On 01-02-23 00:10, Fidonews Robot <=-
spoke to All about FidoNews 40:01 [02/08]: G <=-
IPv6 in 2022
By Michiel van der Vlist, 2:280/5555
Then again, many may already have native IPv6 from their ISP without
being aware of it. ISPs and sofware developers try to make the trans- ition from IPv4 to IPv6 invisible for the normal user. If one is not looking for it, one may not see it. Even Fidonet sysops may miss it.
OS's had IPv6 support for wel over a decade. Surf to www.kame.net
and if you see the turtle swim, you have IPv6.
Then again, many may already have native IPv6 from their ISP
without being aware of it. ISPs and sofware developers try to
make the trans- ition from IPv4 to IPv6 invisible for the normal
user. If one is not looking for it, one may not see it. Even
Fidonet sysops may miss it.
That may be true for me (or not). I do not seem to have any choice in
the matter -- I take whatever they give me.
OS's had IPv6 support for wel over a decade. Surf to www.kame.net
and if you see the turtle swim, you have IPv6.
I did that. Not only did I not see a turtle swim,
I saw no action on the web site since 2010.
Michiel van der Vlist wrote to Dale Shipp <=-
Then again, many may already have native IPv6 from their ISP
without being aware of it. ISPs and sofware developers try to
make the trans- ition from IPv4 to IPv6 invisible for the normal
user. If one is not looking for it, one may not see it. Even
Fidonet sysops may miss it.
That may be true for me (or not). I do not seem to have any choice in
the matter -- I take whatever they give me.
You do not have a choice regading "they"? Here I can choose
between several ISPs.
OS's had IPv6 support for wel over a decade. Surf to www.kame.net
and if you see the turtle swim, you have IPv6.
I did that. Not only did I not see a turtle swim,
Then you do not have IPv6. Most likely because your ISP does not
support it. he.net still offers tunnels free of charge...
On 01-02-23 14:00, Michiel Van Der Vlist <=-
spoke to Dale Shipp about FidoNews 40:01 [02/0 <=-
Then again, many may already have native IPv6 from their ISP
without being aware of it. ISPs and sofware developers try to
make the trans- ition from IPv4 to IPv6 invisible for the normal
user. If one is not looking for it, one may not see it. Even
Fidonet sysops may miss it.
That may be true for me (or not). I do not seem to have any choice in
the matter -- I take whatever they give me.
OS's had IPv6 support for wel over a decade. Surf to www.kame.net
and if you see the turtle swim, you have IPv6.
I did that. Not only did I not see a turtle swim,
No choice unless I pay an extra US$60 per month, and not any assurance that ISP would supply it.
I had never heard of them before.
I took a quick look and could not find out how to connect or sign up
with them.
OTOH -- I don't really care all that much. My current ISP provides reliable connections for whatever I need.
Then you do not have IPv6. Most likely because your ISP does not
support it. he.net still offers tunnels free of charge...
But.... what does that tunnel, or IPv6 in general, offer me that I
don't already have?
I have excellent internet access without it. It won't give me any
more speed or bandwidth. So why do I need it?
I know.... eventually.... yeah. But until then, assuming that ever
even actually happens, it's not needed.
What happened to that pioneer spirit? In the early days of Fidonet did you ever ask "do I really need this"? Or did you just go ahead and tried out ne technology?
He probably does not have a choice, just like I don't. At least, if you want broadband (cable) internet access. There is only one BIG cable
Michiel van der Vlist wrote to Dan Clough <=-
Then you do not have IPv6. Most likely because your ISP does not
support it. he.net still offers tunnels free of charge...
But.... what does that tunnel, or IPv6 in general, offer me that I
don't already have?
A tunnel offers those who do not have native IPv6 from their ISP
the opportunity to experiment with new technology. Like we did in
the early days of Fidonet when the pioneer spirit was still
dominant.
I have excellent internet access without it. It won't give me any
more speed or bandwidth. So why do I need it?
What happened to that pioneer spirit? In the early days of
Fidonet did you ever ask "do I really need this"? Or did you just
go ahead and tried out new technology?
I know.... eventually.... yeah. But until then, assuming that ever
even actually happens, it's not needed.
It will happen and it will be in the foreseeable future. Simple
math will tell you that there is not enough IPv4 to cover the
needs of an expanding internet. With a bit of luck you and I will
live to see it.
Nick Andre wrote to Dan Clough <=-
On 02 Jan 23 08:38:00, Dan Clough said the following to Michiel
Van Der Vlist:
He probably does not have a choice, just like I don't. At least, if you want broadband (cable) internet access. There is only one BIG cable
Please nevermind the techno-dick, he's been whining about IPV6
for so long its lost any interest. Just another busybody widower
with no life and no purpose.
According to him, if you're on IPV4, "you suck" because you won't
play the tunnel game or whatever convoluted nonsense to be one of
the kewl kids.
A lack of IPV6 means you don't have any pioneer spirit, no matter
how much you spend per month on your ISP or hydroelectric bill to
run a weird little messaging network nobody but a handful of
people in the entire world actually heard of or care about.
And he definately knows more about American and Canadian ISP's
than you do.
Better show some respect!
But.... what does that tunnel, or IPv6 in general, offer me that I
don't
already have? I have excellent internet access without it. It won't give me any more speed or bandwidth. So why do I need it?
I know.... eventually.... yeah. But until then, assuming that ever
even
actually happens, it's not needed.
It will certainly take a few months (maybe even one or two years)[..]
until FTTH materialises.
The company doing this here (funny enough, it's a Dutch company) will
only offer a so-called DS-lite stack to private customers, basically meaning you get an IPv6 address and automatic tunneling magic to reach
any IPv4 address around the world. You will also be able to offer
services (like binkd) on your IPv6 address, but without any further intervention this will be unreachable for other people running just
from an IPv4 address.
services from their homes. However, FTN nodes need exactly this. So, depending on what other systems I want to connect to my FTN system,
I'll have to check in advance that they can access IPv6 addresses,
or I'll have to think about getting an extra tunnel or portmapping
tool running to provide IPv4 accessability.
Does this all matter to you? Well, this totally depends on which
systems you want to connect to. The more systems out there only offer IPv6, the smaller your world will become.
Gerrit Kuehn wrote to Dan Clough <=-
02 Jan 23 08:38, Dan Clough wrote to Michiel van der Vlist:
But.... what does that tunnel, or IPv6 in general, offer me that I
don't
already have? I have excellent internet access without it. It won't
give me any more speed or bandwidth. So why do I need it?
I know.... eventually.... yeah. But until then, assuming that ever
even
actually happens, it's not needed.
This is probably very dependent on where you live, and what your IP-connections look like. And what you want your computers to be
able to do or connect to. Just a few words about this from this
neck of the wood: I have subscribed for FTTH lately. This is
something you definitely want if you live around here, because
the alternative is continuing to use DSL over the existing copper telephone lines. It does 100MBit for me now and could probably do
150MBit or so, but it's definitely not future-proof. It will
certainly take a few months (maybe even one or two years) until
FTTH materialises. Living in a rural area, there will be only one
company offering this due to the rather high investment involved
(digging fibres into the ground, making new connections to all
houses etc.). The company doing this here (funny enough, it's a
Dutch company) will only offer a so-called DS-lite stack to
private customers, basically meaning you get an IPv6 address and
automatic tunneling magic to reach any IPv4 address around the
world. You will also be able to offer services (like binkd) on
your IPv6 address, but without any further intervention this will
be unreachable for other people running just from an IPv4
address.
Most people probably won't care much, because they don't offer
any services from their homes. However, FTN nodes need exactly
this. So, depending on what other systems I want to connect to my
FTN system, I'll have to check in advance that they can access
IPv6 addresses, or I'll have to think about getting an extra
tunnel or portmapping tool running to provide IPv4 accessability.
It's a bit like in the old POTS days when you knew that some
people had a certain brand of modem (or a certain firmware
installed) that would be incompatible with other systems.
Does this all matter to you? Well, this totally depends on which
systems you want to connect to. The more systems out there only
offer IPv6, the smaller your world will become.
Yes... but the real question there above is what does *IPv6* offer me
that I don't already have?
Also, it's got nothing to do with "pioneer spirit". It's not new technology, it's just a different way of addressing an ethernet port.
I have excellent internet access without it. It won't give me
any more speed or bandwidth. So why do I need it?
In the early days of Fidonet, the "new" stuff was *NEEDED* just to participate in the network.
IPv6 is *NOT* needed to use Fidonet.
Can you see the difference there?
I'll ask you again - why would I need IPv6 if my current connections (IPv4) are working fine? Just answer *THAT*, without any deflecting/diverging.
It will happen and it will be in the foreseeable future. Simple
math will tell you that there is not enough IPv4 to cover the
needs of an expanding internet. With a bit of luck you and I
will live to see it.
Simple math also tells me that as (some) people move to using IPv6,
that will free up IPv4 addresses that they no longer need. Therefore "replenishing" the pool of available addresses. Simple, no?
You would have a little more credibility in your fanatical claims as
to why people should be using IPv6, if you would just *ONCE* answer
the questions as to what benefit it actually provides to somebody.
Oh, and also realize that it's got nothing to do with any "pioneer spirit".
Yes... but the real question there above is what does *IPv6* offer me
that I don't already have?
Alan Ianson wrote to Dan Clough <=-
Yes... but the real question there above is what does *IPv6* offer me
that I don't already have?
I thing that IPv6 gives you that IPv4 does not is that if you
have multiple machines at home each one can answer on the default
port. Every machine can answer on 24554 for example because each
machine has a unique IP.
The above is not something that most people will care about since
most people don't run any services at home or very little but it
is something I look forward too.
IPv6 is not some bleeding edge technology but the IPv4 space has
been exhausted and we need to make this change, sooner would be
better than later.
As I tried to tell Michiel, I am not arguing *AGAINST* the progression
to IPv6. It's just that it's not currently available to me, and I see
no reason to jump through hoops for it at this time (like using a
"tunnel"). When it becomes readily available, I'll start using it.
On 01-03-23 23:07, Michiel Van Der Vlist <=-
spoke to Dan Clough about FidoNews 40:01 [02/0 <=-
I think maybe I'm just "anti-evangelism". I don't like being preached
to about how I should be doing something that doesn't make sense to me. Michiel is a little too........... preachy, for me.
Thanks for the pointers. I might consider this once I see a date when
this all is going to happen. However, I have more issues to solve
(apart from FTN stuff). These will probably require some kind of IPv4 address, anyway.
Yes, that's one option. I havn't looked into it long enough to
understand if this would solve all my issues (and at which cost).
I might be more effective to rent some vserver including an IPv4
address and set up the required NAT and mapping there.
Among other things, I'd also like to keep accessability of my home
network from my workplace (which is, up no now and for all foreseeable future, an v4-only outfit).
Nobody knows. Thanks to this DSlite "solution", there may be more
people facing these issues around here rather sooner than later.
I thing that IPv6 gives you that IPv4 does not is that if you have multiple machines at home each one can answer on the default port.
Every machine can answer on 24554 for example because each machine has
a unique IP.
That doesn't happen with IPv4. I don't have IPv6 either.
IPv6 is not some bleeding edge technology but the IPv4 space has been exhausted and we need to make this change, sooner would be better than later.
I think maybe I'm just "anti-evangelism". I don't like being preached
to about how I should be doing something that doesn't make sense to
me. Michiel is a little too........... preachy, for me.
There is a down side to IPv6. There are machines and systems in use
that don't an never will support IPv6. I think that is what is holding
up IPv6.
A dual stack of IPv6 and IPv4 will likely be needed for some time.
There are folks who don't have IPv4 now, I don't know what the numbers
are but we really do need to move that way. IPv4's days are numbered.
108 is a little bit less than one eighth of the active systems [ref fidonews weekly report].
As to your statements about pioneer spirit -- I don't care about
transport things so long as they work. What I care about in Fidonet
is echomail content.
I actually have a second system running running on the same hardware as my main system that I use for testing. It is not in the nodelist, but it has an IPv6 address of its own and it is on-line and reachable. f5556.vlist.eu.
That doesn't happen with IPv4. I don't have IPv6 either.
Then you can not connect to my test system, it does not have a public IPv4 address. I could set it up to respond at a diffeent port on IPv4 but I choose not to.
Actually we should have finished the transition ten years ago. Now we have to make the best of what we have got.
There are folks who don't have IPv4 now, I don't know what the numbers
are but we really do need to move that way. IPv4's days are numbered.
How about yourself? What does you ISP say about it? Maybe they already offer IPv6 but you need a new modem/router to make use if it...
Michiel is a little too........... preachy, for me.
Try to look at it from a different angle.
If you have ever seen the "Last Lecture" speech from professor Randy Pausch
at Carnegie Mellon, then you will remember one of his statements. He encouraged his audience to be patient with others. "Wait long enough, and people will surprise and impress you."
What happened to that pioneer spirit? In the early days of Fidonet didyou
ever ask "do I really need this"? Or did you just go ahead and tried outne
technology?
That all ended the moment you and a few others of your suspender-snapping DNA
morphed from an encouraging "pioneer spirit" to a fascist "nodelist police".
Can't wait for you to make your grand departure, the endless whining about IPV6 can finally be given a rest. Nobody gives a shit, and if we had to work
with it, we will, without the two cents from an effeminate techno-dick desperate to put his signature on something.
Lots of Linux guys here who eat this nonsense for breakfast, I'm not worried.
And... newsflash - a major ISP here continues to dish out IPV4 to customers
like candy to children on Halloween. Totally contrary to what you were trying
to shove down my throat a decade ago when I disagreed with your cute little
assessment of Canadian ISP's. Or was that just your "pioneer spirit" ?
All right! No more nodes! I'm a sysop! I'm a sysop!
Glory glory hallelujah, I'm a sysop!
On 01-04-23 13:55, Michiel Van Der Vlist <=-
spoke to Dale Shipp about FidoNews 40:01 [02/0 <=-
As to your statements about pioneer spirit -- I don't care about
transport things so long as they work. What I care about in Fidonet
is echomail content.
On 01-04-23 11:02, Ward Dossche <=-
spoke to Dan Clough about Re: FidoNews 40:01 [02/0 <=-
opinion on everything and he probably also wants his say on
the "how to hang the roll with toilet paper" debate.
opinion on everything and he probably also wants his say on
the "how to hang the roll with toilet paper" debate.
The answer to that is weighed by whether or not one has cats:-}}
Simply to provide information in response to the statement that I
quoted at the time.
Then you can not connect to my test system, it does not have a public
IPv4 address. I could set it up to respond at a diffeent port on IPv4
but I choose not to.
Yes, it's unfortunate but this does happen, and it is going to happen
more and more.
Actually we should have finished the transition ten years ago. Now
we have to make the best of what we have got.
I agree, I don't understand why ISPs here in the west are not ahead of this.
Money could be a part of it. I think there are large numbers of
routers in the wild that don't support IPv6 so they will need to be changed. There will be a cost for that.
In large centers like Vancouver IPv6 is available. Those that want to
use it need supporting hardware.
I live out in the boonies of BC in a small town. There may not be IPv6
on the wire here and that might be the reason I don't get IPv6 here.
I have my eyes on IPv6 and will set it up when it arrives here.
I live out in the boonies of BC in a small town. There may not be IPv6
on the wire here and that might be the reason I don't get IPv6 here.
That puzzles me. Once the fysical infrasturcture is there, supplying IPv6 to customers in rural areas should be no more difficult than doing so in metropolitan areas. The cables are IP version agnostic.
I have my eyes on IPv6 and will set it up when it arrives here.
Here we have tech forums on the internet where ISP customers meet and compare notes. Don't you have that in Canada? Perhaps you can already have IPv6 but some flag need to be set by the ISP. Or you need a router update. Something like that. Comparing notes with fellow customers may help.
opinion on everything and he probably also wants his say on
the "how to hang the roll with toilet paper" debate.
The answer to that is weighed by whether or not one has cats:-}}
As to your statements about pioneer spirit -- I don't care about
transport things so long as they work. What I care about in Fidonet
is echomail content.
All right! No more nodes! I'm a sysop! I'm a sysop!
Glory glory hallelujah, I'm a sysop!
The troll says what?
Michiel is a little too........... preachy, for me.
Try to look at it from a different angle.
I have tried Ward and I have failed to become impressed.
I have failed, because that person has failed to impress ME.
And I give everyone one chance. Objectiveness, fair, open-minded, my trust,
you name it. I've sent Sysops money, computers, source code, I've lost count
how many hours I've put into that silly mailer, how many times Sean Dennis calls because he needs someone to talk to...
We won't get into how many times you and I have traded silly Netmails because we are friends. We have trust.
Now that chance is immediately and forever blown when someone acts towards me
like a techno-dick (preachy/lecturing on tech I don't care jack-shit to hear
or insisting its SOOOOOO important) or calling me a liar (as that "soft spoken" person did with his incorrect assessment of IPV4 in Canada a decade
ago) or generally just behaving in a weird douchebag way.
Preachy techno-dick nonsense doesn't sit well with me because I've been in IT
in a professional capacity for 25+ years. I've worked with IT managers who talk a great game but know shit about PC repair-101. I've worked with bench
techs who can barely speak English but work magic with Linux. And I've worked
with many who claimed blahblahblah tech will be blahblahblah popular and they
were (and are) clearly WRONG... Myspace, Microsoft Zune, Bitcoin and IPV6.
Chances are also immediately blown when a person goes out of their way to be
vindictive, trolling, making cute little passive-aggressive remarks... and starting that stupid "nodelist police" echo ONLY after I outright refused to
be a dictator to RC's. Thats the only reason you enjoy that echo. You have me
to thank for that. It was created because I refuse to take marching-orders from a passive-aggressive Dutch techno-dick with no balls and no life.
So I will celebrate their grand departures wholeheartedly and I guarantee the
overall tone of the network will be vastly improved without techno-dicks or
douchebags or a troll lecturing about America from behind a Swedish keyboard.
I do not give second chances, I do not look past their odd mannerisms or shrug it off as a "cultural thing", I will not see things from their
point of view.
I have always played fair with everyone. They have never played fair with me.
An asshole is an asshole in any language.
The troll says what?
An absent-minded self-appointed zone coordinator.
I have tried Ward and I have failed to become impressed.
Michiel is Dutch. So he has a legitimate excuse.
I have my eyes on IPv6 and will set it up when it arrives here.
On 01-06-23 11:49, Lee Lofaso <=-
spoke to Nick Andre about FidoNews 40:01 [02/0 <=-
The keyboard I am using (at this moment) is made in China. I do not
even know if there is such a thing as a Swedish keyboard. But I do
have another keyboard that is made in the USA. It just has the wrong
kind of plug.
Among other things, I'd also like to keep accessability of my home
network from my workplace (which is, up no now and for all
foreseeable future, an v4-only outfit).
In Canada, or at least in the part where I live, Bell Canada
controls the underlying network of networks. Bell Canada is
itself an ISP, but there are several alternate ISPs to choose
from. However, the alternates have to LEASE the lines from
Bell Canada.
As a result, not all speeds and features are automatically offered by
the alternates.
For example, I learned that although my alternate ISP offers a minimum 10Mps DSL speed to my destination for my pay-package (I am only .5 km
away from the main switch in town), the ISP says that only 5Mbps max
is available. It turns out that Bell *can* offer the privilege of
10Mps rates to the alternative ISP, but the alternative ISP has not negotiated the LEASE to include that rate.
So, although I have a DSL modem provided by my alternate ISP
that supports IPv6, the alternative ISP has *not* enabled it.
10Mps DSL speed to my destination for my pay-package (I am only .5 km
away from the main switch in town), the ISP says that only 5Mbps max
is available. It turns out that Bell *can* offer the privilege of
10Mps rates to the alternative ISP, but the alternative ISP has not
negotiated the LEASE to include that rate.
So, although I have a DSL modem provided by my alternate ISP
that supports IPv6, the alternative ISP has *not* enabled it.
v4 will stay in use behind routers, e.g., in private homes or
companies, for very, very long. It is much easier to set up and
maintain, all devices support it, and all maintenance staff knows how
to work with it. Probably its usage will decline, but a complete
phase-out (even at the 95% level) will take decades.
Among other things, I'd also like to keep accessability of my
home network from my workplace (which is, up no now and for all
foreseeable future, an v4-only outfit).
No way. We're talking about a ClassB university network.
There are plenty of ipv4 addresses available, and on the other hand
way too few people to handle a migration of this size.
That's no excuse. On the contrary, Universities have a role model. They should lead.
to work with it. Probably its usage will decline, but a complete
phase-out (even at the 95% level) will take decades.
No way. We're talking about a ClassB university network.
This is interesting. First of all, I totally agree: My univerity was part of am IPV6 research project in the UK. This was in 2000 !!!
Adoption has been somewhat slow, and the same "Lack of address space" arguments were being made back then.
True. But that's what I wanted as part of the "minimum"
package for $30/mo. However, the 10Mbps was not available in
my area irregardless how close I was to the switch.
I had a Bell tech drop by to check the DSL line for something
and told me that I could have much higher speeds and it was
"technically" NOT limited to 10Mbps like my alternate ISP was
tellings me. Hence, I suspect that the real limitation is
contract limitations or leasing.
Nope. Only two other alternate companies have leases in my
area. And they too are limiting to 5Mbps.
The only way I can get higher speeds is if I subscribe to
Fiber. And the minimum $'s for that is over $80/mo.
By: Michiel van der Vlist to Gerrit Kuehn on Sat Jan 07 2023 11:34 pm
That's no excuse. On the contrary, Universities have a role
model. They should lead.
This is interesting. First of all, I totally agree: My univerity was
part of am IPV6 research project in the UK. This was in 2000 !!!
Adoption has been somewhat slow, and the same "Lack of address space" arguments were being made back then.
Just an example: FreeBSD declared "ipv6 ready" around 2000 afaicr. Now it's more than 20 years later, ipv6 is just picking up speed,
ipv4 is imho decades away from vanishing. I see no reason to believe
that ramping down ipv4 will happen any faster than ramping up ipv6.
The misunderstanding is all yours. As I wrote, ipv4 is already there,
all devices support it and all people know how to use it. Even if ipv6 comes with certain benefits (and there are drawbacks, too), it will require support by hardware and software products, a
migration/transition phase, and people willing to learn how to use it. That's why I said that setting up and maintaining ipv4 is easier.
See? That's exactly why introduction of ipv6 is being held back in
many places until /really/ necessary.
Plus I'm not that optimisic on your last sentence, you won't see ipv4
go away any time soon.
No way. We're talking about a ClassB university network.
Tell that the politicians responsible for the funding.
We're not there, yet.
I don't even know if that would be legally possible. I certainly doubt that this will ever happen.
ipv4 is imho decades away from vanishing. I see no reason to believe
that ramping down ipv4 will happen any faster than ramping up ipv6.
See? That's exactly why introduction of ipv6 is being held back in
many places until /really/ necessary.
ipv4 exhausted 11 years ago, but one could clearly see it coming in 2000.
So how is your personal situation? Is IPv6 available for you?
Gerrit Kuehn wrote to Michiel van der Vlist <=-
v4 will stay in use behind routers, e.g., in private homes or
companies, for very, very long. It is much easier to set up and
maintain, all devices support it, and all maintenance staff knows how
to work with it. Probably its usage will decline, but a complete
phase-out (even at the 95% level) will take decades.
On 01-08-23 14:29, Michiel Van Der Vlist <=-
spoke to August Abolins about FidoNews 40:01 [02/0 <=-
In the meantime I have 100 Mbps down and 20 Mbps up from the cable company. That is their minimum package. Up to 1000/50 Mbps is available for those wanting to pay fo it.
"Just switching it off" only works if there is nothing left on the
ipv4 side. This is not the case, and won't be any time soon.
I've been through these discussions so many times, really. "plenty of people" is not enough. You need them right there where you want to
start your migration project, and they need to be paid to do this
work.
All managers will ask "What's the cost?" and "What's the benefit?".
This is even worse for community-developed software. Someone has to do
the actual work.
Just an example: One of the work-horses in real-time data acquisition
in science labs is EPICS (https://epics-controls.org/). This is not IPv6-ready, and many installations are run in a very conservative
manner concerning updates. Often they talk to embedded devices that
are not ipv6-ready and will never be due to their age and support
state. Believe me or not, we're talking about decades...
See? That's exactly why introduction of ipv6 is being held back
in many places until /really/ necessary.
What bill should that be?
Oh, come on. I don't care about what China does inside their walls.
They don't offer it to end users anymore, as they think they hardly
need it (which is probably true). This will actually lower the overall demand for IPv4-addresses and make their extended use by other
entities possible.
I wasn't thinking about that part. I don't know who legally "owns" the
IP segments for universities in Germany. Germany is a federal
republic, universities and education in general are managed on state level. I don't know if a university can simply "sell" anything of
their property and keep the money.
Yes, the usual bullshit: "decree" that something has to happen.
Without backing this up with money and concrete projects, it's pretty
much void. I don't know of any such decree in Germany, so we are not
even at that stage.
I guess I won't dive into science and education funding here, that's
way too frustrating.
So how is your personal situation? Is IPv6 available for you?
Not with my current ISP, sadly. There are numerous ones in the UK who
are offering it, but I have no reason to jump for that reason at the moment.
But then, most fidonet systems will have shrunk even more
considerably and it won't matter for fidonet "experimentation".
Finally, I grok what FTTH means.
In my previous house, I had fiber optic in the house. IIRC, my speeds were about what you quoted -- with upload being less than download by
more than 3db.
In my current appartment, I no longer have cable or fiber for the
computer -- only wireless from a router that does not belong to me and which I cannot access. But, my speeds are 100/150 Mbps. Do you have
any idea why my upload speed would now be more than my download speed?
All managers will ask "What's the cost?" and "What's the benefit?".
Just an example: One of the work-horses in real-time data acquisition
in science labs is EPICS (https://epics-controls.org/). This is not
IPv6-ready, and many installations are run in a very conservative
manner concerning updates. Often they talk to embedded devices that
are not ipv6-ready and will never be due to their age and support
state. Believe me or not, we're talking about decades...
What bill should that be?
Oh, come on. I don't care about what China does inside their walls.
They don't offer it to end users anymore, as they think they hardly
need it (which is probably true). This will actually lower the
overall demand for IPv4-addresses and make their extended use by
other entities possible.
Yes, the usual bullshit: "decree" that something has to happen.
Without backing this up with money and concrete projects, it's pretty
much void. I don't know of any such decree in Germany, so we are not
even at that stage.
I guess I won't dive into science and education funding here, that's
way too frustrating.
Here I am fortune to be on a fibre plan that has specs of 1000 down
and 500 up. I usually get more like 900 down and 400 up. But the ISP
does not (yet) offer IPv6 despite me asking for some time. They are a large New Zeland ISP (Spark).
Kerr Avon [Blake's 7] 'I'm not expendable, I'm not stupid and I'm not going'
What would be these "much higher" extra costs at a later time? And
what "early benefits" would you miss?
Believe me or not, we're talking about decades...
You can access the website above and see that it is a large project
used in science labs all over the world. It's open source, so you can
even look at the code and see that there is no ipv6-support.
Verifiable enough? What are you missing?
What bill should that be?
This completely depends (again) on the timescale. I still doubt that
there will be anything like a tipping point in the near future that
can't be seen coming from afar. Do you have any verifiable facts for
the opposite?
Oh, come on. I don't care about what China does inside their
walls.
This would only affect servers located in China which I don't care
about.
Switches and other networking gear are agnostic to ipv4/ipv6.
There is no reason why ipv4 support on this level should go away any
time soon.
These are all easily accessible from ipv4 nodes, the technique to do
this is readily available. There is no reason to migrate your own
network to ipv6 just because of this.
They don't offer it to end users anymore, as they think they
hardly need it (which is probably true). This will actually
lower the overall demand for IPv4-addresses and make their
extended use by other entities possible.
You'll have to decide which way to go with your argumentation here:
either ipv4 is going to die out soon (as you claimed above), then
there will be plenty of addresses available. Or this is not going to happen any time soon.
IPv4 is available and there. Access to IPv6 is usually provided by
other people. An ISP will not be able to sell any router box to their customer not supporting ipv4-to-ipv6 translation as most customers (especially the private ones) still run ipv4 networks.
Yes, the usual bullshit: "decree" that something has to happen.
Without backing this up with money and concrete projects, it's
pretty much void. I don't know of any such decree in Germany, so
we are not even at that stage.
So there is probably no need for a decree here, fine. OTOH, I really wonder what they count here. It says they measure "availability of
IPv6 connectivity among Google users". So when I have my new ISP with DSlite, I'd be counted as "ipv6 user", although the only thing in my
whole network at home doing ipv6 will be the edge router. The 20+
devices behind it doing ipv4 only won't be counted. This is not
exactly what I would call convincing facts for a near phase-out of
ipv4.
See above: you count neither the number of ipv4 devices still in
operation nor the ratio between ipv4 and ipv6 devices. It simply says nothing about the near end of ipv4 you claim all the time.
My employer just happens to live on a university campus using the infrastructure they are providing there. Deciding whether to go for
ipv6 or not is beyond scope here.
Michiel van der Vlist wrote to Gerrit Kuehn <=-
Believe me or not, we're talking about decades...
I am not in the believing bussiness, I prefer facts.
Verifiable facts.
You can access the website above and see that it is a large project
used in science labs all over the world. It's open source, so you can
even look at the code and see that there is no ipv6-support.
Verifiable enough? What are you missing?
My response was on the "Believe me or not, we're talking about decades..." part. That part I do not accept as fact just because
you say so.
Having followed the trends for well over a decade my educated
guess is that it will happen between five and ten years from now.
But I have to admit that making predictions is not my strong
point. Especially when it is about the future.
These are all easily accessible from ipv4 nodes, the technique to do
this is readily available. There is no reason to migrate your own
network to ipv6 just because of this.
That depends on your definiton of "easy". Accessing directly via
IPv6 is faster.
You'll have to decide which way to go with your argumentation here:
either ipv4 is going to die out soon (as you claimed above), then
there will be plenty of addresses available. Or this is not going to happen any time soon.
There are shades of "soon". IPv4 will probably not die out in the
next five years. And so ISPs switching their customers to DS-Lite
will not have the effect of lowering the demand of IPv4. Between
five and ten years, yes that will indeed lower the demand on IPv4
but by then it will no longer be relevant.
You can access the website above and see that it is a large project
used in science labs all over the world. It's open source, so you can
even look at the code and see that there is no ipv6-support.
Verifiable enough? What are you missing?
This completely depends (again) on the timescale. I still doubt that
there will be anything like a tipping point in the near future that
can't be seen coming from afar. Do you have any verifiable facts for
the opposite?
Switches and other networking gear are agnostic to ipv4/ipv6.
There is no reason why ipv4 support on this level should go away any
time soon.
These are all easily accessible from ipv4 nodes, the technique to do
this is readily available. There is no reason to migrate your own
network to ipv6 just because of this.
You'll have to decide which way to go with your argumentation here:
either ipv4 is going to die out soon (as you claimed above), then
there will be plenty of addresses available. Or this is not going to
happen any time soon.
IPv4 is available and there. Access to IPv6 is usually provided by
other people. An ISP will not be able to sell any router box to their
customer not supporting ipv4-to-ipv6 translation as most customers
(especially the private ones) still run ipv4 networks.
So there is probably no need for a decree here, fine. OTOH, I really
wonder what they count here. It says they measure "availability of
IPv6 connectivity among Google users". So when I have my new ISP with
DSlite, I'd be counted as "ipv6 user", although the only thing in my
whole network at home doing ipv6 will be the edge router. The 20+
devices behind it doing ipv4 only won't be counted. This is not
exactly what I would call convincing facts for a near phase-out of
ipv4.
See above: you count neither the number of ipv4 devices still in
operation nor the ratio between ipv4 and ipv6 devices. It simply says
nothing about the near end of ipv4 you claim all the time.
My employer just happens to live on a university campus using the
infrastructure they are providing there. Deciding whether to go for
ipv6 or not is beyond scope here.
No, it all depends on the timescale. And this is exactly what we can't agree on. You say it's basically yesterday. I say come back 2030. It's neither recommended nor elementary to pick up new technology before
time. And I'm not even suggesting to do leapfrogging here.
Me: I am doing some final tests to make sure it will still work in 2000.
Boss: What? Are you crazy? That is EIGHT years from now! Does it...
otherwise work?
Michiel,
Me: I am doing some final tests to make sure it will still work in
2000.
Boss: What? Are you crazy? That is EIGHT years from now! Does it...
otherwise work?
When I started my first commercial job in IT, Jan.13th 1973, that same
day we already discussed how to do things ensuring they would still
work 1.1.2000 ... And it wasn't on a UNIX ...
What would be these "much higher" extra costs at a later time? And
what "early benefits" would you miss?
Believe me or not, we're talking about decades...
You can access the website above and see that it is a large project
used in science labs all over the world. It's open source, so you can
even look at the code and see that there is no ipv6-support.
Verifiable enough? What are you missing?
No, it all depends on the timescale. And this is exactly what we can't
agree on. You say it's basically yesterday. I say come back 2030. It's
neither recommended nor elementary to pick up new technology before
time. And I'm not even suggesting to do leapfrogging here.
All managers will ask "What's the cost?" and "What's the benefit?".
What would be these "much higher" extra costs at a later time? And what "early benefits" would you miss?
Admittedly, I'm not into apps and mobile business at all... networking is much more than that.
Just an example: One of the work-horses in real-time data acquisition
in science labs is EPICS (https://epics-controls.org/). This is not
IPv6-ready, and many installations are run in a very conservative
manner concerning updates. Often they talk to embedded devices that
are not ipv6-ready and will never be due to their age and support
state. Believe me or not, we're talking about decades...
You can access the website above and see that it is a large project used in
science labs all over the world. It's open source, so you can even look at the code and see that there is no ipv6-support. Verifiable enough? What are
you missing?
IPv4 will stay around for a while but I don't think it will last many decades.
No, it all depends on the timescale. And this is exactly what we
can't agree on. You say it's basically yesterday. I say come back
2030. It's neither recommended nor elementary to pick up new
technology before time. And I'm not even suggesting to do leapfrogging
here.
IPv4 will stay around for a while but I don't think it will last
many decades.
I think IPv4 will likely be around forever in the embedded/IOT world. Private/local networks don't need IPv6
and therefore don't need to pay the price of the additional complexity that comes with IPv6.
This is not universally true, I'd rather say it's almost always wrong concerning complex technology like networks or computers. Remember the VESA Local Bus that was marketed as successor to ISA? Looked like a
good thing to go for until it turned out that PCI would take over the marked quickly. Skipping VLB was a smart move for many people.
Heise has just recently tested 25 different IPv6-capable routers for
home use (https://www.heise.de/tests/25-Router-im-IPv6-Test-Wo-Fritzbox-Co-noch -immer-p atzen-7449159.html). The article is in German and paywalled,
but here is the gist of it: they're all comming with flawed IPv6 implementations.
Some (like the AVM box) work almost fine, other not so much, and quite
a number of them cannot be run unattended for a longer time. Smart
move to go for that right now? I'd rather let manufacturers sort out
more of these infant diseases before I start seriously messing with
the stuff.
So going for "new technology" always comes with additional costs. You
have to do the migration, live with parallel structures, cope with incompatibilities and new bugs and so on.
You have to choose the time wisely to do this.
Hello Rob,
On Saturday January 21 2023 11:46, you wrote to me:
IPv4 will stay around for a while but I don't think it will last
many decades.
I think IPv4 will likely be around forever in the embedded/IOT world. Private/local networks don't need IPv6
"Forever"is a long time. Isolated private/local networks may continue to function for a long time. But when they have to interact with the Internet - a requirement for IOT - an IPv4 only network will become ever more isolated in an IPv6 dominated Internet.
We are not there yet, but the time that IPv6
will be the dominant protocol is not very far ahead.
and therefore don't need to pay the price of the additional complexity that comes with IPv6.
Of course there is a price to pay for the transition. But IPv6 is not more compex than IPv4. On the contrary, it is IPv4 that has become more complex because of all the tricks and work arounds to compensate for the shortage of addresses.
IPv6 is more complex and expensive.
Rob,
IPv6 is more complex and expensive.
So were jet planes when they were introduced ... guess what happened ...
IPv6 is more complex and expensive.
So were jet planes when they were introduced ... guess what happened...
Prop planes are still plentiful and used every day. You just made my
point.
Hmmmm ... which current prop-airliner does not have a jet-engine?
I don't know of any ... Fokker-50, Q400, ATR72, Embraer120, PC12 and others all have jet engines.
Hmmmm ... which current prop-airliner does not have a jet-engine?
I don't know of any ... Fokker-50, Q400, ATR72, Embraer120, PC12 and others all have jet engines.
Cessna, Piper?
"Forever"is a long time. Isolated private/local networks may
continue to function for a long time. But when they have to
interact with the Internet - a requirement for IOT - an IPv4 only
network will become ever more isolated in an IPv6 dominated
Internet.
IoT devices usually (almost always) interact with the Internet through
a gateway (not directly), so IPv6 is still not needed on the IoT
device itself.
We are not there yet, but the time that IPv6
will be the dominant protocol is not very far ahead.
That's a prediction, not a fact.
Of course there is a price to pay for the transition. But IPv6 is
not more compex than IPv4. On the contrary, it is IPv4 that has
become more complex because of all the tricks and work arounds to
compensate for the shortage of addresses.
The size (in LOC) and cost (e.g. license of commercial offerings) of IPv4-only stacks compared with IPv6-enabled stacks disagrees with that claim.
I've put shipping products out there that are both (IPv4 and IPv6/v4)
and from that experience, IMHO, there's no comparison in the cost to implement, integrate, validate, and support: IPv6 is more complex and expensive.
Ward Dossche wrote to Rob Swindell <=-
IPv6 is more complex and expensive.
So were jet planes when they were introduced ... guess what
happened
Prop planes are still plentiful and used every day. You just made my point.
Hmmmm ... which current prop-airliner does not have a jet-engine?
I don't know of any ... Fokker-50, Q400, ATR72, Embraer120, PC12
and others all have jet engines.
Ward Dossche wrote to deon <=-
The smaller historical general aviation propeller planes will
only survive for as long as 100LL-fuel will be available. When
that runs out or is not anymore produced, the only future for
these planes is being recycled into razorblades. 100LL is also
very expensive, like depending on the location where you try to
refuel more than the double of JetA1.
As a comparison, here in Europe there is only one refinery left
still producing 100LL (100 octane low-lead) and it's in Italy
serving the whole continent.
Many of these small planes are now being fitted ex-factory with a fast-running diesel engine as it is able to use JetA1 ... JetA1
and diesel are very much alike in formulation.
So..... they'll start using UL94 instead.
As a comparison, here in Europe there is only one refinery left
still producing 100LL (100 octane low-lead) and it's in Italy
serving the whole continent.
I haven't researched that, but I really have to doubt that is a true statement.
Many of these small planes are now being fitted ex-factory with a
fast-running diesel engine as it is able to use JetA1 ... JetA1
and diesel are very much alike in formulation.
So up above you say the only future for these planes is to be recycled
into razorblades. Now, you say they are/can be re-fitted with a
different engine. So which is it? More double-speak from you.
He didn't say "airliner". Although I will say that at least here in the USA, there are PLENTY of commercial/passenger airlines that use
propeller driven aircraft for short distance flights.
Cropdusters, "bush planes" in Alaska, hobbyist pilots, search and
rescue, ... the list goes on.
So as Rob said, your (actually incorrect) analogy between jet/prop and v6/v4 only serves to dis-prove your claims about IPv6.
You're on a bad streak of luck regarding making silly/wrong/stupid posts here in FidoNet. Maybe best if you just hunker down and STFU for a while...
Rob,
IPv6 is more complex and expensive.
So were jet planes when they were introduced ... guess what happened...
Prop planes are still plentiful and used every day. You just made my point.
Hmmmm ... which current prop-airliner does not have a jet-engine?
I don't know of any ... Fokker-50, Q400, ATR72, Embraer120, PC12 and others all have jet engines.
Of course there is a price to pay for the transition. But IPv6 is
not more compex than IPv4. On the contrary, it is IPv4 that has
become more complex because of all the tricks and work arounds to
compensate for the shortage of addresses.
The size (in LOC) and cost (e.g. license of commercial offerings) of IPv4-only stacks compared with IPv6-enabled stacks disagrees with that claim.
IPv6 is a public protocol available for all. You have to pay for licenses?
So some people are actually making money on selling IPv6 related stuff!
Seems you have already missed the boat. Instead of having to pay for it, You could haven been one of those doing the selling.
I've put shipping products out there that are both (IPv4 and IPv6/v4) and from that experience, IMHO, there's no comparison in the cost to implement, integrate, validate, and support: IPv6 is more complex and expensive.
Now you are comparing IPv4 only to Dual stack. Of course Dual stack is more complex and expensive. The proper comparison should be IPv4 only against IPv6 only.
Why'd you change the subject from "planes" to "airliners"? I just flew in
a prop plane recently ...
(between Puerto Rico and the US Virgin Islands) and
guess what happened? The less complex and expensive prop plane got my family and the pilot there quickly and safely, no IPv6 required!
Hello Rob,
Why'd you change the subject from "planes" to "airliners"? I just flew in
a prop plane recently ...
I never mentioned prop planes either, just jetplanes.
(between Puerto Rico and the US Virgin Islands) and
guess what happened? The less complex and expensive prop plane got my family and the pilot there quickly and safely, no IPv6 required!
I've traveled a lot, but never been to that location. Pretty tropical I assume? Hot? Humid?
In the embedded/IoT world, even the completely free/open-source world, IPv6 stacks aren't the norm: it's IPv4 or a dual-stack - those are
your options. https://savannah.nongnu.org/task/?13480
Dan Clough wrote to Ward Dossche <=-
He didn't say "airliner". Although I will say that at least here in
the USA, there are PLENTY of commercial/passenger airlines that use propeller driven aircraft for short distance flights.
Kurt Weiske wrote to Dan Clough <=-
Dan Clough wrote to Ward Dossche <=-
He didn't say "airliner". Although I will say that at least here in
the USA, there are PLENTY of commercial/passenger airlines that use propeller driven aircraft for short distance flights.
I just booked a flight on a short-haul airliner for a business
trip, to get from a regional airport to a larger hub for the
flight home.
There's nothing like walking across the tarmac,
having the flight attendant eyeball me at the top of the stairs
and tell me to sit above the wing as to not upset the center of
gravity of the plane. :)
Dan Clough wrote to Kurt Weiske <=-
Hahahahaha, that's outstanding! LOL I do know exactly what you mean about walking out on the tarmac, with carryon bag, and then leaving
that at the foot of the boarding stairs so it can be loaded aboard (overhead bins either not available or too small). I actually like
doing that, with the smell of burnt fuel in the air, the wind, maybe
some rain. Seems more adventurous. :-)
Yes, I have frequently done the same. I guess we're not as advanced as the Euro-boys, who use jets for everything. ;-)
I just booked a flight on a short-haul airliner for a business trip, to
get from a regional airport to a larger hub for the flight home. There's nothing like walking across the tarmac, having the flight attendant
eyeball me at the top of the stairs and tell me to sit above the wing as
to not upset the center of gravity of the plane. :)
I just booked a flight on a short-haul airliner for a business
trip, to get from a regional airport to a larger hub for the
flight home.
Yes, I have frequently done the same. I guess we're not as advanced as
the Euro-boys, who use jets for everything. ;-)
Hahahahaha, that's outstanding! LOL I do know exactly what you mean
about walking out on the tarmac, with carryon bag, and then leaving that
at the foot of the boarding stairs so it can be loaded aboard ...
Did that involve body-mass or the weight of the ego? 8-)
Did that involve body-mass or the weight of the ego? 8-)
I am a leaf on the wind.
Ward Dossche wrote to Dan Clough <=-
Hahahahaha, that's outstanding! LOL I do know exactly what you mean about walking out on the tarmac, with carryon bag, and then leaving that at the foot of the boarding stairs so it can be loaded aboard ...
If you walk across the tarmac with a carryon bag and leave it at
the bottom of the stairs, airport staff should throw it in the
garbage as it probably was not inspected and approved by the
USDA.
Kurt Weiske wrote to Dan Clough <=-
Dan Clough wrote to Kurt Weiske <=-
Hahahahaha, that's outstanding! LOL I do know exactly what you mean about walking out on the tarmac, with carryon bag, and then leaving
that at the foot of the boarding stairs so it can be loaded aboard (overhead bins either not available or too small). I actually like
doing that, with the smell of burnt fuel in the air, the wind, maybe
some rain. Seems more adventurous. :-)
I flew to St. John in Canada (SFO with a stop in Montreal, then a puddle-jumper to St. John) and when I walked down the stairs, had
a walk into what felt like the set from the TV show wings. There
were 3 doors marked gate 1, gate 2, and gate 3. The luggage
carrousel was tiny, and you could see hands pushing the luggage
through.
Nick Andre wrote to Dan Clough <=-
On 25 Jan 23 07:44:00, Dan Clough said the following to Kurt
Weiske:
Yes, I have frequently done the same. I guess we're not as advanced as the Euro-boys, who use jets for everything. ;-)
You missed the conversations had about bidets vs. toilet paper...
Yes, I have frequently done the same. I guess we're not as advanced
as
the Euro-boys, who use jets for everything. ;-)
Gerrit Kuehn wrote to Dan Clough <=-
25 Jan 23 07:44, Dan Clough wrote to Kurt Weiske:
Yes, I have frequently done the same. I guess we're not as advanced
as the Euro-boys, who use jets for everything. ;-)
Well, maybe there are other options, too. This is one: Flying
short-range isn't too popular over here. One reason for this
might be that Europe has a passenger train network that lowers
the need for short-range flights significantly.
If you walk across the tarmac with a carryon bag and leave it at
the bottom of the stairs, airport staff should throw it in the
garbage as it probably was not inspected and approved by the
USDA.
As a self-proclaimed expert on the USA, you sure don't know much about
how USA airports work. I won't waste any more of my time trying to
explain it to you, and no reply from you is needed.
Yes, I have frequently done the same. I guess we're not as advanced as
the Euro-boys, who use jets for everything. ;-)
You missed the conversations had about bidets vs. toilet paper...
Hahahahaha, that's outstanding! LOL I do know exactly what you mean
about walking out on the tarmac, with carryon bag, and then leaving that
at the foot of the boarding stairs so it can be loaded aboard ...
If you walk across the tarmac with a carryon bag and leave it at the bottom
of the stairs, airport staff should throw it in the garbage as it probably was not inspected and approved by the USDA.
Yes, I have frequently done the same. I guess we're not as advanced
the Euro-boys, who use jets for everything. ;-)
You missed the conversations had about bidets vs. toilet paper...
Use your hand.
Bomb squad will be called out and the carryon bag will be no more.
Squad car will be called out and DC will become the sole passenger.
Let me explain with a joke ... Did you know that when vultures are traveling by airplane, they're only allowed one carryon in their carry-on?
...Did you know that when vultures are traveling
by airplane, they're only allowed one carryon in their carry-on?
The word is carrion, not carryon and I must admit, its not a word that
I've used that often (if at all actually) - so I wouldnt have made the connection from carryon.
Ha! I just extended the joke, airplane... connection... ? ;)
Bomb squad will be called out and the carryon bag will be no more.
Squad car will be called out and DC will become the sole passenger.
It's painful that neither you nor Dan Clough can differentiate between 'carryon' and 'carry-on' ...
I thought the both of you were native speakers of the language ...
Let me explain with a joke ...
Did you know that when vultures are traveling by airplane, they're only allowed one carryon in their carry-on?
It's so weird having to explain jokes ... Michiel will not like this.
My native language is Cajun French, not English or Belgian.
My native language is Cajun French, not English or Belgian.
There is no language called "Belgian", also not "Belginese" ...
My native language is Cajun French, not English or Belgian.
There is no language called "Belgian", also not "Belginese" ...
There is 2 hours of begging, "Belgian foreplay".
Sysop: | Weed Hopper |
---|---|
Location: | Clearwater, FL |
Users: | 14 |
Nodes: | 6 (0 / 6) |
Uptime: | 235:09:28 |
Calls: | 55 |
Calls today: | 1 |
Files: | 50,128 |
D/L today: |
47 files (7,109K bytes) |
Messages: | 275,441 |