Strict rationing introduced in Europe as bad harvest brings IPv4 address shortage
41 replies, posted
[url]http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/technology-19600718[/url]
[quote=BBC News][B]Europe has almost exhausted its stock of old-style internet addresses.[/B]
Strict rationing of these addresses - called IPv4 - has been started by the body that hands them out in Europe.
From now on, companies can only make one more application for IPv4 addresses and, if successful, will only get 1,024 of them.
In addition, any application for more old addresses must demonstrate how an organisation is using the new, replacement, addressing scheme.
"The day has come, finally," said Axel Pawlik, managing director of the Ripe NCC that hands out addresses to European ISPs, firms and other organisations.
Every device that goes online is allocated a unique Internet Protocol (IP) address.
The internet grew up using an addressing scheme called IP Version 4 (IPv4). In the 1970s when the web was being built the 4.3 billion IP addresses allowed by IPv4 were thought to be enough.
However, the rapid growth of the internet and popularity of the web have swiftly exhausted this pool.
The growth of the net is linked to the size of the pool because everything that connects to the net needs an IP address to send and receive data.
[B]Restrictions[/B]
Plans are afoot to move to a new scheme, known as IP Version 6 (IPv6), that has an effectively inexhaustible supply of addresses.
On 14 September Ripe NCC got down to its last 16 million IPv4 addresses. While this might sound a lot, said Mr Pawlik, the use of this last substantial block would be so heavily restricted that the supply could be considered to be at an end.
"Applicants will only get about 1,000 addresses," said Mr Pawlik, "and that's it and they only get them once and that's the end of it."
To even get that small number of IPv4 addresses, he said, applicants must already have an allocation of IPv6 addresses and demonstrate how they planned to use them.
Immediately prior to reaching the last big block Ripe was handing out just under four million IPv4 addresses every 10 days.
Anyone planning expansion based around the net should already be committed to using IPv6, said Mr Pawlik.
Other techniques based around technical tricks that share IPv4 addresses among many different devices would prove increasingly unworkable, he said.
"They are complicated, potentially unstable and expensive," he said. "The other route they could go is to v6 as it's in most of the net equipment now."[/quote]
well this was going to happen sometime...
watch us run out of IPv6 in 50 years or so
DO THE BLOODY CHANGE ALREADY.
We've done nearly everything we can to increase the lifespan of IPv4, subnetting, private blocks, NAT, rather than actually attempting to implement IPv6. We're getting there with more companies doing it, but really it should have started a few years ago when we started seeing the massive spikes in networked devices. Surely it's not so expensive that only the largest and most tech oriented firms can afford it.
Please sir... my IP lease ran out... can I have some more?
[I]MORE?[/I]
[QUOTE=hexpunK;37664162]We've done nearly everything we can to increase the lifespan of IPv4, subnetting, private blocks, NAT, rather than actually attempting to implement IPv6. We're getting there with more companies doing it, but really it should have started a few years ago when we started seeing the massive spikes in networked devices. Surely it's not so expensive that only the largest and most tech oriented firms can afford it.[/QUOTE]
Have archaic IPV 4 install
Don't upgrade it and inconvenience customers
??????
(even more) PROFIT
The free market is wonderful isn't it?
We need to start making tear inducing aid adverts.
pls think of all that without dem ip
donate today
Say hello to NAT on top of NAT on top of NAT in 2015, because the free market can be trusted to do fucking anything right.
omg idiots
why don't we just make it say more numbers!!!!
[QUOTE=Zephyrs;37664413]Have archaic IPV 4 install
Don't upgrade it and inconvenience customers
??????
(even more) PROFIT
The free market is wonderful isn't it?[/QUOTE]
I can see it now. A shady boardroom. 8 people sat around a desk, lighting so dim you can only see their upper torso if you focus long enough. An IT engineer sat at the far end of the table, spotlight, and next to a radiator on max heat for maximum discomfort. He asks;
"P-p-please, the IT department just needs a few thousand pound of funding, we can get you more customers, but it won't be quick or cheap. We just can't expand rapidly enough now"
For some reason the board recite in unison;
"And cut into our profits for this year? Begone peasant"
And IPv6 was ignored again that day.
I'm willing to see IPV5.
[QUOTE=nikomo;37664474]Say hello to NAT on top of NAT on top of NAT in 2015, because the free market can be trusted to do fucking anything right.[/QUOTE]
There are already many ISPs that use NAT and don't give you a publicly routable IP address.
The list of companies still asking for IPv4 should be publicly listed so we can laugh at them.
[QUOTE=trotskygrad;37664107]well this was going to happen sometime...
watch us run out of IPv6 in 50 years or so[/QUOTE]
You do realise that IPv6 has more than trillions of addresses for each person in the world? We could have an IP address for every single thing that uses electricity and not even use a hundreth of the addresses it has.
[QUOTE=Mmrnmhrm;37666031]You do realise that IPv6 has more than trillions of addresses for each person in the world? We could have an IP address for every single thing that uses electricity and not even use a hundreth of the addresses it has.[/QUOTE]
multiple IPs in one device, shit like that... disposable IPs, etc.
Technology expands at a rapid pace... it's not totally impossible.
[QUOTE=Mmrnmhrm;37666031]You do realise that IPv6 has more than trillions of addresses for each person in the world? We could have an IP address for every single thing that uses electricity and not even use a hundreth of the addresses it has.[/QUOTE]
We can't really see what the future holds, we never thought we'd run out of IPv4 addresses, who knows, you might been two IP addresses just for your socks in 50 years
Who's to say we will be using IPv6 in 50 years anyway
[QUOTE=smurfy;37666161]Who's to say we will be using IPv6 in 50 years anyway[/QUOTE]Only reason I can think of why we'd stop using IPv6 is if the Internet in it's current form ceases to exist entirely, and is replaced by a different framework.
Which probably wont happen simply because that'd be expensive.
[QUOTE=Sgt Doom;37666214]Only reason I can think of why we'd stop using IPv6 is if the Internet in it's current form ceases to exist entirely, and is replaced by a different framework.[/QUOTE]
To me it would seem more likely that IPv6 would be modified later down the line as the net itself changes.
Or maybe we will just find some other 3 letter word we can stack higher and higher. NÅT maybe
Soviet Union suffers worst IP harvest in 55 years...
Labor and food riots in Poland. Soviet troops invade...
Cuba and Nicaragua reach troop strength goals of 500,000. El Salvador and Honduras fall...
Greens Party gains control of West German Parliament. Demands withdrawal of nuclear weapons from European soil...
Mexico plunged into revolution...
NATO dissolves. United States stands alone.
IPv6 will run out too, not because there aren't any addresses available, but because they give every person 1 trillion addresses. Stupid as fuck if you ask me and it makes banning by IP address a lot harder.
[QUOTE=maurits150;37667319]IPv6 will run out too, not because there aren't any addresses available, but because they give every person 1 trillion addresses. Stupid as fuck if you ask me and it makes banning by IP address a lot harder.[/QUOTE]
Banning by IP has been a fruitless practice for the last few years anyway. We have other means to ban users by today that are a lot harder to circumvent (unique ID, such as SteamID in games though not much outside of games right now).
It's the great IPv4 famine
[QUOTE=trotskygrad;37664107]well this was going to happen sometime...
watch us run out of IPv6 in 50 years or so[/QUOTE]
-snip-
//
GUYS, IDEA.
What if instead of 255, every number in an IPv4 address can go up to 999?
Backwards compatible too; it's not like software actually checks if the numbers are in the right range, does it?
[QUOTE=lavacano;37667705]GUYS, IDEA.
What if instead of 255, every number in an IPv4 address can go up to 999?
Backwards compatible too; it's not like software actually checks if the numbers are in the right range, does it?[/QUOTE]
You have no idea what you're talking about.
[QUOTE=Coffee;37667743]You have no idea what you're talking about.[/QUOTE]
How about explaining what's wrong with the idea instead of just "lol ur stupid"
I can't learn if nobody teaches.
[QUOTE=lavacano;37667749]How about explaining what's wrong with the idea instead of just "lol ur stupid"
I can't learn if nobody teaches.[/QUOTE]
Data is sent in packets of electrical signals. This is sent in the form of bytes (8 bits). Because of 8 bits being the standard, in binary the highest number you can have is 11111111 (255), this is why you can't have numbers in the IPV4 system higher than the limit of 255.
Sorry, you need to Log In to post a reply to this thread.