Ipv6 Explained For An Idiot?

[joeypesci]

I only really know IP4 roughly. I know IPs can be assigned by DHCP or you can do them manually.

In my home network I set everything to static but have decided to leave DHCP switched on, on the router for new devices connecting (friends etc).

But my kit is static. So my PC is

10.0.0.2

10.0.0.3 Other PC

10.0.0.4 NAS 1

10.0.0.5 NAS 2

Etc

For me, this is all easy to understand and remember. IPv6 looks a nightmare. The IP addresses are going to be impossible to remember and have to type all the time.

I haven't come across any video yet that has explained it for a noob to understand. No one seems to use examples. They all keep talking about the corporate networks where you have to buy IP addresses (I still don't understand that concept either), so I get lost.

I'd like someone to have an IPv4 network setup and show it working and how it works. Then show the same network using IPv6 and the differences.

[Charles]

I know what you mean. I do not like dealing with IPv6.

I'm currently studying for the 70-642 and it's going on IPv6 briefly.. that and subnetting give me a major headache.

Not much help there, of course.

IPv6 has some advantages over IPv4: Larger IP address space, built-in security and whatnot. Auto-configuration by seeing which address the router is using and assigning the machine to the same network.. that sorta thing.

Edited April 20, 2010 by Charles

[VaKo]

Basically, on IPv4, there are only around 4.3 billion usable addresses, which sounds like a lot but when the internet was first setup loads of US firms got huge blocks of IP addresses, and as a result my desktop PC at work has an address in the 135.x.x.x range and the internet looks like this. Since none of these firms want to stop abusing IPv4 addresses, NAT and CDIR were invented and a few private address spaces were created to be used on LAN's. But given the huge rise in things like mobile devices, packet based services and general internet usage, its still not enough. So, we end up with a situation where you have an ISP level NAT and lots of internet services stop working due to a lack of end to end connectivity.

The solution is to move from 32bit addresses to 128bit addresses, which is enough for every grain of sand on the planet to have its own IP address. So, instead of buying a public IP, you will buy a block of IP's and use those on your network instead of NATing to a private address range, and thus removing one of the biggest problems on today's internet, lack of end to end connectivity.

http://docstore.mik.ua/orelly/networking_2...dns/ch10_14.htm

As for a network diagram, nothing really changes, other than every device having its own fully routable address, and port forwarding being a thing of the past.

And yes, this is the back of the envelope version, wikipedia still glosses over lots of the detail but it explains a lot more than I have. My advice? Learn how DNS works.

[digip]

My advice? Learn how DNS works.

I was just going to say the same thing. Don't think of things in terms of IP address space, but more in domain/node/device names. For example, www.foobarsandwich.com might resolve to 3ffe:1900:4545:3:200:f8ff:fe21:67cf in DNS, but you are never going to have to remember that address unless you are administering a domain or enterting them into a DNS server to begin with.

All you'll have to do when ipv6 is finally rolled out is ping a domain name, and so long as DNS is working(and your devices can speak ipv6, my home router doesn't so I'll have to upgrade someday), you will be able to get the address for the domain, the same way you can now with ipv4(although you might have to use somehtign like pingv6 or ping with -6 for ipv6 depending on the OS you are using).

How often are you entering IP addresses manually other than 1, local lan/router setup, or 2, corporate network servers(which should also resolve to by name if set up correctly)? You can even assign your home router and modem a name if you wanted instead of having to type the IP address. I do this with my home router and modem by adding an entry in my hosts file that just says router and then the ip address of my router. When I open a browser and type router, it gives me my routers login page. Do the same thing for your modem too..

Edited April 20, 2010 by digip

[Infiltrator]

I only really know IP4 roughly. I know IPs can be assigned by DHCP or you can do them manually.

In my home network I set everything to static but have decided to leave DHCP switched on, on the router for new devices connecting (friends etc).

But my kit is static. So my PC is

10.0.0.2

10.0.0.3 Other PC

10.0.0.4 NAS 1

10.0.0.5 NAS 2

Etc

For me, this is all easy to understand and remember. IPv6 looks a nightmare. The IP addresses are going to be impossible to remember and have to type all the time.

I haven't come across any video yet that has explained it for a noob to understand. No one seems to use examples. They all keep talking about the corporate networks where you have to buy IP addresses (I still don't understand that concept either), so I get lost.

I'd like someone to have an IPv4 network setup and show it working and how it works. Then show the same network using IPv6 and the differences.

For home networks with no more than 5 or 8 pcs you can still use static ip address, but once you start going over that number using DHCP will make your life a lot easier. I personally find a lot easier to have a DHCP server and a DNS server running, as I don't have to worry about remembering ip address of individual machines and in addition all you need to know is the machine's hostname.

Image having to remember something like this: 103.102.104.102.104.233.245.100 that IPV6 by the way.

Edited April 22, 2010 by Infiltrator

[Sparda]

65535.65535.65535.65535.65535.65535.65535.65535 is much easier to remember.

[VaKo]

I honestly have no idea why people would still use static IP addresses these days

[Sparda]

because some people are lazy and can't be bothered dealing with DNS.

[joeypesci]

Or because some people just like it and think it makes them feel like they actually know what they are doing when they probably don't :)

Bit like me :)

Which is why I like using static IPs.

My problem with IT is although I do 2nd Line Support I never specialised in anything so just know loads of little bits from loads of different areas.

Guess I should go and brush up on DNS again then :)

Thanks.

[Sparda]

Static IPs are good on networks without a proper DNS server, but you do have to draw the line when 'managing' that static addressing becomes a problem, at that point proper DHCP + DNS is required.

[Charles]

I'm running a basic DHCP server on my linux box, but haven't been able to wrap my head around setting up a bind server.

Windows DNS servers seem so much easier to set up.

[VaKo]

In a word: Webmin

*nix without Webmin is not as fun as the commercials make out.

[Infiltrator]

Static IPs are good on networks without a proper DNS server, but you do have to draw the line when 'managing' that static addressing becomes a problem, at that point proper DHCP + DNS is required.

Totally agree. Image having to manage a large domain with over 500+ computers. Not feasible

[VaKo]

I've been using DD-WRT and PFsense for so long I just assumed that all home routers had a DNS server in them nowadays. However, I will probably change my DHCP and DNS servers to run on Windows Server 2008 R2 soon, linux is all fine and dandy, but MS Server is just so much easier to use.

[Sparda]

I've been using DD-WRT and PFsense for so long I just assumed that all home routers had a DNS server in them nowadays. However, I will probably change my DHCP and DNS servers to run on Windows Server 2008 R2 soon, linux is all fine and dandy, but MS Server is just so much easier to use.

They do, but I don't trust them, and it doesn't work if you specifically set your computer to have a external DNS server.

[VaKo]

But why would you do that? You should set your router to use something like openDNS, which allows for external and internal resolution. Anyone who has more than one computer and is using static IP's and DNS external addresses is Doing it Wrong.

[Sparda]

Static IP addresses + external DNS = every thing works. Well, right up until you start having to figure out which IP address are used and which aren't. Static IP address are necessary for port forwarding to work consistently aswell, DHCP servers on routers will usually give you the same IP address every time, but when they don't it's a pain in the face.

[VaKo]

Why are you not using a DHCP reservation for systems that require a static IP? Its much easier to manage than static IP addresses.

[Sparda]

Why are you not using a DHCP reservation for systems that require a static IP? Its much easier to manage than static IP addresses.

My router (WAG320N) is running the default firmware which does not offer this as a feature.

[VaKo]

Time to move to a better router then ;)

[Sparda]

Time to move to a better router then ;)

Defaults are always good unless they are insecure. Defaults are nearly always insecure lol, but I'm dead set against changing shit where there is no real need to. Some defaults are good.

[Charles]

In a word: Webmin

*nix without Webmin is not as fun as the commercials make out.

Got it, but I guess my understanding of DNS is limited. I can set it up on a windows box no problem, but I have problems with BIND, most of the how-tos I've found aren't talking about setting up a local dns that does forwarding.

[Infiltrator]

Got it, but I guess my understanding of DNS is limited. I can set it up on a windows box no problem, but I have problems with BIND, most of the how-tos I've found aren't talking about setting up a local dns that does forwarding.

I know some routers will provide a very basic DNS resolution. My current router that I use at home is a NetComm NB6 and it comes with a very basic dns service, which allows me to enter the hostname and its ip address. Thus resolving the ip address into a hostname or vice and versa.

I guess you could try to look into a router that has this capability. Like I said its very basic and you don't have to set up a DNS server like bind or whatever.

Edited April 24, 2010 by Infiltrator

[Charles]

I think the best the router I have now does is forward all requests to outside DNS servers, so that I only need to have a listing for 192.168.1.1 as the DNS server instead of a bunch of them.

I just use netBIOS broadcasting for normal windows machine and have resorted to just adding entries to the hosts file on my linux box.

It's not too bad since I only have like 6 machines.

Edited April 24, 2010 by Charles

[Infiltrator]

I think the best the router I have now does is forward all requests to outside DNS servers, so that I only need to have a listing for 192.168.1.1 as the DNS server instead of a bunch of them.

I just use netBIOS broadcasting for normal windows machine and have resorted to just adding entries to the hosts file on my linux box.

It's not too bad since I only have like 6 machines.

That's what I used to do before, adding entries to my hosts file. Now I just use a DNS server a lot simpler and easier to manage.