3 ms·

I wonder how this will go? 8 years is plenty of time to make the transition even for a government, right?

promiseofbeans 3y ago
For governments maybe, but for banks? They're still desperately trying to transition to IBM databases that were deprecated slightly more recently than their current one.
- marcosdumay 3y ago
  They only have to transition their external communications, they can keep their 90's DB2 databases that cost millions/(MB*year) just fine.
- 0cf8612b2e1e 3y ago
  Probably easier to start a new bank.
bombcar 3y ago
Eight years is forever, we can wait. Five years is a long time, let’s work on other things. Three years isn’t terribly soon, it’ll probably be fine. Two years is getting close, let’s consider checking. One year is too close, let’s ask for an extension.
- labster 3y ago
  I would name that poem “The Ballad of REAL ID”
  - nxobject 3y ago
    Strangely enough, though, it seems to be working in everyone's favor in this case.
- stcredzero 3y ago
  Eight years is forever, we can wait. I've heard that under 10 years is the optimal for a long term government project. Anything longer, and it's equal to "forever," and it's never done. This was the rationale for setting the goal of landing on the Moon to within the decade.
- p_l 3y ago
  Which is why this time US government for example is only allowing extensions to government agencies on case by case basis, but not to vendors. AFAIK they allowed extensions for vendors in 1990 and that's why original EOL date for IPv4 continuously slipped until success by Network Translation and its PIX devices helped kill the attempt completely.
  - p_l 3y ago
    The "ancient" code probably already speaks IPv6 due to whatever method used to hook IP connectivity to its VTAM interfaces. Or due to its age it has multiprotocol support anyway. It's the BSD Sockets using code that is a problem - the OSes has supported v6 for a long time now.
    - bombcar 3y ago
      Actually routing IPv6 is usually possible with existing equipment, once you figure out all the settings (and potentially avoid the bugs). What usually ends up being the issue is some side piece of software that isn’t ready to log IPv6 addresses or assumptions made about how long they’ll be in some database somewhere, etc. I’ve seen hacks around that, like hashing IPv6 addresses down to 4 bytes so you can store them as fake IPv4 addresses :O
      - p_l 3y ago
        Yeah, it's just that it took time to implement, especially since IPv4 ossification (at the time when it was explicitly in works to be removed!) happened partially through introduction of hardware-assisted switching. But we have had fast path switching for IPv6 for I think 20 years now, and it's generally available. Hell, some big networks, the kind where having fast path switching, moved fully over to v6 and simply do not transit v4 (Deutsche Telekom, for example, whose skeleton network is now "flat" IPv6 network and any v4 traffic is encapsulated to 464xlated
deleted 3y ago
[deleted]

For governments maybe, but for banks? They're still desperately trying to transition to IBM databases that were deprecated slightly more recently than their current one.

marcosdumay 3y ago
They only have to transition their external communications, they can keep their 90's DB2 databases that cost millions/(MB*year) just fine.
0cf8612b2e1e 3y ago
Probably easier to start a new bank.

bombcar 3y ago

Eight years is forever, we can wait. Five years is a long time, let’s work on other things. Three years isn’t terribly soon, it’ll probably be fine. Two years is getting close, let’s consider checking. One year is too close, let’s ask for an extension.

labster 3y ago
I would name that poem “The Ballad of REAL ID”
- nxobject 3y ago
  Strangely enough, though, it seems to be working in everyone's favor in this case.
stcredzero 3y ago
Eight years is forever, we can wait. I've heard that under 10 years is the optimal for a long term government project. Anything longer, and it's equal to "forever," and it's never done. This was the rationale for setting the goal of landing on the Moon to within the decade.
p_l 3y ago
Which is why this time US government for example is only allowing extensions to government agencies on case by case basis, but not to vendors. AFAIK they allowed extensions for vendors in 1990 and that's why original EOL date for IPv4 continuously slipped until success by Network Translation and its PIX devices helped kill the attempt completely.
- p_l 3y ago
  The "ancient" code probably already speaks IPv6 due to whatever method used to hook IP connectivity to its VTAM interfaces. Or due to its age it has multiprotocol support anyway. It's the BSD Sockets using code that is a problem - the OSes has supported v6 for a long time now.
  - bombcar 3y ago
    Actually routing IPv6 is usually possible with existing equipment, once you figure out all the settings (and potentially avoid the bugs). What usually ends up being the issue is some side piece of software that isn’t ready to log IPv6 addresses or assumptions made about how long they’ll be in some database somewhere, etc. I’ve seen hacks around that, like hashing IPv6 addresses down to 4 bytes so you can store them as fake IPv4 addresses :O
    - p_l 3y ago
      Yeah, it's just that it took time to implement, especially since IPv4 ossification (at the time when it was explicitly in works to be removed!) happened partially through introduction of hardware-assisted switching. But we have had fast path switching for IPv6 for I think 20 years now, and it's generally available. Hell, some big networks, the kind where having fast path switching, moved fully over to v6 and simply do not transit v4 (Deutsche Telekom, for example, whose skeleton network is now "flat" IPv6 network and any v4 traffic is encapsulated to 464xlated

deleted 3y ago

[deleted]