Page 2 of 2 FirstFirst 12
Results 11 to 14 of 14

Thread: No need for IPv6?

  1. February 13th, 2002, 06:52 PM #11
    TheSilverDragon
    TheSilverDragon is offline
    Junior Member
    Join Date
    Oct 2001
    Posts
    27
    Yes, that could be an awkward solution, but a solution non-the-less. Its a navy term called "hot bunking". Meaning that if you had 256 machines
    you would have to share the 127 open addresses. Only 1/2 of your availiable workstations could be on the network at any given time.
    Reply With Quote Reply With Quote
  2. February 13th, 2002, 07:23 PM #12
    Vorlin
    Vorlin is offline
    PHP/PostgreSQL guy
    Join Date
    Dec 2001
    Posts
    1,164
    DHCP (Dynamic Host Configuration Protocol, also see www.isc.org) is based on a per-scope basis. You have a dhcpd.conf file that's read at start time that has both configurations per scope, pools of IP addresses to hand out for each scope, and what restrictions, if any, on said scopes (example: drop unknown clients instead of allowing them to get an IP).

    There's a handshake that goes on when a client set to obtain automatically (DHCP) sends out the UDP broadcast basically asking "Is anyone willing to give me an IP?" to which a server set to answer will say "Yeah...lemme go see who you are (checks already-read-table-of-accepted-MAC-addresses). (Found) Here's an IP (if it has it) or (Not found, option to not allow unknown clients) Get lost!."

    There's some more in there but I can't remember off the top of my head right now.
    We the willing, led by the unknowing, have been doing the impossible for the ungrateful. We have done so much with so little for so long that we are now qualified to do just about anything with almost nothing.
    Reply With Quote Reply With Quote
  3. February 13th, 2002, 07:38 PM #13
    KorpDeath
    KorpDeath is offline
    Priapistic Monk KorpDeath's Avatar
    Join Date
    Dec 2001
    Posts
    2,628
    This about sums up my feelings on the matter.


    And while IPv6 yields a greater number of available IP Addresses, approximately
    3.4 x 10^38, it remains slightly less than IPv8's 128 Bit Address
    availability of '3.40282 x 10^38'. Furthermore, when noting the benefits
    offered by IPv6, which are taunted as being advantageous. No presentation
    emphasizing its high lights, can suppress the severity of the drawbacks it
    maintains. In fact, IPv6 is not only cumbersome and difficult to use,
    implement, and employ. But, it lacks a Mathematically Derived Logical
    Structure, which results in a 'Default Addressing Structure' being
    superfluously defined.

    You can find the entire white paper at http://www.ietf.org/internet-drafts/...v7-ipv8-09.txt
    Mankind have a great aversion to intellectual labor; but even supposing knowledge to be easily attainable, more people would be content to be ignorant than would take even a little trouble to acquire it.
    - Samuel Johnson
    Reply With Quote Reply With Quote
  4. February 15th, 2002, 11:47 AM #14
    nietzsche
    nietzsche is offline
    Senior Member
    Join Date
    Jan 2002
    Posts
    132
    IP6 ... the Novell-ization of hostnames. You know ... I'd doubt we'd have such an imminent need for 3.4 x 10^38 distinct addresses if we could clear out SPAM-based black-hole addresses. Mmmmm ... what a great world that'd be.

    ~N~
    Reply With Quote Reply With Quote
« Previous Thread | Next Thread »

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •  

Forum Rules