Phoenix Network Forums

http://netlab.caltech.edu/FAST/ <== FAST TCP
http://www.ipv6.org <== IPv6

but of course, the physical network infrastructure play big role too...

what's your comment guys ?

Fast TCP will not make much difference in today's internet. If we all were still on older 28.8K modem lines, then it would, but you won't notice any increase in speed with Fast TCP in nowadays links.

IPv6 looks much better, but it's still not tested well enough. It brings some signicifant improvements over the current IPv4, like inline authentication as well as encryption and compression. The larger address space is no gain currently, as large companies will buy large ranges again. We'll have to wait and see...

I wonder if there is a way to make the address space infinite, like perhaps by allowing an infinite amount of "."'s, while retaining backwards compatability.

Do you think something like this would be too hard to implement, or too messy? Can anyone else think of another way to do this well?

reki wrote:I wonder if there is a way to make the address space infinite, like perhaps by allowing an infinite amount of "."'s, while retaining backwards compatability.

Technically it's possible, but backwards compatibility can't be retained. It wouldn't be infinite though, but nearly. You could store a length value along with the actual address. With 16 bits per address part and a 32 bits length value, you would allow up to 2^(16 * 2^32) * 2^(16 * 2^31) * 2^(16 * 2^30) * ... * 2^16 distinct addresses. Trying to calculate the value of that number has nearly frozen my system.

However, this would cause many problems and such an address space is just going to be abused. In my opinion even the address space of IPv6 is 'too large'.

mm_freak wrote:In my opinion even the address space of IPv6 is 'too large'.

yeah, i think so, it's very hard to remember IP address. I wonder, whether in the future it'll be nostalgic to remember IP address

mm_freak wrote:In my opinion even the address space of IPv6 is 'too large'.

What are you talking about? The ipv6 address space is fine, I for one currently have uhh...281,474,976,710,656 IPs available on the range I am using
Perhaps it is a little large eh?

psychoAngelo wrote:yeah, i think so, it's very hard to remember IP address. I wonder, whether in the future it'll be nostalgic to remember IP address

I believe thats why we use hostnames now and they will become ever more useful assuming we actually migrate to ipv6 properly.

Tim wrote:

mm_freak wrote:In my opinion even the address space of IPv6 is 'too large'.

What are you talking about? The ipv6 address space is fine, I for one currently have uhh...281,474,976,710,656 IPs available on the range I am using :P
Perhaps it is a little large eh?

Have you ever tried to ban an IPv6 user from an IRC channel? I haven't, but others have tried to ban me. =)

Haven't any of you guys heard of dnsstuff.com.b If you ask me thats the best site for any ip related tracking/research. Personal I thanik ip addresses are here to stay.

topgun17 wrote:Haven't any of you guys heard of dnsstuff.com.b If you ask me thats the best site for any ip related tracking/research. Personal I thanik ip addresses are here to stay.

I'd hope so! If it goes anywhere soon we'd have no interweb :0

ipv6 is good , i hope isp offering it then using tunnel brocker for using it
and its really nice , because you get alots of ips (one ip can used to have many ips)