IPv6 Support in AI war?

[Anticept]

So yeah, with the deadline approaching for the day IPv4 addresses run out, everyone will be scrambling for IPv6... does AI war have support?

Yeah I know it's a year and a half off, but if you think about it... having support now means we can enjoy AI war for years to come ...

[Black]

That's a library issue, not something Chris has to worry about very much.

[HellishFiend]

Eh, VPN will always provide the ability to play legacy games, so it's not really too concerning unless you are mega-anti-VPN.

[eRe4s3r]

IPv4 can never run "out" - only new ip-range assignments will be stopped at some point, for the average internet user right about now, NOTHING will change when ipv4's run out. Hell most sites you use will probably never have to bother going fully IPv6 only.

So yeah, don't listen to the (wrong, as usual) slashdot stories about this, ipv4 will run out and nothing will happen.

Worse, no (normal) human on earth can remember even a single IPv6 - this'll give a whole new meaning to "Whatismyip" sites ,p

The thing is, personally i absolutely detest Ipv6, because its a protocol update thats made by tech scientists. Which is why its humanly unreadable and impossible to use or remember manually.

I think this is also the main reason why adoption is not only low, but abysmal

[deMangler]

Perhaps support for domains in the hosting screen - I would like to use deMangler.no-ip.org as my gaming PC address because the ip is always changing..... Hmmm....
Disliking IPv6 because it is not human readable is like disliking giraffes because they are aerodynamically rubbish.
Well, anyway, I am in danger of escalating an argument.... Restraining myself.....
dM

[x4000]

Right now the game probably does support ipv6, but I have not tested it. It does not support domains because that has to be translated into an ip first in order to work with our network library, which requires that we give it an ip to connect to.

[carlosjuero]

Right now the game probably does support ipv6, but I have not tested it. It does not support domains because that has to be translated into an ip first in order to work with our network library, which requires that we give it an ip to connect to.

Doesn't .NET have a library for translating host names to IP's via DNS?

Edit:

System.Net namespace

Dns.GetHostAddresses(string hostname)

Sample usage:

Code: [Select]

Using System.Net;


string localhost = "myomepc.dyndns.org";
string localip;
IPAddress[] addresslist = Dns.GetHostAdresses(localhost);

// Most users should only have one IP address associated w/ a dynamic host name
// so only select the first returned IP
localip = addresslist[0].tostring();

Obviously the code isn't 100% but its the basics of it.

[Anticept]

Eh, VPN will always provide the ability to play legacy games, so it's not really too concerning unless you are mega-anti-VPN.

I know, but that creates it's own slew of pains

IPv4 can never run "out" - only new ip-range assignments will be stopped at some point, for the average internet user right about now, NOTHING will change when ipv4's run out. Hell most sites you use will probably never have to bother going fully IPv6 only.

Technically it isn't supposed to, but that's not the issue. In order to create efficient routing tables, IANA assigns blocks to regions around the world. Some regions will go through their IP's faster than others. Combine that with the early internet's inefficient assignment of HUGE blocks of IP's to companies which do not even use half of them, universities which are too large for class B, so they were given a class A, and private addresses. This takes quite a chunck out of routable IP's.

So yeah, don't listen to the (wrong, as usual) slashdot stories about this, ipv4 will run out and nothing will happen.

ISP's will either convert, or switch to ISP wide NAT routing *shudder*. They have to. Period. We will still have IPv4 support backing up IPv6 for a while, but in time they will convert to straight IPv6 for costs reasons.

To be honest, I forsee ISP wide NAT routing being more likely for a while. We still run off of telecommunication lines from the 50's, and there's no rush to upgrade them, so why would ISP's change their entire backbone just to change protocols?

The thing is, personally i absolutely detest Ipv6, because its a protocol update thats made by tech scientists. Which is why its humanly unreadable and impossible to use or remember manually.

You will get used to it I've heard that about IPv4 plenty of times

I think this is also the main reason why adoption is not only low, but abysmal

It's always costs. Everything is about money when it comes to telecommunications.

Right now the game probably does support ipv6, but I have not tested it. It does not support domains because that has to be translated into an ip first in order to work with our network library, which requires that we give it an ip to connect to.

Possibly make a small DNS handling library then pass off the IP to the main libs?

[Spikey00]

(That would be helpful; I also would enjoy DNS support.)

[Fiskbit]

I feel it worth adding that support for host names has been requested in the IRC channel multiple times. Sounds like the demand is there, so if it's not a difficult change, it'd probably be worth it.

[x4000]

carlosjuero makes an excellent point with his code post -- ironically, I think I have actually used that, way back in the .NET 1.1 days, but I forgot all about it. I will have to test it out, but it should be a pretty easy change to add in if it works as it is supposed to.  Thanks!

[carlosjuero]

carlosjuero makes an excellent point with his code post -- ironically, I think I have actually used that, way back in the .NET 1.1 days, but I forgot all about it. I will have to test it out, but it should be a pretty easy change to add in if it works as it is supposed to.  Thanks!

The only reason it came to mind is that I used it for a custom utility in C# not long ago .

[keith.lamothe]

I'm not sure if it qualifies as IPv6 support, but host name support is now in for 3.018.

Edit: Chris, since this is in General instead of bug report or feature request (and since there's something of a discussion involved) I won't move it yet, let me know if you'd rather I move this to completed or whatnot.

[x4000]

I think this is a good one to leave here. Thanks! And so far as I know, ipv6 is already supported anyway.