IPv6 Finally gets off the ground

"On Thursday, 29 March 2007, a Cisco Systems router,
flying
in low Earth Orbit onboard the UK-DMC satellite built by
Surrey Satellite Technology Ltd (SSTL), was successfully
configured by NASA Glenn Research Center to use IPsec and
IPv6 technologies in space." 

http://www.dmcii.com/ne
ws.htm

Its good to know that IPv6 is finally being used along
with encryption! Albeit in outer space, maybe one day we
could all catch up with this "out of this world"
technology that people could now claim is "light
years"
ahead of us.


-- 
=+=+=+=+=+=+=+=+=+=+=+=+=+=+=+=+=+=+=+=+=+=+=+=+=+
J. Oquendo
echo infiltrated|sed 's/^/sil/g;s/$/.net/g'
http://pgp.mit.edu:11371/pks/lookup?op=get&s
earch=0x1383A743

"How a man plays the game shows something of his
character - how he loses shows all" - Mr. Luckey 

J. Oquendo wrote:
> "On Thursday, 29 March 2007, a Cisco Systems
router, flying
> in low Earth Orbit onboard the UK-DMC satellite built
by
> Surrey Satellite Technology Ltd (SSTL), was
successfully
> configured by NASA Glenn Research Center to use IPsec
and
> IPv6 technologies in space." 
> 
> http://www.dmcii.com/ne
ws.htm
> 
> Its good to know that IPv6 is finally being used along
> with encryption! Albeit in outer space, maybe one day
we
> could all catch up with this "out of this
world"
> technology that people could now claim is "light
years"
> ahead of us.

I'm looking forward to a future where pc104/isa bus based
routers figure
prominently in the ip core!

> 

On Apr 9, 2007, at 12:04 AM, Joel Jaeggli wrote:

>
> J. Oquendo wrote:
>> "On Thursday, 29 March 2007, a Cisco Systems
router, flying
>> in low Earth Orbit onboard the UK-DMC satellite
built by
>> Surrey Satellite Technology Ltd (SSTL), was
successfully
>> configured by NASA Glenn Research Center to use
IPsec and
>> IPv6 technologies in space."
>>
>> http://www.dmcii.com/ne
ws.htm
>>
>> Its good to know that IPv6 is finally being used
along
>> with encryption! Albeit in outer space, maybe one
day we
>> could all catch up with this "out of this
world"
>> technology that people could now claim is
"light years"
>> ahead of us.
>
> I'm looking forward to a future where pc104/isa bus
based routers  
> figure
> prominently in the ip core!

Have recently checked the weight requirements for core
routers?   
Seriously heavy lift capacity launch vehicles would be
required...  
not to mention the drag encountered in LEO would likely also
be  
considerable and not yield good uptime.

Best regards,
Christian

On Sun, Apr 08, 2007 at 06:15:34PM -0500,
 J. Oquendo <silinfiltrated.net> wrote 
 a message of 24 lines which said:

> was successfully configured by NASA Glenn Research
Center to use
> IPsec and IPv6 technologies in space."

Any human on board? Because he would have been able to
access useful
content:

http://www.ipv6experim
ent.com/

The great chicken or the egg dilemma. IPv6 has had operating
system and router support for years. But, content providers
don't want to deploy it because there aren't enough
potential viewers to make it worth the effort. There are
concerns about compatibility and breaking IPv4 accessibility
just by turning IPv6 on. ISPs don't want to provide IPv6 to
end users until there is a killer app on IPv6 that will
create demand for end users to actually want IPv6. There
hasn't been any reason for end users to want IPv6 - nobody's
dumb enough to put desirable content on IPv6 that isn't
accessible on IPv4. Until now.

We're taking 10 gigabytes of the most popular "adult
entertainment" videos from one of the largest
subscription websites on the internet, and giving away
access to anyone who can connect to it via IPv6. No
advertising, no subscriptions, no registration. If you
access the site via IPv4, you get a primer on IPv6,
instructions on how to set up IPv6 through your ISP, a list
of ISPs that support IPv6 natively, and a discussion forum
to share tips and troubleshooting. If you access the site
via IPv6 you get instant access to "the goods". 

On Tue, Apr 10, 2007 at 03:54:39PM +0200, Stephane
Bortzmeyer wrote:
> 
> On Sun, Apr 08, 2007 at 06:15:34PM -0500,
>  J. Oquendo <silinfiltrated.net> wrote 
>  a message of 24 lines which said:
> 
> > was successfully configured by NASA Glenn Research
Center to use
> > IPsec and IPv6 technologies in space."
...
> We're taking 10 gigabytes of the most popular
"adult entertainment"
videos from one of the largest subscription websites on the
internet,
and giving away access to anyone who can connect to it via
IPv6. ...


*sigh*  Off the ground, then into the gutter, eh?  From the
heights to
the depths ...


-- 
Joe Yao
Analex Contractor

On Apr 10, 2007, at 11:13 AM, Joseph S D Yao wrote:
> On Tue, Apr 10, 2007 at 03:54:39PM +0200, Stephane
Bortzmeyer wrote:
>>
>> On Sun, Apr 08, 2007 at 06:15:34PM -0500,
>>  J. Oquendo <silinfiltrated.net> wrote
>>  a message of 24 lines which said:
>>
>>> was successfully configured by NASA Glenn
Research Center to use
>>> IPsec and IPv6 technologies in space."
> ...
>> We're taking 10 gigabytes of the most popular
"adult entertainment"
>> videos from one of the largest subscription
websites on the internet,
>> and giving away access to anyone who can connect to
it via IPv6. ...
>
> *sigh*  Off the ground, then into the gutter, eh?  From
the heights to
> the depths ...

First, I find it interesting that you are applying your
personal  
morals to a technical discussion.  Actually, I find it sad
too.

Second, who said v6 was "the heights"?  Many
people would argue this  
actually _lifts_ v6, not drags it down.  (And most of those
people  
would further argue v6 should have stayed down.)

Third, where do you work?  I work on the Internet.  If you
are  
opposed to pr0n, and you work on the Internet, you need to
change  
jobs, FAST.  Unless you enjoy self delusion.  And don't even
think  
about saying "not on MY network".  I don't care if
you work for  
a .gov, there is plenty of nekkid-flesh-bits flying on your
network.   
To think otherwise only proves you are delusional or
ignorant.


The only good thing I can say about this proposal is that
10GB is not  
NEARLY enough to get your typical luser to think about
changing their  
configuration.  Therefore, it probably won't have an impact
on v6  
adoption.  (That ghod.)

-- 
TTFN,
patrick

On Tue, Apr 10, 2007 at 03:54:39PM +0200, Stephane
Bortzmeyer wrote:
> IPv6 has had operating system and router support for
years.

I'd have to object with such a blanket statement.

I don't think you can say you support IPv6 (from an ISP's
point of
view) without DHCPv6, since I don't think anyone at a large
ISP
sized scale is going to leave address assignment up to
RTADV.

I'm aware that Vista added support for DHCPv6, and I have
heard
naught else (aside from the unixes).

So, it's my opinion that IPv6 "may" only recently
have started
enjoying the level of operating system support required for
actual ISP-scale use by one major vendor...and I don't know
how
commonly deployed Vista is yet.

-- 
David W. Hankins	"If you don't do it right the first
time,
Software Engineer		you'll just have to do it again."
Internet Systems Consortium, Inc.	-- Jack T. Hankins

Patrick W. Gilmore wrote:
> 

> The only good thing I can say about this proposal is
that 10GB is not
> NEARLY enough to get your typical luser to think about
changing their
> configuration.  Therefore, it probably won't have an
impact on v6
> adoption.  (That ghod.)

Nor was it intended to. From what I understand it's an
experiment on the
usability of dual-stack servers at this point. Porn happens
to be a test
load.

We (myself, previous and current employers) have been
deploying dual
stack servers (with published AAAA records) for all sorts
of
applications which may or may not give us some reasonable
samples of
client behavior (usenet news, ntp servers, open source ftp
http mirrors).

Experience would suggest that before content providers can
build a
business case for dual stack servers they need to confirm
they're not
going to loose eyeballs as a result.

> --TTFN,
> patrick
> 

On Tue, Apr 10, 2007 at 12:10:59PM -0400, Patrick W. Gilmore
wrote:
...
> Second, who said v6 was "the heights"?  ...

My, aren't we serious?  Too serious to realize that
satellites are a
little higher than I, at least, can reach.


-- 
Joe Yao
Analex Contractor