Follow Slashdot stories on Twitter

 



Forgot your password?
typodupeerror
Microsoft Networking The Internet IT

Microsoft Runs Out of US Address Space For Azure, Taps Its Global IPv4 Stock 250

Posted by timothy
from the one-on-every-desktop dept.
alphadogg (971356) writes "Microsoft has been forced to start using its global stock of IPv4 addresses to keep its Azure cloud service afloat in the U.S., highlighting the growing importance of making the shift to IP version 6. The newer version of the Internet Protocol adds an almost inexhaustible number of addresses thanks to a 128-bit long address field, compared to the 32 bits used by version 4. The IPv4 address space has been fully assigned in the U.S., meaning there are no additional addresses available, Microsoft said in a blog post earlier this week. This requires the company to use the IPv4 address space available to it globally for new services, it said."
This discussion has been archived. No new comments can be posted.

Microsoft Runs Out of US Address Space For Azure, Taps Its Global IPv4 Stock

Comments Filter:
  • by houstonbofh (602064) on Saturday June 14, 2014 @01:25PM (#47237189)
    So after years of panic, someone finally ran out of IPs. No, wait a minute... They still didn't.
    • by Tim the Gecko (745081) on Saturday June 14, 2014 @01:36PM (#47237245)
      "Years of procrastination" might be a better description than "years of panic". Putting off action is my favorite strategy too, but I've heard it doesn't work forever.
    • by spectrokid (660550) on Saturday June 14, 2014 @01:36PM (#47237247) Homepage
      but the routing tables once more become more complicated. Shit starts slowing down, there is more room for mistakes in BGP. With all the routers having to do more calculations a gazillion times a day, shit starts using more power. That is right: our refusal to move to IPV6 is increasing our emission of greenhouse gasses
    • There are still plenty of IP, but so many companys just buy them up and sit on them like they are a old childrens toys that need to be preserved in a box to keep value.

      Lets face it, these company's are hoping to make money on them when the demand is high, its just a typical move in a oligarchy

    • by tehlinux (896034) on Saturday June 14, 2014 @03:28PM (#47237715)

      I think the headline was meant to point out that people are actually using azure...

  • OR (Score:5, Interesting)

    by v1 (525388) on Saturday June 14, 2014 @01:30PM (#47237217) Homepage Journal

    there are no additional addresses available, Microsoft said in a blog post earlier this week. This requires the company to use the IPv4 address space available to it globally for new services,

    OR they could migrate those services to IPv6??

    Considering how much bashing MS gets for not being a leader, this would have made a really good opportunity for them.

    (I hate it when people say they're doing something because they were "forced" or "had no choice", when in reality, they had aa choice, they made a choice, and now don't want to take ownership of the outcome)

    • OR they could migrate those services to IPv6??

      No. Most of the world are not on IPv6 yet. My ISP has only started making it available, and the (global) company I work does not even have a plan for IPv6.

    • OR they could migrate those services to IPv6??

      The last estimates I saw were that 50% of users were unable to access ipv6 only services. Many of the 50% who can will be using a fragile tunneling protocol that fights nat rather than working with it.

      So services that need to be accessible to the general public need to be accessible on IPv4.

      (I hate it when people say they're doing something because they were "forced" or "had no choice", when in reality, they had aa choice, they made a choice, and now don't want to take ownership of the outcome)

      Of course sometimes there are no good choices, a growing hosting provider with an address shortage has to choose between grubbing together ipv4 addresses from whereever they can (causing routing table fragmentation, inna

    • by sjames (1099)

      Yes, technically they could go v6 only and then listen to the crickets chirping because way too many potential users are v4 only, but that's not an especially good answer.

    • Migrating those services would mean shutting off IPv4.

      That would mean that every customer that would want to access these services, would have to have IPv6 connectivity. If anything, MicroSoft should encourage their customers to get IPv6 connected, so they can eventually shut off the IPv4 connectivity for their services.

      Given the time frame they'll have to observe for their Enterprise customers, an announcement to do the shut down would have to be at least 3 years prior to the shut down date. They can't g

  • They're only really memorable to computers. Which is fine as far as it goes but IP4 addresses were something you could sorta remember if you dealt with the same number over and over again.

    Obviously for internal networks there's no need for IP6. But even beyond that... I wonder if we couldn't improve on the DNS system so that we could assign names to IP addresses differently.

    I don't know... something so we never have to work with the IP6 numbers which are so large and random that a human being really has no

    • Work with them for a bit assign them in a sensible manner. Been using IPv6 for a long time you remember your prefix fairly easily. I've got the ipv4 address of all my servers coded into the ipv6 address in human readable format. So I just go 2001:abcd:1234:5678::10:10:20:53 for 10.10.20.53. I do not work with desktops or "random" dhcp everything has consistent IP's.

    • by ledow (319597)

      Because, for 90% of business, the only guy who needs to care about the IP address is the IT department.

      And they rarely deal with IP addresses and when they do it's mostly copy/paste from some spreadsheet or management program.

      Nobody cares what the IP is, nobody memorises what the IP is (maybe fleetingly to type it in somewhere else, but pretty much that's a one-time thing. DHCP takes away all internal IP management apart from the occasional fixed static which is no worse than having asset numbers (which yo

      • part of my sentiment is based on a long experience with automatic systems failing to find network assets unless they're set to static IPs. To that end, every time I run into this problem I just set the machine to static and then have every system that needs to find it link directly to that IP bypassing lookup.

        I appreciate that the lookup works in many situations but often it does not.

        The most consistent culprits are network printers. On initial installation they always work just fine. But give them a few mo

        • by jbolden (176878)

          How is it annoying. You have basically an address like

          Your global location::printer identifier:printer number
          Much easier than v4 if you want meaningful addresses. You have so much space you don't have to be random.

    • If you control the network then one option is to use IPv6 addresess that are not so large and random. In particular avoiding autoconfiguration based on mac addresses or ramdom numbers and assigning addresses manually in the conventional way (possiblly to match the machines v4 address)

    • I really don't get what your post is about. Only very specific situations require you to actually use IP (4 or 6) numbers. We've had DNS for decades and mDNS for a long time as well. You only need to work with dns when initially configuring network devices (eg: routers) or DNS servers themselves. No other scenario should require that you use IP numbers.

  • by Virtucon (127420) on Saturday June 14, 2014 @02:04PM (#47237341)

    It's never to late to procrastinate.

  • by statemachine (840641) on Saturday June 14, 2014 @05:29PM (#47238147)

    I think the deniers are the same people, with the same arguments.

    It's easy to spot the people who don't know what they're talking about. Over the last few days:

    1) Just re-assign multicast!
    2) Hey, they don't appear to be using those addresses, let's take those!
    3) Double/Triple-NAT is good enough for me and everyone else!
    4) Let's give out one IP address to everyone and we'll be set for awhile!
    5) Let's make a new protocol!
    6) IPv6 addresses are too big to remember!
    7) You just need to sell it better!

    All of those show fundamental misunderstandings about networking. And that part is OK. The problem is that people think they know about flying a plane because they've flown a paper airplane.

    Calm down people. Stop trying to barge into the cockpit.

    • 1) Just re-assign multicast!

      Silly, and amusing, but possible. :)

      2) Hey, they don't appear to be using those addresses, let's take those!

      Very valid. There is a /8 assigned to packet radio operation... Not common, and not often connected to the actual Internet anymore. Oh, and not paid for at all.

      3) Double/Triple-NAT is good enough for me and everyone else!

      I am with you here. Especially that nasty NAT abomination in 2Wire routers "DMZ Plus Mode."

      4) Let's give out one IP address to everyone and we'll be set for awhile!

      Never heard that one...

      5) Let's make a new protocol!

      That is how IPv6 came about. But then again, look how it turned out...

      6) IPv6 addresses are too big to remember!

      Very valid point. Especially when your ISP DNS craps out and you can actually remember 4.2.2.2 or 8.8.8.8 or 198.6.1.1 without

  • by saccade.com (771661) on Saturday June 14, 2014 @05:32PM (#47238157) Homepage Journal
    Leave it to Microsoft to screw up the map. [xkcd.com]
  • .... So I can get your IPV4 addresses!

    IPV4 is like the fax machine... it will never go away :-D

  • The sad part is, they can't really transition to IPv6 because their own OS doesn't really support it.
    Sure, some groundwore is present, but there's something critical missing: Windows can't retrieve a DNS server over RA. That means, it can get an IP, but not DNS servers.

  • by rabtech (223758) on Sunday June 15, 2014 @12:10PM (#47240907) Homepage

    Many end users have IPv6 support. Many servers are capable of it. The issue is mostly the US ISPs and middle-tier transit providers dragging their feet. My systems all support IPv6, my m0n0wall box supports it, but neither of the two ISPs I can buy service from support it. In fact they won't sell it to me even if I offer to pay extra money for it!

    My pet theory is that Verizon et al wants to convert IPv4 address space into a "resource" they can buy/sell/trade. A bunch of lawyers and MBAs are rubbing their greedy fingers together, hoping we stay in a "resource shortage" for as long as possible.

    We could switch over, probably within a year or two, but it would take a government-imposed mandate to force people to stop screwing around and make the change.

  • Don't Panic! (Score:4, Informative)

    by jbgeek (952457) on Sunday June 15, 2014 @06:02PM (#47242615)

    Don't Panic, or be afraid of IPv6.

    People often talk of "switching" to IPv6. One does not "switch". You simply deploy it alongside IPv4. Right now my home network is happily running IPv4 and IPv6 at the same time, called a "dual-stack" environment. This sort of set up will be common for decades until IPv4 use dwindles to nothing, and people start turning it off.

    Nearly all operating systems and devices supporting IPv6 have it turned on by default, so you're already running IPv6. You just don't have globally routable addresses assigned (most likely). You could actually use ping (windows) and ping6 (*nix) to ping other hosts on your LAN using link local addresses, which have automatically been assigned (see those addresses starting with fe80 on all of your interfaces?), if you knew how, right now. :-)

    If you know IPv4 routing and subnetting, you already know most of what you need to know about IPv6. Except that IPv6 is simpler since there's no need to NAT. Just set up your firewall exactly as you would under IPv4 (same security policy), minus the NAT. Subnetting is also simpler, with no need to fret over "right sizing" your subnets so they're "just big enough" and don't use too much of your precious IPv4 space. Just assign a /64 out of your /48 (businesses will be easily be able to request multiple /48s) and you're done. Never run out of host numbers, or subnets.

    Some folks are frightened by the use of hexadecimal for IPv6 addresses. No need to fret. It makes sense, and would have made sense for IPv4 also. Hex for IPv6 not only makes the IPv6 addresses more compact., it's also far easier to translate hex into binary, and work with prefix-lengths than decimal IPv4 address are. I can do it in my head all day with no issue. All you have to do is memorize 16 bin patterns from 0000 to 1111, each represents a hex digit from 0 - F. Piece of cake. No more annoying math and base conversion to try to figure out which subnet some IPv6 address belongs to like with IPv4. No more subnet masks either (which are also decimal), instead, just prefix lengths (although this is also true of IPv4 with CIDR, adopted long ago, many user interfaces still require a netmask for IPv4 instead of just a /prefix-length, sigh).

    Anyway. Go play with IPv6. It will be an essential skill to add to your Resume/CV, and will only take a short time to figure out. Go set up an tunnel with Hurricane Electric or some other tunnel broker to get some globally routable IPv6s. It's simple and you'll learn a lot and quickly! And best of all, you'll stop being afraid of IPv6! :-)

    (apologies to those who already have adopted IPv6 and know all this already ... this isn't addressed to you!)

Advertising may be described as the science of arresting the human intelligence long enough to get money from it.

Working...