BRiT Posted March 3, 2017 Share Posted March 3, 2017 16 hours ago, NAS said: Lets get into specifics rather than brinksmanship, what are the real implications of this and do they break anything. e.g perhaps this list includes GUI work for general network config Documentation work (lots) License server Update servers Docker GUI work Docker back end Virtual GUI work Virtual back end Samba control AFS control FTP control NFS control Core addons e.g. unassigned drives Windows domain specific stuff What is missing or included by mistake? What need to work at alpha stage when IPv6 is a command line only option? All the more reason to get this prioritized. I asked for it for unRaid 6.4 with the expectation that schedule-wise to be "sometime 2018", more likely towards the end of 2018. So when it's said not to be on 6.4, I sigh a little and change my expectations schedule-wise to be "sometime after 2020". Quote Link to comment
tr0910 Posted March 3, 2017 Share Posted March 3, 2017 I live in the US and my ISP has been supporting and encouraging users to use IPV6 for over a year now, so it's not entirely all doom and gloom in the US when it comes to that. I do too and my USA connections support IPV6 while my China ones don't presently. My point is that it's the China side that has the need. On the China side my router thinks my external IP is one thing, while ipecho.net confirms that my router is being fooled. And my external IP is changing every 48 hours like clockwork. It's a total pain. via Tapatalk 2 Quote Link to comment
jonp Posted March 3, 2017 Share Posted March 3, 2017 3 hours ago, tr0910 said: I do too and my USA connections support IPV6 while my China ones don't presently. My point is that it's the China side that has the need. On the China side my router thinks my external IP is one thing, while ipecho.net confirms that my router is being fooled. And my external IP is changing every 48 hours like clockwork. It's a total pain. via Tapatalk Thank you for chiming in here! It's folks like you that will help get this prioritized sooner by making yourselves heard! Quote Link to comment
sparklyballs Posted March 3, 2017 Share Posted March 3, 2017 On 22/02/2017 at 7:41 PM, jonp said: But that might be because we own the majority of ipv4 addresses in the US (the US DoD alone has 42,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000 of them; no, that's not an exaggerated figure). LOL, given there are only 4.x billion ipv4 addresses available in total, I'd say that's not just an exaggeration, that's a gross exaggeration. 1 Quote Link to comment
CHBMB Posted March 3, 2017 Share Posted March 3, 2017 There are 2^32 ipv4 addresses = 4,294,967,296 Quote Link to comment
CHBMB Posted March 3, 2017 Share Posted March 3, 2017 (edited) And 2^128 ipv6 addresses = 340,282,366,920,938,463,463,374,607,431,768,211,456 Which is apparently said out loud like this... "340 undecillion, 282 decillion, 366 nonillion, 920 octillion, 938 septillion, 463 sextillion, 463 quintillion, 374 quadrillion, 607 trillion, 431 billion, 768 million, 211 thousand and 456" Edited March 3, 2017 by CHBMB 1 Quote Link to comment
CHBMB Posted March 3, 2017 Share Posted March 3, 2017 (edited) And doing some research the DoD actually does have that many ipv6 addresses so think there's a typing error in jonp's post. Edited March 3, 2017 by CHBMB 1 Quote Link to comment
binhex Posted March 3, 2017 Share Posted March 3, 2017 1 hour ago, CHBMB said: And 2^128 ipv6 addresses = 340,282,366,920,938,463,463,374,607,431,768,211,456 Which is apparently said out loud like this... "340 undecillion, 282 decillion, 366 nonillion, 920 octillion, 938 septillion, 463 sextillion, 463 quintillion, 374 quadrillion, 607 trillion, 431 billion, 768 million, 211 thousand and 456" im going to ask the barman tonight for this number of pints :-) Quote Link to comment
saarg Posted March 3, 2017 Share Posted March 3, 2017 56 minutes ago, binhex said: im going to ask the barman tonight for this number of pints :-) Careful so you don't end up with a barman that is studying advanced math in university and have the bar job for extra money. Might be expensive for you 1 Quote Link to comment
Kode Posted March 3, 2017 Share Posted March 3, 2017 3 hours ago, CHBMB said: And doing some research the DoD actually does have that many ipv6 addresses so think there's a typing error in jonp's post. Lol, a typing error that actually undermines his own point Quote Link to comment
Kode Posted March 3, 2017 Share Posted March 3, 2017 3 hours ago, sparklyballs said: LOL, given there are only 4.x billion ipv4 addresses available in total, I'd say that's not just an exaggeration, that's a gross exaggeration. FAKE NEWS! 1 Quote Link to comment
trurl Posted March 3, 2017 Share Posted March 3, 2017 4 hours ago, CHBMB said: And 2^128 ipv6 addresses = 340,282,366,920,938,463,463,374,607,431,768,211,456 Which is apparently said out loud like this... "340 undecillion, 282 decillion, 366 nonillion, 920 octillion, 938 septillion, 463 sextillion, 463 quintillion, 374 quadrillion, 607 trillion, 431 billion, 768 million, 211 thousand and 456" I think I learned those words when I was about 12. What a bunch of nerds. Quote Link to comment
biwhite Posted March 8, 2017 Share Posted March 8, 2017 I saw this today doing the rounds on mailing lists: http://seclists.org/nanog/2017/Mar/134 Verizon Wireless to stop issuing static IPv4 addresses from June. A big push towards forcing people onto IPv6 from them! Quote Link to comment
NAS Posted March 10, 2017 Share Posted March 10, 2017 That is a pretty big deal as it essentially enforces all new business signups use IPv6. I think this will catch many IT people by surprise. Quote Link to comment
StevenD Posted March 10, 2017 Share Posted March 10, 2017 19 minutes ago, NAS said: That is a pretty big deal as it essentially enforces all new business signups use IPv6. I think this will catch many IT people by surprise. Wireless! Not FiOS. Quote Link to comment
NAS Posted March 10, 2017 Share Posted March 10, 2017 You will have to excuse the assumption they were a wired provider as I am not even on the same hemisphere as this company. I read Wireless and in my head substituted Cable and Wireless which for me has always been cable and lan extension services. A mistake was made so not as big a deal as thought but still significant. 1 Quote Link to comment
jonp Posted March 11, 2017 Share Posted March 11, 2017 Just a quick update, we are in the process of testing ipv6 enabled in the kernel. There is no way to load it as a module AFAIK, but it appears we won't have to as it doesn't seem to have any negative impact on our ipv4 support. You will all be able to test this when we release 6.4-rc1. and no, I won't be saying a release date for that other than BRiT's favorite line to quote me by: Soon(TM). 4 Quote Link to comment
BRiT Posted March 11, 2017 Share Posted March 11, 2017 Thank you for the first steps being taken. This is much appreciated. 1 Quote Link to comment
RobJ Posted March 11, 2017 Share Posted March 11, 2017 I split the discussion of target demographics by @Dissones4U off to its own thread: The unRAID target demographic (from "Requesting IPV6 in unRAID kernel") It's a worthy topic for discussion, but not directly relevant to IPv6 inclusion. Quote Link to comment
Roner Posted March 12, 2017 Share Posted March 12, 2017 (edited) I'm only using virtual machines for now because i need IPv6 support. My provider is pushing CG-NAT on all new contracts so there is only a shared IPv4. This trend is happening on most ISP new contracts here in Brazil, only old contracts are keeping a private IPv4. So thanks for the firsts steps towards IPv6 support i will be very glad with it . Edited March 12, 2017 by Roner Quote Link to comment
biwhite Posted March 13, 2017 Share Posted March 13, 2017 On 11/03/2017 at 0:20 AM, jonp said: Just a quick update, we are in the process of testing ipv6 enabled in the kernel. There is no way to load it as a module AFAIK, but it appears we won't have to as it doesn't seem to have any negative impact on our ipv4 support. You will all be able to test this when we release 6.4-rc1. and no, I won't be saying a release date for that other than BRiT's favorite line to quote me by: Soon(TM). That's great news. Thanks for this. Quote Link to comment
urbanracer34 Posted March 13, 2017 Share Posted March 13, 2017 My ISP is pushing CG-NAT for SPECIFIC FIber customers according to a friend, but not for DSL. Guess which end of the stick I'm on: DSL. Stlll waiting on FIBER! I encouraged him/her to internally contact people to get IPv6 on the table, but (s)he said "it has fallen on deaf ears." Guess we're stuck on IPv4. Quote Link to comment
tr0910 Posted March 13, 2017 Share Posted March 13, 2017 My ISP is pushing CG-NAT for SPECIFIC FIber customers according to a friend, but not for DSL. Guess which end of the stick I'm on: DSL. Stlll waiting on FIBER! I encouraged him/her to internally contact people to get IPv6 on the table, but (s)he said "it has fallen on deaf ears." Guess we're stuck on IPv4. You don't want CG-NAT. Absolutely don't. via mobile Quote Link to comment
xycmu Posted March 15, 2017 Share Posted March 15, 2017 On 3/10/2017 at 4:20 PM, jonp said: Just a quick update, we are in the process of testing ipv6 enabled in the kernel. You will all be able to test this when we release 6.4-rc1. Thank you for prioritizing IPv6 support. I access many of my internal network devices at home via native IPv6 from my ISP (Cox) to avoid IPv4 NAT translation. I one-day hope to reach my Docker services directly via IPv6. (e.g. Streaming Plex content via IPv6) Quote Link to comment
Recommended Posts
Join the conversation
You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.
Note: Your post will require moderator approval before it will be visible.