Guest post by We’ve taken the next step in Internet connectivity, and have IPv6-enabled this site for testing purposes. Of course, this will only work if your ISP or some third-party gateway provides you with IPv6 connectivity, which you can check here. If you’re all set, try the IPv6 OSnews out at http://ipv6.osnews.com/ and let us know if you have any trouble with it.
Good thing!
I think the second sentence in that pitch was unneeded.
Yup, edited the article a bit to make it even more straight to the point. After all, we probably don’t have to explain what IPv6 is to the general OSnews audience
I’m using Windows 7 with IPv6 enabled and I still can’t get to the site from work. Would that mean my local network or my ISP is not up to speed (assuming I did everything correctly for Windows 7)?
Edited 2011-06-22 15:46 UTC
Most likely explanation is your ISP doesn’t support IPv6 (it is switched on in later versions of Windows by default but the infrastructure still has to support it). I myself use a Hurricane Electric tunnel which seems to work quite well, and shall give OSNews a test when I’m home from work 🙂
First, check your router. Most home routers don’t support IPv6 yet. Generally speaking, the only time your home router will support IPv6 is if you were specifically looking for that as a feature.
Next, the modem you use with your service also has to support it. I’m not sure how common these are, or if IPv6-capable service providers give them out by default or not.
Finally, your ISP has to support it. If you’re using Comcast, your out of luck (unless you happen to be one of a couple thousand people in 1 of 5 cities).
I can’t browse the site from home using AT&T DSL. The test site says:
You appear to have no IPv6 address.
It looks like you have only IPv4 Internet service at this time. Don’t feel bad – most people are in this position right now. Most Internet service providers are not quite yet ready to provide IPv6 Internet to residential customers.
So I guess I’m shit outta luck for now
Don’t know if my router supports it… not really curious enough to check into it.
It is your ISP, I’m willing to bet my last dollar on it. As a PC builder and repairman I’ve been trying to get up to speed on IP V6 but have learned the hard way that until the ISPs jump on board it is a waste of time and talking to my local ISP I get “IP V6, what’s that?” so I doubt we’ll be seeing it any time soon.
Talking to the head of my cableco he told me flat footed that at current growth rates my cableco could easily go another decade and a half without exhausting their current addresses, and that isn’t counting the possibility of NAT. But even with every cable box on 24/7 he said their dynamic address pool has a good decade plus before being depleted and as long as the VAST majority of routers (seriously go look at Newegg. The vast majority of routers sold to consumers RIGHT NOW doesn’t support IP V6 and most likely never will) and other consumer gear support IP V4 only the support nightmare makes IP V6 a non starter.
Personally i think the moron that designed IP V6 to not be backwards compatible (by say using a 6to4 wrapper or other encapsulation) should be stood in the village square and have rotten fruit thrown at him as it makes adoption by those that already have large amount invested in IP V4 a mess. I personally doubt we’ll see the majority of ISPs switch over until the late teens at the earliest.
And honestly if we would demand that those sitting on huge swaths of IP V4 addresses cough them up or spend a buck a month to keep them? We wouldn’t be having this problem and would have time for an orderly switch out, as less than 35% at last count of IP V4 addresses are being used, the rest are squatters and those that got huge class As back when the net was born.
So as someone who lives in a flyover state let me say this: It is gonna be bad folks. Most of the experienced net guys are retiring rather than deal with the headache that is IP V6, years of outsourcing has left IT in most places badly short handed as an American would have to be insane to go into IT anymore,not to mention the lousy pay makes it not worth the effort, and because the few guys that are left are both short handed and have ZERO experience with the tech problems that would take a few hours to diagnose and fix with IP V4 will take days or even weeks with IP V6. It is gonna be a mess folks, really REALLY ugly. I can see why most ISPs are pretending IP V6 doesn’t exist as it is gonna cost them some serious $$$ to do the switchover and all the failures are gonna have folks screaming bloody murder.
just tested it from my iPad on the t-Mobile network in the uk its not working for me.
Transmitted the issue to Endpoint, their answer is that anyone who has problems should check their IPv6 link first using this link : http://test-ipv6.com/
EDIT : Added it to the article
Edited 2011-06-22 16:45 UTC
This comment was posted over IPv6 using a 6to4 anycast gateway (192.88.99.1). I used to get a gateway in NYC from Boston FIOS. Now I am getting a gateway in Chicago. Verizon won’t directly pass IPv6 yet.
It is very easy to set dd-wrt up to use a 6to4 gateway. Enabling 6to4 in your router makes your whole LAN IPv6 enabled. Might be interesting to do an article on setting this up just to raise awareness.
This sure qualifies as cheating, but I can browse ipv6.osnews.com using http://ipv6to4.com/
I’ve got 6to4 running on my gateway at home and this is working great.
Good to see more web sites getting with IPv6. Congrats, OSnews!
The IPv6 site works great for me, using a he.net tunnel. I would prefer if the IPv6 site was at the same URL, i.e. if http://www.osnews.com had an AAAA entry.
I guess that’s the final plan, if this experiment proves to be successful.
Yup it works on the HE-tunnel in NL and native.
I only wish IPv6 was offered by my ISP.
Native IPv6 from ISP
traceroute6 to ipv6.osnews.com (2607:f0d0:1002:62::3) from 2001:980:XXXXX, 64 hops max, 12 byte packets
1 fritz.box 3.576 ms 1.703 ms 1.188 ms
2 lo1.dr8.1d12.xs4all.net 18.774 ms 20.203 ms 18.787 ms
3 1418.ae3.xr4.1d12.xs4all.net 17.766 ms 18.674 ms 18.675 ms
4 2001:888:1:4006::1 22.521 ms 21.173 ms 18.395 ms
5 10gigabitethernet3-3.core1.ams1.he.net 28.465 ms 19.174 ms 24.449 ms
6 10gigabitethernet1-4.core1.lon1.he.net 26.328 ms 28.842 ms 26.253 ms
7 10gigabitethernet7-4.core1.nyc4.he.net 97.060 ms 93.956 ms 93.629 ms
8 10gigabitethernet2-3.core1.ash1.he.net 111.131 ms 107.544 ms 102.887 ms
9 te1-2.cer01.wdc01.washingtondc-datacenter.com 101.041 ms 102.371 ms 139.527 ms
10 po3.bbr02.tl01.atl01.networklayer.com 112.441 ms 112.814 ms 112.201 ms
11 po7.bbr02.eq01.dal01.networklayer.com 132.718 ms 132.882 ms 133.030 ms
12 po6.dar02.sr01.dal01.networklayer.com 133.568 ms 133.003 ms 132.849 ms
13 po2.fcr02.sr04.dal01.networklayer.com 133.959 ms 156.021 ms 134.484 ms
14 osnews.com 134.664 ms 133.528 ms 132.948 ms
Edited 2011-06-22 21:40 UTC
This is a test to post a message using an IPv6 only connection.
What doesn’t work:
– the news feed link generator @ http://ipv6.osnews.com/feeds.
– the avatars don’t show in comments
– it is possible to edit a message using IPv6 only, but the redirect following it goes to http://www.osnews.com.
– it seems some of the JS doesn’t load (as it has hard links to http://www.osnews.com)
Edited 2011-06-23 09:07 UTC
Works for me.
ipv6.osnews.com [2607:f0d0:1002:62::3]
http://www.osnews.com [74.86.31.159]
Posted using ipv6 through a Hurricane Electric tunnel. Using addresses distributed over my network by RADVD running on my patented “screenless netbook” server. 😀
can i use ipv6 if i have ipv4 support modem if yes then pleease tell me i want to use it and what are the consiquences of it, should i ablwe to surf all the web after activating the ipv6, please tell
thanks!
Bravo this really works!
http://ipv6to4.com/
Thanks for the tip its a good work around for now, however even our team of IP Network Guru are puzzled how it works? I’m a bit confused about the IPv6 thing, we able to get the correct AAAA records replied by IPv6 ISP without using tunneling but by a browser.
For example we can get AAAA records , but have had problems accessing this site when we setup with IPv4 in IPv6 tunnel mode:
IPv6 test and AAAA Records
Array ( [0] => Array ( [host] => marconi.dimetel.uc.edu.ve [type] => AAAA [ipv6] => 2800:a030::3 [class] => IN [ttl] => 86400 ) )
http://www.dimetel.uc.edu.ve IPv6 address is: 2800:a030::3
http://www.dimetel.uc.edu.ve IPv4 address is: 190.170.67.3
190.170.67.3 is valid IPv4
2800:a030::3 is valid IPv6
Using the H.E IPv6to4.com tunnel allows me to access every IPV6 site so why the tunnelling?
Any clues for why this is or is it time for us to start looking for an IPv6 ISP and go throught cost of setting it up? Thanks
I browse in ipv9. Its better for the environment.
http://tools.ietf.org/html/rfc1606
Linux (Mint 9 LTS amd64), miredo IPv6 tunnel – works flawlessly
Windows 7 x64 VM, Hurricane Electric IPv6 tunnel – works flawlessly
Windows 7 x86 VM, MS Teredo tunnel – fail (to be expected; I yet have to see a working teredo tunnel on Windows)
A great move to run the site on a dual v4/v6 stack; maybe the ISPs will slowly get the idea that a transission to IPv6 would be a good idea.