Internet to run out of IP's between 2009 and 2012

[ScioAgapeOmnis]

Not quite sure yet how significant this will be, but thought I'd post it just to bring this to forum's awareness, as it can be totally nothing like the y2k thing, or it could be potentially disastrous to the internet. Here are the links, in order, to bring yourself up to speed:

This link explains what an IP address is:
_http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/IP_address

Currently the entire internet is using "IPv4" type of IP address which start at 0.0.0.0 and end at 255.255.255.255 to make for a total of 4,228,250,625 possible combinations. So in the very best scenario - that's the maximum number of devices that can currently access the internet. However, the real number is a lot less because of how the IP addresses are distributed or "allocated" to various companies, people, internet service providers, networks, and other uses. For example, all the IP's the range from 127.0.0.0 to 127.255.255.255 cannot be used as internet addresses cuz they are reserved for "localhost communication". That's about 16 million IP's already unavailable. But there are a *lot* more reserved for special purposes in similar ways. Long story short, the allocation is less than "optimal", cutting hundreds of millions of IP's away from that 4 billion number. Here are more details about IPV4 and IP allocation:

_http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/IPv4

In the above link it also says:

As of May 2007, predictions of exhaustion date of the unallocated IANA pool seem to converge to between March 2010 and May 2010.

Which basically means, according to this wikipedia article, that's basically when we'll use up all available IP's.

Here is an article that has a good layman's explanation of the situation with running out:

_http://www.ripe.net/info/info-services/ipv4/index.html

And here are 2 studies that also explore this issue and what the temporary/short-term and long term solutions are:

_http://icons.apnic.net/index.php?option=com_content&task=view&id=2136
_http://www.cisco.com/web/about/ac123/ac147/archived_issues/ipj_8-3/ipv4.html

The gist is that short-term solutions are fixing the way we allocate IP's, and re-allocating so that we have closer to that 4 billion available for actual internet use. The long term solution is going from IPv4, which only has a 32-bit addressing space (meaning 2 to the 32nd power, aka 4 billion total IP's available) to IPv6 which has a 128-bit addressing space (which means 2 to the 128th power, which is 18 quintillion squared, aka LOTS).

So we have the problem - running out of IP's very soon. And the solution - switch everything and everyone on the internet to the IPv6 system. The reason I bring this up is, cuz we know how the PTB are not fans of the internet, and all the communication/networking together this allows people to do. And that it's highly likely that they are cooking up a plan to somehow "shut it down", and either blame it on terrorists (as we've seen the news articles about internet being a terrorist recruitment heaven), or some other excuse. So while doing some research about this IP situation (cuz I'm a big nerd), it suddenly occurred to me - what if they use this major "transition" as a way to close the lid? After all, it looks like a big opportunity, a weak spot - a major global internet transition. And even in that mainstream study at the apnic.net link above, it says:

5) What will the situation after August 11th 2011 be?
AfriNIC would probably be able to satisfy the "critical infrastructure", but may not be able to do much for the other categories. The latter will be confronted by the black market of IP addresses. It will be very hard and expensive to get IP addresses and there will be an excessive inclination to the usage of NAT which will negatively impact the network.

Sure sounds like they are predicting a pretty chaotic/difficult situation, and they're not considering any intentional sabotage. But if we bring that into the picture, as in, the government causing economic/infrastructural difficulties intentionally to make this process as chaotic and horrible as possible, I could see a potential recipe for disaster - and it would be bad enough without needing any "terrorism". And notice the year 2011 here - different sources give different years, but it looks like generally various sources give 2009 at the earliest and 2012 is the very latest.

Now, I'm not sure that there is anything that can really be done on our part here to stop this, except just to be aware of this possibility, and if it does happen, well, awareness/knowledge protects. But my guess is, if the government does use this great opportunity to end the internet, or at least mess it up enough to make it dysfunctional, the best we can do is to keep on spreading what we're learning about the pathology far and wide, while we still can. So if you've been postponing making a website or a blog, soon you may not be able to, so my advice is to do so while you still can.

Plus, 2009 might be a big year for comets, possible ice age, and god knows what else. And if that happens to be the case, would the internet "ending" by running out of IP's around the same time real global chaos begins be a coincidence? If I was really cynical (and I am), I could even hypothesize that it could've been planned that way, and the whole IP address scheme was designed with this limitation in mind ahead of time, and its "expiration" known and timed to coincide with other cyclical disasters at the same time. In other words, maybe the internet was already sabotaged/compromised in the planning stages. I dunno, maybe I'm stretching it with that one, but just a thought.

 

[vinny]

So while doing some research about this IP situation (cuz I'm a big nerd), it suddenly occurred to me - what if they use this major "transition" as a way to close the lid? After all, it looks like a big opportunity, a weak spot - a major global internet transition.

I think that's plausible, and I'm sure the PTB have their best (hired in) brains on the job already. The transition would mean new protocols, new software on EVERY device that needed to connect, and this rollout could very easily be strictly controlled, and have other 'trojan' things (only limited by your imagination) inescapably embedded in it.

Ie: you get with the new program along with ALL it's new baggage whatever that might be (so called 'trusted computing', or "iris scans"... whatever), or you're OFF the net.

much like they way, already, it is getting harder and harder for the 'man in the street' to buy a PC without Windows Vista on it. It is only a fairly short walk from here to a situation where it is impossible to buy any kind of PC without on-chip restrictions blocking any 'unauthorised' software - the foundations for this are already underway.


edit: another scenario - the impending run-out of IPs (I'm sure I read years ago about this potential situation and all kinds of 'hacky' ways round it) in 2009-2001 is ITSELF a scam (eg: either the timing is wrong, or there are already other solutions), and that actually the figures have been cooked to justify a shutdown at this 'convenient' time.

 

[ScioAgapeOmnis]

To complement what Vinny is saying, here's a good article about Vista's current DRM situation:

_http://www.pcmag.com/article2/0,4149,942369,00.asp

However, the DRM thing is only the beginning, it is to "smooth over" the transition that is planned, and patents already exist and the next version of Windows may really shock you. This short article explains what's about to happen:

_http://www.groklaw.net/article.php?story=2007012808444146

Snippet from above article:

All in all, it fits with an overall goal of turning your home PC from an empowering tool into a "don't tamper" appliance - indeed, into a device that you effectively lease (rather than own) that is useful for little more than delivering approved partner content and taking part in those harmless online activities that don't endanger the OS vendor's revenue (or those of its approved partners.):

[0040] ... Lastly, service providers or system operators who may be providing computers on a pay-as-you-go or pay-per-use basis may be able to limit installation of potentially harmful applications [DrS: harmful to whom?] or hardware peripherals by restricting the installation of required operating system add-on modules.

A model where the level of functionality of the OS can be purchased on so fine-grained a basis has many other interesting (and disquieting) possibilities, which cannot all be covered in this space. Since all functionality enhancements have to pass ultimately through the gatekeeper of the base OS vendor, this vendor gains a power of patronage. For example, a blogger who passed favourable comment on one of the OS vendor's products could find himself rewarded with a free upgrade of a minor system component. The scope for mischief by a unscrupulous OS vendor is also vast -- not that I make any particular allegation here.

Did you catch that? It is *exactly* what Vinny said above, if applications are deemed "harmful" or "unsuitable"
by some corporate psychopaths, you won't be allowed to install or use it. And this is not just a pipe dream, it is patented, and it is currently in development and we're going to see it soon. You will either use it or you won't be allowed to use a computer. So the destruction of the internet is truly only the beginning. Pathocratic controls that are going to be imposed on *all* computer use preventing you from doing anything on your computer that they don't explicitly allow and know about. And if you have ordered any e-books from this site but have not got around to reading them, my advice is to read them while you're still allowed to have them on your computer. Even better, have paper copies in your hand. Although even paper copies aren't exactly safe as we know that the first manuscript of Political Ponerology had to be thrown into the fire when information police came knocking. But as the info above lays out, relying on the internet to last much longer as you know it, and even relying on being able to have the right to your own files on your own computer, is a bad idea.

And just to throw into this soup, let's not forget the "cashless" plan. The whole ID-chip that the C's have mentioned. My guess is, it is probably going to be instituted around the same time as all of the above is introduced. It will seem like separate ideas from separate groups coincidentally coming together around the same time - but as we know it all accomplishes the same thing, institutes total control. Oh yeah, huge "coincidence" there. Meanwhile, here's a nice article about the current status of DRM's "security", and how it totally fails to achieve its stated purpose, but ends up achieving something else. Another innocent case of incompetence or coincidence I'm sure. Just like how Bush fights the freedom-hating terrorists by taking away our freedoms. He just didn't think it through, that's it! :P

_http://www.theinquirer.net/default.aspx?article=29161

 

[Beau]

Found this interesting note on a blog:

from _http://tritterbrew.wordpress.com/2007/02/20/ipv6-what-me-worry/

What's driving the move to IPv6? In the government the military is the major force for movement to IPv6. The military foresees the day when every soldier, weapon, vehicle, building, supply, MRE? will have it's own uniquely addressable IP address. There was much talk about "shortening the kill chain" and how IPv6 is important for this.

One of the things that intrigued me about the conference was the fact that there is a clear mandate to migrate to IPv6 and a clear lack of understanding of what the impact of this migration will be. Even Gerald Charles, Jr., Director , Internet Business Solutions group for Cisco acknowledged that no one really knows what will happen when there is a large-scale migration to IPv6, particularly since we will all be living in a dual-stack (IPv4/IPv6) world for decades. I really appreciated his honesty but I also found it a bit disconcerting.

 

[ArdVan]

If the PTB no longer want you to have internet access they probably just raise the prices or availability of electricity or telephone lines. Even today there are many who don't have or only very slow internet access.

All the computer stuff is easy to shut down. No electricity and you no longer have internet access. Does someone remember the accident in ONE factory only which produced some chemical component needed for making chip casings and suddenly the producers of ICs had problems producing them. I'm convinced that at least 50% of the electronic parts in use by the US army are made in Asia.

I think a worldwide crisis, comets and even a war can easy throw us back a half century. We don't have cars like the ones from the 1960 without electronics anymore. We got so dependent of microprocessors and electronics that if some strategic points of this world get destroyed, we will have to learn again how to write by hand.

IMO to many take our technology for granted, like water or air. But it's a kind of bootstrap process IMO: each generation can build new stuff upon the knowledge of the old generation, without having to learn/invent what the old generation had to learn. If this chain gets interrupted by some event, we will be thrown back into "stone age".

 

[Ringo]

Can't see them even thinking of taking the net away? It's too useful for them to track what we say and do, collect data, give out propaganda etc. Things like VoIP (voice over IP is what they want) so it's easier to pipe everyones conversations into a voice recorder to be analysed. Why stop users (consumers) connecting to the net, surely you just stop 'unauthorised' parties hosting websites. Easily done by bringing in cyber terrorist laws or migrating the world to something like internet2 and making it expensive to host, leaving sites like SOTT behind on old networks that nobody can get to.

IPv6 is already here and waiting in the wings. All the hardware/software is ready in most companies to translate between the 2 formats as we migrate. Smaller companies/users who need to be on IPv6 straight away (home users wont) will just have to rollout the hardware/software updates when the date is set. Just like companies did when support ended for Windows NT and companies had to move to Windows 2000.

Not sure if those links have made it clear, IPv4 won't be switched off, just translated into IPv6 until it doesn't exist anymore.

Imagine if they give all appliances IP addresses and put them online, selling it to us like "think of a day your fridge can replenish food when it's getting low, that's more time to watch TV!", or allow you to set your heating/kettle/oven etc to come on as you drive home, all those things people would have to re purchase in a frenzy to keep up with the times. Hidden amongst all that would be the ability to do things like monitoring how the latest propaganda is doing by your TV habits.



R.

 

[ScioAgapeOmnis]

Can't see them even thinking of taking the net away? It's too useful for them to track what we say and do, collect data, give out propaganda etc.

That's a good point too, the net does help them keep track of our interests. But at the same time, the net is the only resource that alternative media and regular folk have to speak their mind in front of a large audience for low cost - as opposed to advertisements that cost a lot more. So while it tells them who's into "alternative" interests, it does provide a major portal for the truth to be spoken and to potentially reach hundreds of millions of people (like that Pentagon Flash did for example). I'd think the mainstream media would be a much more useful propaganda tool than the internet.

And as for switching to IPv6, as I understand it, at some point we will run out of IPv4 IP addresses. So any new users on the internet would have to get the right hardware and software and use IPv6. Are you saying that this will basically be a "seamless" process like a new operating system coming out? Because what about what that study said about IP addresses becoming expensive and being "sold/bought" on a black market, etc? I mean, they seem to be expecting a not-so-seamless changeover.

Why stop users (consumers) connecting to the net, surely you just stop 'unauthorised' parties hosting websites. Easily done by bringing in cyber terrorist laws or migrating the world to something like internet2 and making it expensive to host, leaving sites like SOTT behind on old networks that nobody can get to.

That's kinda along the lines of what I was thinking, that the switchover to IPv6 will provide the opportunity to bring in those "cyber terrorists". As Beau quoted that blog that quotes that Gerald guy who says that no one knows what will happen when there is a a large-scale migration to IPv6, plus the uncertainty and potential "chaos" expressed in that other study, it just seems like a good opportunity to make the "worst" come true. So instead of attacking the internet when it just sits there and everybody feels secure, they can make it known that the whole internet is going through a new transition and nobody knows what will happen, and what new vulnerabilities this introduces, etc. And then when everybody is half-expecting something to happen, to make it happen, which can be played as "those evil terrorists took advantage of a weak and uncertain time in the internet's life" etc. Plus, again what Beau quoted, where it says every soldier and every device being connected. That also provides opportunity to "hack" a lot more devices. So if the army itself can compromise its new "internet-connected-bullets" they could spin it as the terrorists targeting military using the new IPv6 etc.

Imagine if they give all appliances IP addresses and put them online, selling it to us like "think of a day your fridge can replenish food when it's getting low, that's more time to watch TV!", or allow you to set your heating/kettle/oven etc to come on as you drive home, all those things people would have to re purchase in a frenzy to keep up with the times. Hidden amongst all that would be the ability to do things like monitoring how the latest propaganda is doing by your TV habits.

And I think that's also very interesting, the whole re-purchasing thing. Where all the new products are connected to the internet, as in, have a "chip" inside. So they can all be identified, tracked, which means clothing, toys, tools, anything. So then people wouldn't be the only ones "chipped". It'll all be excused to track supplies, or for security, or to make infrastructure/economy work more "efficiently". In fact, if the economy is set to crash, there's another good opportunity to "force" everybody to buy only the secure products, to chip everything to "fix" the economy etc. Basically I just can't help but see it all culminating in the same time period, it's like all these different things coming together, and one can be used to excuse the introduction of the other ones, etc.

 

[Ringo]

And as for switching to IPv6, as I understand it, at some point we will run out of IPv4 IP addresses. So any new users on the internet would have to get the right hardware and software and use IPv6. Are you saying that this will basically be a "seamless" process like a new operating system coming out? Because what about what that study said about IP addresses becoming expensive and being "sold/bought" on a black market, etc? I mean, they seem to be expecting a not-so-seamless changeover.

"It is almost evident that with the exhaustion of the of IPv4 address pool, a black market will develop with its law of supply and demand and will not be favorable to ISPs in emerging regions."

ISPs would fight over the last class A (largest) networks for sure, possibly driving the cost up to acquire them. But the above statement is just misleading, if an ISP could sell them on a black market, it'd be like a mobile phone company (assigned its own prefixed numbers) also taking back all it's customer's numbers, then sell the job lot to the highest bidder because they also where running low on digits to use. Doesn't make sense, before that happened I'm sure IP addresses would have to go back to the governing body that hands them out.

If your ISP started using IPv6 tomorrow, you would need a dsl modem/router or whatever your PC uses to connect to your ISP to translate it back to IPv4. By doing this your PC wouldn't know anything had changed. Outgoing data from your PC would be translated back to IPv6 (by your router) on the way back to the ISP. As the ISPs had switched over, they wouldn't need their IPv4 network addresses, that can then be re used elsewhere (if they chose to). Slowly in years to come, Vista will be everywhere and they'll be no need for any translation process.

R.

 

[Beau]

Where all the new products are connected to the internet, as in, have a "chip" inside. So they can all be identified, tracked, which means clothing, toys, tools, anything. So then people wouldn't be the only ones "chipped".

From Techdirt (it's a rather old article):

Building The Parallel Internet (Or Not) And Associated Problems
from the running-out-of-IP-addresses dept

A good article about the debates currently going on about how and if we should go about switching from IPv4 to IPv6. The article gives a good explanation of the problem in simple terms: that as more and more devices beyond just computers get connected to the internet, each is going to need a separate internet address - and with current standards we're going to run out of numbers pretty soon. So, along comes IPv6 which offers many more numbers, but there's quite a interoperability problem - and just about everything will need to be upgraded. Of course, there are also people who say we're focusing on the wrong problem in the first place, and there's no need to switch to IPv6 at all. People have been talking about this for a while, and I haven't followed the debate too closely, but I imagine it's on the verge of heating up a bit.

link: _http://techdirt.com/articles/20010828/0118205.shtml

Note: the article the author is referencing is from boston.com but appears to not be on their server anymore.

I read on another blog (don't have the link now) that eventually the idea is for every device we use, from toasters to automobiles to cellphones, to have its own IP address.

Talk about a Matrix for the PTB to control everything!

 

[Azur]

But the thing is, IPv4 still let's the PTB know who you are, it only takes an extra step to make sure: for those who don't have a fixed IP address, the DHCP logs from the ISP gives up that info.

You're not giving up anything with IPv6. If you thought you had privacy on the net with IPv4, it was induced by ignorance.

Cheers.

 

[yamez]

This is slightly off topic, you may be interested in a project called I2P _http://www.i2p.net/

To quote "I2P is an anonymizing network, offering a simple layer that identity-sensitive applications can use to securely communicate. All data is wrapped with several layers of encryption, and the network is both distributed and dynamic, with no trusted parties."

I2P sits on top of the existing Internet creating a virtual network. Allows IRC, email, blogging, browsing the I2P network and an outbound proxy to the Internet anonymously.

Still in beta form they point out that "Anonymity is not a boolean - we are not trying to make something "perfectly anonymous", but instead are working at making attacks more and more expensive to mount. I2P alone is what could be called a "low latency mix network", and there are limits to the anonymity offered by such a system"

For portability and the paranoid :) you can run I2P from a Linux live bootable CD with an encrypted USB flash drive for your storage that will work on almost any PC without having to install to a fixed hard drive.

I'm with ArdVan on this one though. Most PC motherboards are designed and made in the tiny Island state of Taiwan, although more production is going to China. And electricity being cut off. How would you be affected if SOTT and the Cassiopaea presence suddently disappeared from the Internet?