score:3, Insightful)
The real issue is that IPv6 was horribly badly misconceived and misdesigned right from the start, in such a way that it was doomed to become the epic fail we know and love today. I am very skeptical that ipv6 can be fixed.
I'd love to believe you but you give no evidence as to why I should. You could very well be right, but how do I know that? [citation needed]
The article title is trolling (Score:3, Insightful)
Actually, the article is trolling, too, I think. The issue here is not whether Obama is personally interested in IPv6. As someone above (who got modded troll) mentioned, Obama, himself, probably knows very little about TCP/IP, IPv4, NAT, and IPv6. It's the NTIA that's running this workshop. Printing a headline that says 'Obama' is highlighting IPv6 is just begging to turn the conversation into a bunch of partisan bullshit re: 'hope and change', Obama's personal technical competency, etc. Looking at the thread, this is exactly what happened. And that's trolling (or maybe flamebait).
Then again, it seems like we've pretty much run the whole 'IPv4 addresses running out ZOMG' topic into the ground, too. I guess it's nice to see that the feds are approaching the issue. But there's not really any controversy in 'Federal Government Explores Adopting Updated Technology'. So we make it into a partisan political issue in order to provoke responses? Bleagh.
Rome didn't fall in a day! (Score:3, Insightful)
FEW nations fall quickly; especially democracies and large empires don't fall that quickly either.
It'll be gradual and involve most the population being at fault beforehand.
Obama could be the straw that breaks the camel's back; however, that back was arguably broken already and we are have been seeing a mirage. Obama could be the messenger of doom who is falsely blamed as well. Repair takes a lot of strain, we also may not be up to the task of going the right direction... Lots is possible but what is not possible is for us to return to the previous decade in just 4 years.... if EVER (1 in a million shot at best. you have to be clueless to think it can return to those days.)
Re:The real issue (Score:1, Insightful)
Great, a +4, insightful with no insight. The problem with the US Constitution is it was horribly badly misconceived and misdesigned right from the start, in such a way that it was doomed to become the epic fail we know and love today. I am very sceptical that the US Constitution can be fixed.
See how easy it is to criticize something when you're completely ignorant about it? If you have any complaints about IPv6, what are they? Until you provide such a time, the millions of us who are already using IPv6 with zero problems will just continue to do so.
Re:Deadline (Score:4, Insightful)
Why would you exclude Bush from "war and socialism"? Medicare part D is one of the largest expansion of entitlements ever enacted and by far the largest threat to long-term budget stability.
Re:Deadline (Score:1, Insightful)
All the news companies are populated by lying sacks of shit (yes, even NPR). Why does FOX get singled out?
Re:Deadline (Score:3, Insightful)
- Free Healthcare for All? Check.
- Free Retirement for the Elderly? Check.
- Free Housing/Food for the Poor? Check.
- Free School plus College for the People? Check.
- Not free, but government-subsidized "People's Wagons" for everyone, even the poor? Check.
Hitler and his Parliament of the 1930s looks socialist to me. In fact that was the key goal in Spain, Italy, and Germany: To bring corporations under Direct government control (i.e. strictly regulated), while providing lots of government-and-corporate-sponsored benefits to the workers. It was an extremely popular party platform.
Re:Deadline (Score:2, Insightful)
While you and all your friends are raging against Fox news (and presumably swallowing all the pro-Democrat propaganda), the real powers that be are wetting themselves, knowing they have you exactly where they want you, caught up in an empty shouting match.
These TV shows are about entertainment, not about issues or anything else.
Re:Deadline (Score:3, Insightful)
Re:The real issue (Score:4, Insightful)
Instead it's just another protocol with bad interoperability between V4 and V6. If I'm a V6 client I can't talk to a V4 server without some ugly "help". So how do they expect to move every one to V6 if it can't be done gradually ?
If only every OS sold in the last 5 years came out of the box with the capability of connecting to IPv4 and IPv6 networks at the same time so you could begin using IPv6 services as the DNS records for them became available. Boy, how convenient that would have been!
I'm sorry, but I have a hard time not being sarcastic when people keep trotting out that same dumb argument. Every host I use at home and work is dual-stack IPv4/IPv6 and I have none of the hypothetical problems that people keep inventing to panic over.
Re:Deadline (Score:3, Insightful)
It's not about the conservative bias. It that they lie, and are hypocrites, and bullies.
If ti was just a bias, that would suck but hey it's ok. When it's specific lies, promote false hoods, and fanning the flams of anger it impacts every one.
Re:The US was supposed to switch to metric in 1976 (Score:2, Insightful)
I can understand hesitancy to deploy radical new ideas. However, I don't understand the hesitancy to deploy ideas that have been tested exhaustively, deployed, and used widely.
Because the stuff they already have also has been tested exhaustively, deployed, and used widely. And they don't have to hire more staff, or buy more equipment, to keep using it.
I'm always amazed when I meet people like you so ignorant of basic economics. Just, whenever you have a question like that, think to yourself: "what's in it for them?"
Re:The real issue (Score:3, Insightful)
Junta summarized it satisfactorily. I could elaborate, but what would be the point? Oh well. For example going to 128 bit addresses was in a word idiotic. It failed to ameliorate router loading issues as hoped, and in fact made things worse by imposing a bigger cache footprint than necessary. It also broke every network library to a much worse extent than necessary by exceeding the 16 bytes allowed from the dawn of time for socket addresses, which design point was chosen by people who knew what they were doing as opposed to the people who ended up on the IPv6 committee.
The big fail is that IPv6 and IPv4 hosts cannot communicate in any way that could remotely be described as natural. What commercial web site wants to cut over to an IPv6 address today, or any time in the foreseeable future?