on 27-03-2010 18:11
on 25-05-2012 22:41
You're unlikely to come across a website without IP v4 support in the medium term, as there are plenty of IP addresses to host many, many times the current number of websites and it's realtively easy for websites to share IPs (some SSL sites excepted while we need to worry about visitors using IE on XP).
The problem is the millions of people who want to connect to the internet, and each needs an IP to do so. Perhaps a few if they've got smart phones, tablets etc that they want to connect. Virgin Media have been allocated several million IPs, but they've got millions of customers and they can't easily get more IPs as their customer base grows. There will come a point when they either need to turn away potential customers, or make their customers share IP addresses by putting another layer of NAT in.
That's fine for most services, but sometimes you need to open a particular port on your router, and you won't be able to do that on a shared IP. In this scenario you could either pay extra for your own IP, or use IP v6.
11-07-2012 01:25 - edited 11-07-2012 01:32
Sorry to bring this up but im gonna hate all this IPv6 as all my lifes been IPv4 lol
When virgin media do go to IPv6 then there should be a choice if they wonna go IPv6, Google will still have an IPv4 option not all the worlds gonna go IPv6
And whats gonna happen when IPv6 get full? They gonna bring out IPv9 😄 then all of use jumping from IPv4 to IPv6 then to IPv9 🙂
Just saying....
on 11-07-2012 02:21
on 11-07-2012 06:33
@francisandrosie wrote:.....
And whats gonna happen when IPv6 get full? ......
Be a while before that happens?:
on 09-12-2012 17:26
Welcome to the most friendliest community.
Have you got technical problem post it and we will help you fix it.on 10-12-2012 01:15
@horseman wrote:
@francisandrosie wrote:.....
And whats gonna happen when IPv6 get full? ......
Be a while before that happens?:
The big worry will be that ipv6 blocks will be given out like candy (much as the v4 blocks were) and we'll end up with ISP's t hat own billions of blocks each.
In fact, google owns 79,000,000,000,000,000,000 ipv6 IP's!.... 2001:4860:(all)....
The removal of the standard NAT layer for IPv6 is going to be the biggest headache in my eyes.
on 10-12-2012 01:20
@VMCopperUser wrote:
@horseman wrote:
@francisandrosie wrote:.....
And whats gonna happen when IPv6 get full? ......
Be a while before that happens?:
The big worry will be that ipv6 blocks will be given out like candy (much as the v4 blocks were) and we'll end up with ISP's t hat own billions of blocks each.
In fact, google owns 79,000,000,000,000,000,000 ipv6 IP's!.... 2001:4860:(all)....
The removal of the standard NAT layer for IPv6 is going to be the biggest headache in my eyes.
Well, thanks to OVH giving them out like candy I have something crazy like 221,360,928,884,514,620,000 IPv6 addresses across my 12 servers! I've also seen many many companies giving them out like OVH do too, and it's bad!
on 10-12-2012 03:19
It's not really. There are 2^61 /64s in the /3 block we currently use for global unicast, which works out to 330 million /64s per person on the planet. Do you have 330 million servers?
It's IPv6. You don't count individual IPs any more. You count subnets (= /64s), and limiting each customer to a single subnet isn't giving it out like candy... it's downright stingy. Go ahead and give them more if they want more.
on 10-12-2012 06:57
@Dagger2 wrote:It's not really. There are 2^61 /64s in the /3 block we currently use for global unicast, which works out to 330 million /64s per person on the planet. Do you have 330 million servers?
It's IPv6. You don't count individual IPs any more. You count subnets (= /64s), and limiting each customer to a single subnet isn't giving it out like candy... it's downright stingy. Go ahead and give them more if they want more.
Apologies for not devoting my life to IPv6 research, but regardless of how many /64 subnets each person can have doesn't make it less wasteful.
on 10-12-2012 10:07
@robson689 wrote:
@Dagger2 wrote:It's not really. There are 2^61 /64s in the /3 block we currently use for global unicast, which works out to 330 million /64s per person on the planet. Do you have 330 million servers?
It's IPv6. You don't count individual IPs any more. You count subnets (= /64s), and limiting each customer to a single subnet isn't giving it out like candy... it's downright stingy. Go ahead and give them more if they want more.
Apologies for not devoting my life to IPv6 research, but regardless of how many /64 subnets each person can have doesn't make it less wasteful.
That's right, and while we can say that there arent 330 million servers out there, we can say that there are over 1 million buisnesses out there and each one may well have or want 1-2 servers in the future. Users may wish to have their own small blocks in the future too, and personally I would have loved to see some of it saved for things like the space station, moon IP's, or IS travel!.... IPv4 will have been around for about 40 years by the time it's a legacy item, given growth trends and such that would mean that in 40 years we could be through about 60% of ipv6 addys.. So yea, I think it is wasteful.
I dont think one company will have 330 million servers, but they are deffo not going to have 79 billion billion (google) servers!... Unless google is going to start offering vpn's for every person in the world.