Most *nix platforms have supported both for some time now so you can run either or both depending on your routing hardware and software end-point requirements. I have no clue about Microsoft's mayhem. I hope I don't confuse too many people here. I'm still catching up on the v6 addressing scheme myself.
There are two types of IPv6 address that can embed IPv4 addresses: ftp://ftp.isi.edu/in-notes/rfc2373.txt Section 2.5.4 "IPv6 Addresses with Embedded IPv4 Addresses" 1) IPv6 packet tunneling for IPv4 routing (80-bits of zero)(16-bits of bit zero)(32 bits of IPv4 address) Ex. ::0000:127.0.0.1 2) IPv4-only networks using IPv6 addressing (80-bits of zero)(16-bits of bit 16)(32 bits of IPv4 address) Ex. ::ffff:127.0.0.1 You would use #1 for instances where you wanted to use IPv6 packets on a IPv4 network(with IPv6 end-points). #2 is IPv6 addressing for end-points that only accept IPv4 packets. If you deploy IPv6 and still have to use IPv4 on an end somewhere, then you'll need to go with #2. I have several boxen running Debian now that listen on tcp6 stacks using ::ffff:<addr> binding. All of my Windows boxen use IPv4 still, so I haven't had to move to IPv6 completely yet. This transition between 4 and 6 is going to be tough. That's why options #1 and #2 were put into the RFC. IPv6 is 8 segments of 16-bits, which is 128-bit hex addressing more similar to MAC hardware addresses than our familiar numerical IP addresses. 0000:0000:0000:0000:0000:0000:0000:0000 FFFF:FFFF:FFFF:FFFF:FFFF:FFFF:FFFF:FFFF 340,282,366,920,938,463,463,374,607,431,768,211,456 addresses Luckily, the RFC offers sanity to addressing methods using shortcuts which eliminate leading and ending 16-bit blocks of zeros. "::" means repeated 16-bit zero blocks. 0:0:0:0:0:0:0:1 can be represented as ::1 (or ::0001 if I'm not mistaken). ------------------------------------------ Glen Batchelor IT Director All-Spec Industries phone: (910) 332-0424 fax: (910) 763-5664 e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED] ------------------------------------------- www.allspec.com ------------------------------------------- > -----Original Message----- > From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:owner-u2- > [EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of Charles Barouch > Sent: Monday, May 07, 2007 1:33 PM > To: [email protected] > Subject: [U2] IPv6 > > All, > With the US government requiring implementation by June 2006, with > Europe and Asia already doing a lot with it, shouldn't there be more > talk here about IPv6 (http://www.ipv6.org/)? I know my clients will be > asking me soon. Is it a big deal, how long can they avoid coming on > board? Why should they ever? Will their database still connect to > everything? > Does anyone out there already have some experience to share? If it's > easy, I'd love to have that answer ready when I get asked. If it's hard, > I need to know what the steps are, at least in the broad outline. If i > don't know, they'll pay someone else to find out... > > > -- > > Charles Barouch ([EMAIL PROTECTED]) > www.KeyAlly.com (718) 762-3884 x 1 > P. O. Box 540957, Queens, NY 11354 > ------- > u2-users mailing list > [email protected] > To unsubscribe please visit http://listserver.u2ug.org/ ------- u2-users mailing list [email protected] To unsubscribe please visit http://listserver.u2ug.org/
