ipcop support

I know this has been talked about before, I would just like an update.

Does anyone know if there is plans for IPv6 support in IPCop?

From my understanding from insiders, IPv6 is comming to residential customers within the next year or 2.
This site has a snip-it of it. http://www.internetnews.com/infra/article.phpr/3825696/Comcast+Embraces+IPv6.htm

I don't quite understand why it is not included to begin with. All modern Linux distros support it.

IPCOP is NOT a modern linux distro. It's a firewall appliance based on a Linux 2.4 kernel.

Plus it doesn't really matter what OS's supports it - if the ISP's (i.e. the transport people) don't support it - what difference does it make?

The few that do support it, don't really, it's mostly just IPv6 over IPv4 at this point, so it's hardly worth worrying about.

As to why it's not supported in general, name 10 big name websites that have a IPv6 address (besides Google).

_________________
For the 2.5^15th time :: Better Details = Better Answers

As I said, Comcast will be starting to roll it out to their customers in 2010-2011. I will be deploying some Linux firewalls in the next few months and looking for a distro that meets some requirements (IPv6 support being one of them).

First off, Comcast says lots of things, and 2 years is a LONG time in "tech time".

Second, who cares. Once the IPv6 traffic goes off Comcast circuits, it's back to IPv4, so once again, what does it matter.

Trying to plan future small tech years in advance is more "magic 8 ball" type stuff then actual planning.

_________________
For the 2.5^15th time :: Better Details = Better Answers

Some info from my ISP.
http://ipv6.internode.on.net/
Any signs of IpCop being capable of IPv6 ?

Until it's native IPv6 end-to-end, what does it matter?

The point where IPv6 is a "must have" is still years and years away - just like it was when this thread was started.

_________________
For the 2.5^15th time :: Better Details = Better Answers

From a corporate standpoint, we are not seeing any appetite for major internal or border network ipv6 upgrades at this time. Since these projects have a 2-year minimum deployment lifecycle, it will be at least 2013 before there is uptake significant enough to warrant support by ipcop.

All, of course, imho.

What do you think of http://inetcore.com/project/ipv4ec/index_en.html ?

When they run out of new IPv4 addresses to hand out - will the old IPv4 magically stop working?

No? Then it's really a problem for new players in the game (especially since anyone with a brain has already made sure to purchase a bit more IP space then needed just for the very day when IPv4 space runs dry).

Since I don't do a lot of business with Zimbabwe or North Korea, I don't see it having a big impact on my networks.

Let me know when I can go from my edge, to Amazon.com ALL via IPv6 (including a IPv6 lookup to IPv6 Name Servers) until then, IPv6 is just more hype then reality (and certainly not worth all the hassle if you're just going to tunnel it over IPv4 most of the way).

_________________
For the 2.5^15th time :: Better Details = Better Answers

You know this is the equivalent of "It is not a problem for me, gtfo" and is not very nice yes? It would be like someone saying 'who needs a squid cache, I have plenty enough bandwidth for everything you people should have just bought faster connections!"

ipv6 deployment is a partial reality already. With apnic on their last block of addresses at present with none of those addresses even being allowed to be used by end consumers (instead being used in 6 to 4 as required) sticking your head in the sand will not help the situation.



So.. you want to not support ipv6 until it is a complete 'must have' for everyone, now think about it, just before it is a 'must have' wouldn't that mean that at that time there would be a significant portion of users being left out in the cold, with ipcop becoming more and more irrelevant before it is finally admitted ip6 needs to be implemented? Why not shoot the problem in the bud. Oh that's right, because the problem will not have any negative consequences for your personal network because you already bought a heap of addresses.

The biggest deployment problem stem from people like you that simply wish to ignore it forever until it effects them. If everyone had your attitude there would be no ipv6 deployment at all right now, and we'd just all run out of addresses and that's it, no more internet for new people except through heavy nat which would run out of ports.

That attitude is part of the problem, and achieves nothing.

It is just unfortunate seeming as ipcop does have a rather convenient interface, I more than understand being late to the ipv6 game considering it's lackluster adoption until now, but when entire regions of the world are being forced to use ipv6 because they are literally out of addresses, I would say that is a good time to start considering support for it.

Name one?

Just because the allocating authorities are out of IPv4 addresses doesn't mean the ISP's are.

If your "The sky is falling" diatribe was even close to being true, the Asian carriers and isp's would be making a mad dash to deploying ALL IPv6 networks.

Once again, name one?

IPv4 will be the standard for several years to come, then it will be a nightmare mix of 6-to-4 and 4-to-6 networks, and finally, years and years and years from now, it will all be native IPv6.

So relax, rushing into IPv6 just for the mere geekyness is not a valid (or intelligent) business plan.

Let me know when you can order a IPv6 circuit (cable/dsl/wifi) to your home, with IPv6 numbers, with a IPv6 only gateway, and IPv6 only name servers and then I'll dust off my IPv6 transition plans that's been sitting on the shelf since the late 90's.

_________________
For the 2.5^15th time :: Better Details = Better Answers

Australian isps are rushing to deploy ipv6 within the expected time they will run out of addresses, all of the big players have known it was coming and in true corporate style, only started playing with it when the date drew near there would be no more v4 addesses to give people

Internode already has full deployment of ipv6.

iinet Expect to have dual stacks running to the end user by the end of the year.

Tpg have been testing it for the last six months and intend to deploy it to the public within the next three

Only optus and telstra refused to give solid approximations, each saying they have been testing it for the last six months plus but deployment dates are unknown

We are in the birthing stage of proper isp level ipv6 deployment, why make life harder than it is? just support it in conjunction with your original v4 setup as well.



You don't get the point, your argument is that we should do absolutely nothing until the sky has fallen. I am at a loss at why you must continue to go "We won't do anything until there is a major problem" when the problem can be avoided with very little preparation.

I'm guessing you don't actively administer and monitor your networks then either yes? wait until something breaks until you fix it?

This was what I was arguing against more than anything, the attitude of "if it isn't broken yet (or isn't broken for me) don't make plans for when it happens"

Unless you care to say that ipv6 will 'never' be adopted, what reason is there to not support it in ipcop. And moreso doesn't the fact that quite a few people (I'm not alone in posting things like this) actually wish to deploy it signal to you that it is getting deployment?

Not to mention the chicken and the egg problem, it is attitudes like 'why should I deploy ipv6, nobody else has' that makes end to end difficult when people like you don't bother with it, your site becomes another one that is inaccessible by it.



This depends on what you mean by 'several'. Address demand has been going up exponentially for the last two decades, you really think it won't continue to go up exponentially for at least a while longer? The present allocations the local isp's have will be burned through like they are nothing in sectors of heavy growth, and then even when ipv6 is deployed demand will continue to grow exponentially. Just look at how quickly we are burning through addresses now as opposed to then. It is also worth noting that even five years ago it was predicted we would start running out of addresses around now.

The predictions have changed since then a little, but only in the way of they thought IANA would run out in 2012 or 2013, happened a little quicker than expected. The reason everyone has been all 'lets implement ipv6 also' the last decade is because it's use is inevitable. As an administrator, which is a better situation for you, being prepared for something when it happens or being found running around putting out fires because even though you knew it was coming, you did nothing. Some people like to prepare very early, some late. I'd say when IANA runs out of addresses is a good time to start preparing because the next stage is when you plain can't get a new ipv4 address from your isp (or more likely they'll just start charging more for accounts with them).

Also, you want your network to be part of the 6-to-4 and 4-to-6 network chaos?



I can get all of the above except it is still dual stack for the present moment, not just only 6. When the isp's are coming to realize they have to start this soon or they will be stuck up a river without a paddle, don't you think it's about time you started thinking about it at least?

Anyway, in regards to ipcop, I would love to hear why ipcop should 'never' implement ipv6, considering that unless you think that is the case it WILL have to support it at some point. Why leave implementation to the last minute so that when you need it it is untested?

i know that ipcop is essentially a front end for the linux command line utilities that do nice networking business and i've used them before. Linux has had ipv6 support for over a decade. I would just like to know why being prepared for something that will (unless you disagree) become necessary is a bad thing.

You individually may not need to deploy ipv6 for another few years, but why should those that do be forced to go without a lovely gui for their router needs?

I'm reasonably confident that ipcop will have support for ipv6 in the next version. Will it be mature? Probably not, as there are limited capabilities for testing right now.

Is it an urgent issue? No.

The stack is there in IPCop 2 beta and IPCop 2 will likely have it usable at some point. As a VOIP hobbyist and user I am NOT looking forward to years of NAT issues as we NAT between IPV4 and IPV6 all over the place. As it is, one NAT is ok with most providers without the need to use STUN servers. Traversing through several? Doesn't sound fun.

I'm under the impression from reading the posts of many eager, panicked IPV6 now, not tomorrow posters that many people think IPV6 is just like IPV4 with a lot more addresses available when it is much more complex than that.

_________________
Dave
http://www.raqcop.com
Sun Cobalt Raq4i AMD K6-III clocked at 550mhz LCD replaced with 16x2 Newhaven VFD and Rose Filter for white output.
Raqcop-2.0.6 Raid 1 with Two Transcend Industrial CF Drives and Syba adapters.
Traverse Pulsar ADSL PCI Card using DSLExtreme DSL
Cisco 1231 Access Point with both A and G radios installed attached to Blue.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Test Boxes:
Cobalt Raq 550 with slower quieter fans, a stock Raq4i running 3G and WLAN AP.
Cobalt Raq3i upgraded to a K6-III clocked to 550mhz for testing, also running WLAN AP.
Qube 3, Another 550, Various Symantec Velociraptors (Raq4 yellow faceplate)

See recent IPv6 announcement by Simon Hackett (MD of Internode)
http://forums.whirlpool.net.au/forum-re ... ?t=1754526

Hi. I'm building a linux router/firewall and have been deciding on a distro. I came across this thread while looking at which of my candidates have ipv6 support as I'm currently using 6rd with my isp and hope to go dual stack soon.

I took the time to register and post just to say what a horrible thread to find as a representation of your project. "Does anyone know if there is plans for IPv6 support in IPCop?" is hardly a "diatribe" and can't possibly be worthy of such angry responses. Having been apart of some wonderful open source communities, several for over ten years including slackware for about twenty, I can't imagine how we'd have ever got anyone involved in our project if this is the way we responded to simple questions. I found this thread easily enough with a simple google search for "ipcop ipv6". I would not want the canonical result for some new(ish) relatively soon to be deployed technology and my project to lead to such a negative impression.

Have a wonderful 2012.

Perhaps you should read the 2+ year old thread closer.

People years ago were panicking because IPCOP v1.4.x didn't support IPv6, which at the time, had no traction what so ever in the real world (therefore there was no need to panic about the lack of IPv6 in IPCOP v1.4.x)

Since IPv6 is finally getting off the ground (barely), I'm sure the IPCOP Developers have it on their radar for IPCOP v2.x

Since the world didn't come crashing to a halt in Feb 2011 when the last blocks of IPv4 were assigned, I'm guessing they don't need to rush a solution out (I've had a dual-stack VPS host since 2nd Qtr 2011 and have had exactly 7 hits in 10 months that weren't my own testing - the world is hardly beating down the net for IPv6 transport).

Since you apparently just researched this, what Firewall Appliances currently support IPv6 out of the box?

_________________
For the 2.5^15th time :: Better Details = Better Answers

Just an FYI as the primary telco company of the US, AT&T is not even worried about IPV6 at this time and have other plans to resolve IPV4 exhaustion issues. AT&T's plan is to implement Carrier Grade NAT which will give dynamic customers a private IP that will be NATed through AT&T in which will free up many IPV4 addresses to be used for static customers. AT&T has already began rolling out firmware updates to their U-verse VDSL and IPDSL modems to support Carrier Grade NAT. So at least in the US I would not worry about having to goto IPV6 any time soon.