<div>Forgot to say, IPV5 has been and gone but never got ratified. It was called ST or streaming protocol. It was connectionless like RDP to allow voice and video streaming.</div>
<div> </div>
<div>So now we go to IPV6.</div>
<div> </div>
<div>Mike<br><br></div>
<div class="gmail_quote">2009/7/23 Andrew Meredith <span dir="ltr"><<a href="mailto:andrew@anvil.org">andrew@anvil.org</a>></span><br>
<blockquote class="gmail_quote" style="PADDING-LEFT: 1ex; MARGIN: 0px 0px 0px 0.8ex; BORDER-LEFT: #ccc 1px solid">
<div class="im">David Fletcher wrote:<br>> Something I keep wondering about because it will be happening sometime in the<br>> future but I've no idea when, because nobody seems to be taking any interest<br>> in something so fundamental, is IPV6.<br>
><br>> If anybody has any expertise on the subject, it might be good to spend a<br>> little time telling the rest of us.<br><br></div>I am by no means claiming expertise, but I did take a time-out on<br>company time a while and sit down and read the reference work on the<br>
subject cover to cover ... I even understood it for a while as well !!<br>
<div class="im"><br>> Specifically:-<br>><br>> As far as I know, even though IPV6 has been available on operating systems for<br>> quite a while, ISPs are showing no interest in implementing it on their<br>> broadband services. Why?<br>
<br></div>They're businesses. Nobody is asking them for it, so they aren't<br>spending their profit margin offering it.<br>
<div class="im"><br>> Manufacturers of consumer internet routers do not appear to be implementing<br>> IPV6 on their products. Why?<br><br></div>See comment for ISPs ;-)<br>
<div class="im"><br>> When it eventually becomes possible to buy an IPV6 enabled consumer level<br>> router, or run a firmware update to obtain IPV6, and ISPs are providing the<br>> service, what impact will it have on the likes of us?<br>
<br></div>Depends on whether you choose to implement IPV6 inside your network.<br>IPV4 can be sent over IPV6, so anywhere from nothing at all to complete<br>switchover and probably total chaos for a while.<br>
<div class="im"><br>> We are all used to having NAT on our routers. I understand that it is there as<br>> a consequence of not having enough IPV4 addresses for every computer in the<br>> world. Given that it has the effect of hiding the real IP address of a<br>
> computer, it seems to me to be a nice feature to have for security. Will it<br>> vanish along with IPV4?<br><br></div>First off, if you are a fan of "Deperimeterisation" (as am I) (see<br><a href="http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Deperimeterisation" target="_blank">http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Deperimeterisation</a>) then NAT is a<br>
distraction, however to answer the question behind the question: NAT is<br>the poor relation of some far more advanced concepts made possible by<br>IPV6. Your security on this front will not be reduced. You can do some<br>
really cool things with IPV6 that are just not in the standard for IPV4.<br>In fact a couple of the more recent IPV4 networking tricks were kind of<br>back-ported from IPV6 in the first place.<br>
<div class="im"><br>> What will happen with private networks? Wikipedia states that IPV6 has a built<br>> in provision for these. Will they operate in a similar fashion with an IPV6<br>> version of NAT?<br><br></div>
Yup<br>
<div class="im"><br>> Will every Internet user be able to purchase a block of IPV6 addresses for<br>> personal use? In that case, does every computer become, effectively, directly<br>> connected to the Internet, and completely dependent for security on its own<br>
> firewall? In this case will the router be replaced by something more like an<br>> ethernet switch?<br><br></div>This one will depend on how the relevant authorities choose to actually<br>implement stuff. In theory, every piece of equipment you buy with a MAC<br>
address automatically has it's own routeable IPV6 address ... but then,<br>the initial documentation based theory for many standards gets subverted<br>by commercial interest when it actually hits the streets. Don't get me<br>
started on this one; I worked on some of the specs for GSM back when it<br>was a theory and believe you me, big chunks of it now look nothing like<br>the stuff we developed.<br>
<div class="im"><br>> And, just as an afterthought, what happened to IPV5?<br><br></div>The evil version-fairies stole it and locked it in their crystal prison.<br><br>Or maybe:<br><a href="http://compnetworking.about.com/b/2008/11/05/what-happened-to-ipv5.htm" target="_blank">http://compnetworking.about.com/b/2008/11/05/what-happened-to-ipv5.htm</a><br>
<a href="http://www.oreillynet.com/onlamp/blog/2003/06/what_ever_happened_to_ipv5.html" target="_blank">http://www.oreillynet.com/onlamp/blog/2003/06/what_ever_happened_to_ipv5.html</a><br>
<div class="im"><br>> See you all at the next meeting.<br><br></div>I seldom get the chance to do meetings unfortunately, but keep making<br>the resolution to try harder.<br><br>Cheers<br><br>Andy M<br><br>PS All of the above, come with the proviso that I read up on all<br>
this a long time ago and have a notoriously bad memory ;-)<br><font color="#888888"><br>--<br>___________________________________________________________<br><br> Andrew Meredith BEng CEng CITP MBCS MIET<br> <a href="http://www.anvil.org/" target="_blank">http://www.anvil.org</a> <a href="mailto:andrew@anvil.org">andrew@anvil.org</a><br>
___________________________________________________________<br></font>
<div>
<div></div>
<div class="h5"><br><br>_______________________________________________<br>Wiltshire mailing list<br><a href="mailto:Wiltshire@mailman.lug.org.uk">Wiltshire@mailman.lug.org.uk</a><br><a href="https://mailman.lug.org.uk/mailman/listinfo/wiltshire" target="_blank">https://mailman.lug.org.uk/mailman/listinfo/wiltshire</a><br>
</div></div></blockquote></div><br>