Internet approaches addressing limit

[kedaar]

I just read on BBC, thought of sharing with you,

In less than 18 months there will be no more big blocks of net addresses to give out, estimates suggest.

Predictions name 9 September 2011 as the date on which the last of those tranches is released for net firms and others to use.

Read more

 

[glaxxon]

Never thought of it, but now seems about time it happened.
Lets see what they finally do and fast they can adapt. Great post.

 

[HostMantis]

They've been saying this for a long time. They need to make IPv6 the standard and move away from IPv4. Until they do, there will always be the possibility of running out of IP addresses.

 

[Archangel]

I've heard of this issue for years... it hasn't happened yes, has it?

 

[labrocca]

It will eventually. They could delay this by charging more and being stricter with address alotments.

I don't care either way. Some slight adjustments are required for IPv6 and you're back in business.

 

[NetworkProblems]

This seems problematic as it will to have involve a global restructuring. But it's up to companies to decide. We'll just have to wait and see.

 

[HostMantis]

This seems problematic as it will to have involve a global restructuring. But it's up to companies to decide. We'll just have to wait and see.

It's going to take a lot of work to get the worlds infrastructure IPv6 compliant and a lot of companies in poorer countries just don't have the money to replace their infrastructure. So we may not see a move to IPv6 for a while. It does need to happen though.

 

[Sparhawke]

Every single time some technology comes along the organising group always limit themselves, is this intentional for some reason?

It seems obvious to me that if you only have 500M combinations then eventually you are going to run out with 10% of the population online...so why not make the limits 50,000M in the first place?

Note to the governments, next time you organise some new technology make sure it is infinite, if oyu are thinking of making it a combination of only 8 alphanumerical digits then scrap that idea and make it 32.

 

[Kate]

Hmmm IP addressing is more than 3 decades old.

 

[DubDubDubDot]

The logical solution is to unplug the undesirable countries from the WWW.

 

[Alex P]

The logical solution is to unplug the undesirable countries from the WWW.

And how do you judge a country to be undesirable?

 

[Archangel]

This borders on racist. I was about to erase it but figured I'd leave it as it is. As asked, how would one determine which countries are 'undesirable'?

The logical solution is to unplug the undesirable countries from the WWW.

 

[michaeloconnell84]

maybe we should just pull your country out of a hat!!

 

[Domagon]

Hmmm IP addressing is more than 3 decades old.

Spot on :bingo: From what I've read, IPv4 dates back to Aug-1979. And amazingly still chugging along well - it was originally envisioned for about a hundred or so networks, which back then seemed adequate.

Ron

 

[Alex P]

This borders on racist. I was about to erase it but figured I'd leave it as it is. As asked, how would one determine which countries are 'undesirable'?

I wouldn't say it was racist, most country's are multi race now anyway and he didn't say well we are going to stop all whites from coming on the internet ( had to use whites since there least sensitive about the subject ). However if im guessing what he was thinking then im guessing he was saying 3rd world country's.

 

[Ms Domainer]

*

Perhaps Dub's remark is more dismissive than racist. Small developing countries always seem to get the short end of things, so, if anything, we should be cognizant of their needs, especially having access to the internet, which is often a small country's ticket out of poverty and exclusion.

I'm currently living in a small country, and I can see first hand the power of the internet to change the economy of a small country (population of about 2,000,000).

So it's time to get going on that IPv6 so that the idea of exclusion can be put to rest.




*

 

[Kate]

Actually the Third world nations only account for a small portion of the total IP space.
But there is a lot of 'legacy' waste right within the US when it comes to IP addressing.

For instance a few large US-based corporations/govt entities (ie. HP) each owns a whole CIDR/8 block - that's right 1/256 of the 32-bit addressing space available.
Truly shocking: IPv4 Doomsday: We're Running out of IPv4 Addresses (IPv4 Address Exhaustion and Who Owns What) - Mark S. Kolich

Dump the US and problem solved.

 

[abdussamad]

Every single time some technology comes along the organising group always limit themselves, is this intentional for some reason?

It seems obvious to me that if you only have 500M combinations then eventually you are going to run out with 10% of the population online...so why not make the limits 50,000M in the first place?

Note to the governments, next time you organise some new technology make sure it is infinite, if oyu are thinking of making it a combination of only 8 alphanumerical digits then scrap that idea and make it 32.

Actually the did make the limit 50,000M! But it turned out to be insufficient as technology advanced. Like in the 80s when they thought that no one would ever have as much as 4GB RAM in a single computer because they were still using computers with RAM measured in kilobytes!

 

[Archangel]

I did say "borders on racism," not that it was truly racist. It's the idea of segregation that bothers me :p Ya know, trying to limit 3rd world countries and such from accessing the net.