Submit Hint Search The Forums LinksStatsPollsHeadlinesRSS
14,000 hints and counting!


Click here to return to the 'Turn off IPv6?' hint
The following comments are owned by whoever posted them. This site is not responsible for what they say.
Turn off IPv6?
Authored by: the1truestripes on Jan 23, '04 12:01:24PM
I've heard the routing algorithms are supposed to be more efficient under IPv6 than IPv4

IPv6 might be more efficient for two reasons, one is there is a lot more address space so each ISP gets very huge blocks of space, enough that you can probably just say "if the top X bits look like this then the packet goes to ISP Y" (one bit masking, and one table lookup, in a "not too big table" even). Two is IPv6 in theory makes it easyish to change IP addresses, so IP address space in v6 is not portable (because the costs of being "not portable" have been significantly reduced).

With IPv4 there is no easy test you can do as an ISP to see who an IP address belongs to. You end up with giant tables and lots of work doing lookups in them (unless someone has a 30 bit CAM...). In theory this will not be needed in IPv6.

Two things gum up the works. Multihomed hosts which are computers with internet service from more then one ISP. Many of these hosts want to use one IP address for all the connections so that things connecting to them (say web browsers) can get the best route to the address rather then randomly picking an address and maybe sending packets to another ISP when they actually share ISPs with the web server! Or picking an address at random and getting a timeout because that ISP has a hardware failure (multi homed hosts normally have more then one ISP both for more bandwidth and for increased reliability). The other is people may force the "not portable" issue because while it is easier to change IPv6 addresses then IPv4 it is still easier to not change the address and insist that is someone else's problem.

Only time will tell if IPv6 can stay more easily routable. Of corse if it won't it is more trouble then IPv4 to route. There isn't really a better way to have more addresses though. Unless maybe you buy into PIP (one of the other proposals for "IPng", which is what IPv6 was called while it was still in the design stage as opposed to the long slow deployment stage)

[ Reply to This | # ]