[TriLUG] Adding to the list of topics: IPv6

[Mike Johnson]

Jon Carnes [jonc at nc.rr.com] wrote:
 
> Well how about the Japanese who are also working on their IPv6 "WIDE"
> project.  They have massive corporate support. And of course there are
> hundreds of IPv6 global inititives (China just has some of the largest
> implementations).

That's great.  I'm very happy for them.  But I still haven't seen that
'killer app' which -requires- the use of IPv6.  Until then, I'll sit in
my corner and grumble about the good 'ole days.

> You say that now, but manufacturers want to make just about any device
> that uses information internet accessible. And they want to talk
> directly from device to device - with both sides being able to initiate
> the flow of data (something that NAT prohibits).

But I don't -want- my oven talking to your freezer.  I don't even see it
as a good idea to allow direct device to device connections over the
Internet.  Manufacurers can want it until they're blue in the face.
There has to be a pretty compelling reason to allow this nightmare to
take place.  
 
> Of course the operating systems *wont* be windows...

Why not?  They can support IPv6 too.
 
> NAT is good for security. Very true. You can still secure your network
> without NAT.  You can use access control lists and routing filters to do
> the same effective job, but leave open ports to allow secure
> communications from one computing device to another.

Certainly, but it's beyond 'you can secure your network'.  NAT provides
a huge reduction in the amount of information that can be discovered
about your network from the outside.
 
> This allows you to run a decentralized office.  Your workers can be
> anywhere in the world - still receiving there phone calls, and still
> being able to move data in/out of the company servers.

I'm at a loss as to why IPv6 is required for this.  IPv4 is doing it
today.

> That is the prevailing attitude in America, and that is why other
> Nations including China have already taken the lead and are well ahead
> of us in implementing IPv6.

Great, good for them.  Europe beat us to broadband with ISDN.  It's
real easy to make a jump when you have very little legacy crap to deal
with.  I'm all for IPv6, but the migration is freaking scary.  Until I
see a huge need, I'm all for continuing to put off that migration.
 
> Sony and other corporations are already gearing up for the IPv6
> revolution.  At Sony every computing device (camera, radio, cd player,
> refrigerator, toilet, etc... ) is going to have the embedded ability to
> communicate via IPv6 by the end of 2005. It's something they can't do
> using IPv4.

Of course they could do it with IPv4.  They just don't want it to be
configurable.  They don't want to have to worry about that.  IPv6 will
let them set the address at the factory and forget about it.  But think
of this, they then know the IP address of your toilet.  And with enough
tracking along its lifetime, Sony may know when you go take a crap.
 
> America is going to be playing catch-up soon.

America plays catch up in a lot of places.  The nationality is
irrelevent here.  The problem is our -huge- installed base of IPv4
systems.  Other countries don't have nearly as much to deal with.  We
-have- to take it slow, or we're screwed.  I surely expect plenty of
other countries to beat us to IPv6.  But like I said, I don't see the
compelling reason for us to race towards IPv6.

Mike, who really just loathes the idea of having to type those long IPv6
addresses...
-- 
"If life hands you lemons, YOU BLOW THOSE LEMONS TO BITS WITH 
 YOUR LASER CANNONS!" -- Brak

GNUPG Key fingerprint = ACD2 2F2F C151 FB35 B3AF  C821 89C4 DF9A 5DDD 95D1
GNUPG Key = http://www.enoch.org/mike/mike.pubkey.asc

-------------- next part --------------
A non-text attachment was scrubbed...
Name: not available
Type: application/pgp-signature
Size: 230 bytes
Desc: not available
URL: <http://www.trilug.org/pipermail/trilug/attachments/20040121/011967b2/attachment.pgp>