We're sorry. The IPv4 address you are trying to reach has been disconnected.

http://devcentral.f5.com/weblogs/macvittie/archive/2009/04/27/wersquore-sorry.-the-ipv4-address-you-are-trying-to-reach.aspx

by lmacvittie • 17 years ago

17 8 17 years ago

devcentral.f5.com

DLWormwood• 17 years ago

The problem with the IPv6 migration isn't technical, but social. IPv4 was the version of the protocol that was active when the Internet "went pop", and as such, many people (especially those who actually pay for the technology, rather than actually use it directly) think it is good enough. It doesn't help matters that workarounds and kludges like NAT are regarded nowadays as features instead of flaws.

akronim• 17 years ago

Presumably a lot of money is going to be spent on the transition - any startups working in this area?

Tagith• 17 years ago

Arguably, there's an element of discrimination here too. Large American and European corporations and governments have plenty of IP addresses. (For a start, have a look at: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_assigned_/8_IP_address_... ) Whereas countries like India and China are lacking IP addresses. Until the address shortage starts to affect the aforementioned governments and corporations, I doubt we'll see any significant movement.

kogir• 17 years ago

It's the chicken and the egg problem. Right now I can't name a single US consumer ISP using IPv6. If I update my edge routers, all my firewalls, dns, and all my servers to support IPv6, what have I gained? No users will use it to access my site, and now I'll have to use unmemorably long addresses in all my equipment. No thank you..

Right now, for me and many others, IPv4 addresses running out is someone else's problem. It doesn't affect me, so I feel no need to switch until I'm forced.

Am I missing something? Is there some cool new feature of IPv6 that's worth upgrading for?

amalcon• 17 years ago

I can't source this, so disbelieve it if you like, but Comcast and others are seriously looking at IPv6. The reason is basically that they know what a pain it is going to be to switch. They want to get a head start, because they know that sometime they're going to ask for some new IPs, and actually be told "No."

The trick is that v6 isn't useful unless both the clients, servers, and networks are doing it. Comcast and others will need to push on Level 3 and others. Fortunately, they're big enough that they can play the "I hope nobody else does this before you; we might need to buy transit from them" card.

wmf• 17 years ago

Alain Durand from Comcast has been participating a lot in the IETF v6ops working group where the IPv6 transition is being argued about. If you want to understand or influence the transition, that's the place to be.

kree10• 17 years ago

The best explanation I've read as to why ipv6 adoption isn't happening is here: http://cr.yp.to/djbdns/ipv6mess.html .

jvdh• 17 years ago

Dan Bernstein mainly describes that it is currently very hard to switch over. I would add to that that there is currently no reason whatsoever for an existing user to switch. Running out of address space is not a problem for an existing user.

Also there is no real "killer app" for IPV6. When they started with IPv6, there was a vision that it would solve all the hard problems that we currently have with networking: address space, multihoming, and mobility of both users and applications. However, all the zealots in the IETF made sure that IPv6 is as compatible to IPv4 as possible, thus it only solves the depletion of addresses.

Also, there is no guarantee that the routing mess that we currently have with BGP will magically go away when we switch over to IPv6. There are already signs that that problem is only going to get worse.

We're sorry. The IPv4 address you are trying to reach has been disconnected.

Related Stories