Sign in / up

* Posts by Yes Me Too

3 publicly visible posts • joined 11 May 2011

Judge blasts Cisco's 'unmitigated gall' in ex-exec's arrest

Yes Me Too
Devil

Why is this a surprise?

I don't recall John Chambers ever suggesting that Cisco won't be evil.

0 1

WTF is... IPv6?

Yes Me Too
Reply Icon
Happy

Re: Bamboozled and Brain-scrambled

> We all know that 192.168 and 10.0.0.0 etc are private IP address ranges for in-house usage. But what are their IPv6 equivalents?

There are no exact equivalents. You don't need them, because your ISP won't just give you one lousy address - you'll get a large block of addresses just for you, which you can use as you wish with no risk of collision with anyone else. And if you're paranoid about using global addresses in your living room, you can use something called a Unique Local Address which will never be routed outside your house. Next-gen ADSL or cable boxes really will have to handle these.

You're right about the dummies book... you can try

"IPv6 for Dummies, Part 1: It's Time!"

http://www.xtranormal.com/watch/7201125/

"IPv6 for Dummies, Part 2: Comparing IPv4 and IPv6"

http://www.xtranormal.com/watch/7210035/

0 0
Yes Me Too
Reply Icon

@Graham Dawson

> Never understood why they couldn't make the existing IP address a subnet of a new, much larger address space.

Short version: Because that would mean blowing out the IPv6 routing table with all the historical junk in the IPv4 routing table. this way we can hopefully end up with a lean, mean routing table for IPv6. (The long version of the answer is *really* long.)

Also, in fact, it wouldn't have simplified the transition that much. IPv4-only systems still wouldn't be able to understand IPv6 packets, so the problem of interworking between the two would still arise. Rather like 405-line and 625-line TV, in fact.

0 0