News IPv4 address blocks are over

[SiberianTiger]

http://www.afterdawn.com/news/artic...ss_blocks_assigned_icann_pushes_ipv6_adoption

Last IPv4 address blocks assigned, ICANN pushes IPv6 adoption
Written by James "Dela" Delahunty @ 03 Feb 2011 22:35

Last IPv4 address blocks assigned, ICANN pushes IPv6 adoption On Thursday, the last top level block of free Internet Protocol version 4 (IPv4) addresses was assigned, igniting a discussion about the future of the Internet and its rapid expansion to more locations and devices.
IPv4 uses 32bit addressing to route data packets across the Internet, providing for 232 addresses, or 4,294,967,296 addresses. Internet Protocol version 6 (IPv6) is intended to succeed IPv4. Using a 128-bit address, the IPv6 address space allows 2128 addresses, or around 340 undecillion unique addresses (1 undecillion == 1,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000). That means an address pool that is a billion-trillion times larger than IPv4.

IPv4's address format uses a Dotted Decimal Notation, such as "209.62.87.157", to enable communication between devices over the Internet. IPv6 addresses are composed of four hexadecimal digits separated instead by colons, such as "2001:0db8:85a3:0000:0000:8a2e:0370:7334".

IPv6 certainly has lasting power because of the mind-numbing numbers involved. The IPv4 pool is now technically completely exhausted, an event that has been anticipated for years (although a lot of free addresses still remain in most assigned IPv4 blocks and will continue to be allocated for the time being.)

"This is a major turning point in the on-going development of the Internet," said Rod Beckstrom, President and Chief Executive Officer of the Internet Corporation for Assigned Names and Numbers (ICANN).

"No one was caught off guard by this. The Internet technical community has been planning for IPv4 depletion for some time. But it means the adoption of IPv6 is now of paramount importance, since it will allow the Internet to continue its amazing growth and foster the global innovation we've all come to expect."

Really no one?

 

[RisingFury]

We run out of internets? :O

 

[IronRain]

No, now we will use IPv6.

 

[Artlav]

Which does not work.
Something is broken:
Either Windows 7 64 bit
Or tunnel broker
Or Russia

---------- Post added at 19:21 ---------- Previous post was at 13:13 ----------

Heh.
Actually, the problem was me.
Reading manuals help, trust me.

 

[Quick_Nick]

I think my little mind doesn't understand what this means...
All I know is that I always have to configure a certain laptop's IPv4 settings, and IPv6 never does anything...
Plus, I've never seen anyone use those hex addresses.

 

[IronRain]

I think my little mind doesn't understand what this means...
All I know is that I always have to configure a certain laptop's IPv4 settings, and IPv6 never does anything...
Plus, I've never seen anyone use those hex addresses.

Well, that's going to change now
Almost every computer already has an hex address. try: Windows 7: in search bar; type CMD>in command prompt type: ipconfig /all. In Windows XP: open 'Run'>CMD>in command prompt type: ipconfig /all. So computers have an IPv6 but they just doesn't use it yet.

 

[Bonanza123d]

well... This will make things more complex.

 

[Fabri91]

If math doesn't fail me every human being (rounded off to 7 billion) would need to connect a bit more than 2371 moles of internet devices to saturate the new system.

That'll take some time.

(1 mole = approx. 6,022*10e23)

 

[IronRain]

@Bonanza123d Jup. the IPv4 address was in xxx.xxx.xxx.xxx format. IPv6 is in
xxxx:xxxx:xxxx:xxxx:xxxx:xxxx:xxxx:xxxx format.

Did I already mentioned that I have no short term memory?.. -.-'

 

[Johnman]

How am I going to remember all those handy-to-know-by-heart DNS addresses!?

 

[Bonanza123d]

How am I going to remember all those handy-to-know-by-heart DNS addresses!?

Here is an idea. Everyone registers their own long IPAddress so now it will work better. Oh yea, if we use IPv6, all our internet applications will not work.

EDIT: I meant to a DNS Service

 

[IronRain]

Here is an idea. Everyone registers their own long IPAddress so now it will work better. Oh yea, if we use IPv6, all our internet applications will not work.

Why not?

 

[Artlav]

Well, they give you no less than 18 446 744 073 709 551 616 addresses on registration, and 1*208*925*819*614*629*174*706*176 more if you ask.
You can address every atom in your house with it, if i'm not mistaken.

And what's so hard about remembering them?
2001:470:95e1::91 isn't that long a number.

 

[Quick_Nick]

Well, they give you no less than 18 446 744 073 709 551 616 addresses on registration, and 1*208*925*819*614*629*174*706*176 more if you ask.
You can address every atom in your house with it, if i'm not mistaken.

And what's so hard about remembering them?
2001:470:95e1::91 isn't that long a number.

In fact, if I did my math right, you can address every molecule in about ten billion tonnes of water.
(I've been pondering this all day)
I have a feeling that will take a while to fill up.

 

[Linguofreak]

If math doesn't fail me every human being (rounded off to 7 billion) would need to connect a bit more than 2371 moles of internet devices to saturate the new system.

That'll take some time.

(1 mole = approx. 6,022*10e23)

I'm getting 80721 moles of internet devices with Google's calculator feature, and a unit calculator on my own system.

Actually pretty good, you were only off by a mere factor of 34, which is chump-change compared to the numbers we're talking about. You were only ~5 bits off in the size of your number, out of 128.

Incidentally, the 128 TiB size of my /proc/kmem file is feeling absolutely claustrophobic...

---------- Post added at 03:27 ---------- Previous post was at 03:12 ----------

In fact, if I did my math right, you can address every molecule in about ten billion tonnes of water.
(I've been pondering this all day)
I have a feeling that will take a while to fill up.

Well you can address every molecule in ~80.7 * 18/12 = 121 kg of water per person currently alive. That's 8.47 billion (metric) tons of water total, for the exact number. You get about a 118th of a cubic km of water out of that.

 

[Fabri91]

Ah, well, 80721 moles is even more stuff I did my calculations too with google, but I did them without bothering too much, it was during a pause in the lessons here I believe. I'll double check that later...in another pause.
Edit: makes perfectly sense, I took one undecillion, instead of 340.
Wer lesen kann ist klar im vorteil, so they say...