Danger of IPv6 RRS feed

  • Question

  • Hi! May I publish here original research? It can be important to see by the american IT professionals. Sorry for language: english is not my native. If I choosed wrong forum, please move it to right one.

    The theme is danger of IPv6. Very long 128-bit address of IPv6 will lead to unnecessity of NAT and private networks in IPv6 network. With time, NAT and private networks will disappear. IPv6 network will become totally transparent and opened for incoming connections. Any host on the planet will be able to establish connection with any other host. This can lead to "client-client" style of communications instead of "client-server". Server as point of user activity concentration will become unnecessary. "Client-client" applications will be used widely. The danger is haotic uncontrolled using of this network. It will be very difficult to control it. I think, with time, IPv6 network will be destroyed by angry men, because they will not be able to control it. More of that, I think the main goal of IPv6 introduction is namely destroing of Internet's globality by this manner. After collaps of IPv6 network, global Internet will be devided on national, regional or even local segments with difficult rules of routing between them. I think that is main goal of IPv6.

    NAT, private networks and client-server style of communications must be kept, because they give known degree of Internet controllability. Clients in private networks can be only clients of Internet, but not servers. They can initiate connections but they can not accept them from global network. We have to keep this system, if we want to save global Internet.

    Word "NAT" has sound similar to "NOT!!" with two exclamations. I think, that is the sense of this technology: the men don't accept totally opened network, private networks must exist, and must be opened inside particular network only. I think, that is not big cost. We have a lot of Internet resources, and we can create own ones, so it is acceptable. To keep global Internet is much more important.

    In 1970-s, when IPv4 was developed, the population of Earth was 4 billions (it became twice more during previous 50 years). Developers of IPv4 must understand that 4 billions of addresses will not be enough for every host on the planet. Short 32-bit address was choosed with intention of future introducing of NAT and private networks. Short 32-bit address makes NAT and private networks necessary. That is the goal of short 32-bit address. Long 128-bit address eliminates this.

    I mean, short 32-bit address is restriction, but it is NOT protocol restriction, it is social restriction, it is social imperative. Internet is part of society, it is not simply mechanism. We can not simply enlarge its efficiency without thinking what influence it will have. IPv6 has too much communication freedom - this freedom will be destroyed and we will loose globality of our network.

    You have to know that NAT444 in IPv4 allows trillions (70 * 10^12) private addresses behind EVERY globally routed IPv4 address. So, in fact, the amount of CLIENTS in IPv4 network IS NOT restricted. We can have ANY amount of home or office computers or smartphones connected to IPv4. The "problem" of IPv4 address space exhausting does not touch them. The globally routed addresses IPv4 are dedicated ONLY for global servers and global routers. We have 4 billions of globally routed address IPv4. This number is not much below that actual population of Earth. I don't believe that Internet providers have built network so difficult that they need all of them for routing purposes. It looks like intensive using of address space without real reason, with intention of exhausting. People that want to destroy global Internet, use IPv4 address space maximally intensive and say: "Oh, we need more addresses, let's go to IPv6".

    At first, we have to ban IPv6. I removed it from my network interfaces and I recommend to do it everybody. Software engeneers, exclude IPv6 support from your products.

    The temporary resolving of IPv4 address space exhausting problem can be rent of address. If company pays to IANA some monthly tax for using address space, it will economize on it, it will return unused space back to IANA. The tax can be little, for minimal influence on Internet cost, but big enough to think: "We have to economize".

    But we have to find final resolving of address space exhausting problem, or else our descendants will continue introducing IPv6.

    The idea (result of brainstorming) is to introduce two kinds of sockets: client socket and server socket. Client socket may operate only with private addresses, server socket may operate only with global addresses, or else exception is thrown. We have to introduce it to programming practice, programming tradition, programming architecture. If programmer writes client application, he uses ClientSocket class, if server application, he uses ServerSocket class. In that case, the mass of client software will keep the NECESSITY of private addresses and private networks. Private networks architecture will become a part of programming archetecture.

    We can do it with IPv4, and, if this architecture will become the necessity of network programming, then we can make Internet address longer with light heart, without danger that private networks will disappear.

    For example, it can be IPv8 with 8-bytes address length, 64 bits. If first bit is 0 - this is private address, if 1 - this is global address. Example of private address IPv8: Example of global address IPv8:

    The problem is opened. It is not final solution, it's only main particular idea from brainstorming. The task 
    • Edited by acbaile Friday, March 20, 2020 6:44 PM
    Friday, March 20, 2020 5:53 PM


  • I revoke my claims to IPv6. We have to accept IPv6. Yes, it will make network hierarchical, but we have to do it if we want global safety. Coronavirus says about the problem of global communications.
    • Marked as answer by acbaile Thursday, April 2, 2020 10:46 PM
    Thursday, April 2, 2020 10:46 PM

All replies

  • I invite everybody to participate in the brainstorming with the following question:


    We have to resolve this problem. IPv6 stopping is not enough. IPv6 stopping was done in the past, but generations change, and new ones don't understand the danger of IPv6. New ones continue introduction of IPv6. If we don't do it, our descendants (without our experience) will meet this danger in greater scale. So, we have to resolve "problem" of address space exhausting, because they use it as strong argument.

    Your ideas are welcome.

    We MUST prevent disappearing of NAT, private networks and client-server style of communications.

    I think, introducing private networks to the programming architecture is good idea.

    • Edited by acbaile Saturday, March 21, 2020 6:33 PM
    Saturday, March 21, 2020 6:32 PM
  • We have to write THE DESIRABILITY and THE NECESSITY of NAT, private networks and dominating of client-server style of communications to the official Internet documents. Our descendants must read it and understand that following three things - NAT, private networks and client-server style of communications - are MIRROR of social structure. We have no right to eliminate them and we have no right to allow introducing the system that will destroy its.
    Saturday, March 21, 2020 6:52 PM
  • IMPORTANT NOTE! We have to eliminate the danger of enlarge private networks in IPv8 until size of universe - that can be used for destruction of Internet's globality too. We have to allow existence of private networks in small size ONLY. The idea expressed earlier - 63 bits for private addresses - is UNLUCKY. We have to restrict maximal size of private network to reasonable bigness.

    In actual IPv4 the biggest private network is, it has 2^24 = 16.8 millions of addresses. Do we need more? Do organizations that have more nodes exist? We have to keep this limit. In a future - if some organizations will ask for greater size of private network - they MUST justify it. More compact private networks in IPv8 of course will exist too, similar to

    The ClientSocket will have right to be bound ONLY to one of these private addresses. Network is non-globally-routed one with special assignment to enlarge deepness of NAT's. We can not consider it private because it has no clients, it's only middlenet between global network and private. ClientSocket MUST NOT have right to be bound to address in this network.

    Did you understand the idea? ClientSockets will PIN the existence of small private networks. It will secure the Internet. Architecture of private networks will become a part of programming architecture. Explication of necessity and social nature of private networks must be added to official Internet documents. Elimination of ClientSocket must be considered as social crime, as attempt to destroy Internet. Our descendants must read it and understand.

    We have to block IPv6. At first we have to implement ClientSocket and ServerSocket. Internet community have to accept this architecture as convention. Operational system producers must have NO RIGHT to eliminate these restrictions from ClientSocket and ServerSocket. If this convention will work, the Internet will be safe. If somebody will cancel these restrictions - it will be bad. But, if main OS producers will supply operational systems that support ONLY this model, other software producers will have to accept and use it. Small groups of convention breakers can not change the global situation. If majority of software use it, private networks will be the necessity.

    Different system calls. CreateClientSocket(), CreateServerSocket(). Or simply different address families like expressed earlier - InternetworkV8Private, InternetworkV8Global.

    NATs in IPv8 will become simpler - its will become one-level. The majority of NATs in IPv8 will be NAT88.

    • Edited by acbaile Friday, March 27, 2020 10:35 AM
    Friday, March 27, 2020 10:22 AM
  • I recognize that my idea from brainstorming about ClientSocket, ServerSocket and IPv8 is UNSUCCESSFUL. This will not eliminate the redundancy of 8-byte address. Yes, OS producers can implement it and Windows software can REQUIRE private address, but anybody can use global address IPv8 for free on his router. A lot of IPv8 addresses - anybody can ask it from internet provider and configure port forwarding in web interface of router. So, it will not work.

    It seems, limited address space is the necessity. It seems, we have to stay with IPv4 with it's short 4-byte address. It can be IPv5 in perspective, with the same 4-byte address. IPv5 can eliminate other deficiencies of IPv4 like fragmentation and minimal packet size that all hosts must accept, but address MUST stay 4 bytes.

    We have to find solution for "IPv4 address space exhausting problem". My suspicion is that this problem is imaginary. It looks like maximal using of IPv4 address space with intention to implement IPv6 with following chaos and following destroying of Internet. My suspicion is that telecoms and internet providers have BILLIONS of addresses unused or used without a necessity.

    Let's make commission in IANA for AUDIT using of IPv4 address space inside companies. Let this commission have right to take blocks back to the pool of accessible if it finds unnecessity. If you don't want rent, if you don't want to pay for address space, let's make audit.

    Let's write to Internet documents that SHORT address in IPv4 was chosen INTENTIONALLY to keep existence of private networks. Let's write that existence of private networks is social necessity, and short address IPv4 makes this necessity INEVITABLE. We have to keep 32-bit address because of this reason, and this is MORE IMPORTANT that inconvenience of economy. It ensures social safety of Internet.

    Therefore, we have to use IPv4 address space rationally. Audit or rent is the necessity. Your choice. You have to ACCEPT limited address space, because we will block IPv6 by ANY available method.

    • Marked as answer by acbaile Friday, March 27, 2020 11:51 AM
    • Edited by acbaile Friday, March 27, 2020 12:01 PM
    • Unmarked as answer by acbaile Thursday, April 2, 2020 10:44 PM
    Friday, March 27, 2020 11:51 AM
  • Let's open market of IPv4 blocks. Let organizations buy IPv4 blocks free. Market will stimulate economy. This does not cancel audit. Some tycoon can buy all available blocks simply for exhausting.
    Friday, March 27, 2020 12:13 PM
  • I revoke my claims to IPv6. We have to accept IPv6. Yes, it will make network hierarchical, but we have to do it if we want global safety. Coronavirus says about the problem of global communications.
    • Marked as answer by acbaile Thursday, April 2, 2020 10:46 PM
    Thursday, April 2, 2020 10:46 PM