>the great debate
>the great debate
Falling into your wing while paragliding is called 'gift wrapping' and turns you into a dirt torpedo pic.twitter.com/oQFKsVISkI
— Mental Videos (@MentalVids) March 15, 2023
>the great debate
Falling into your wing while paragliding is called 'gift wrapping' and turns you into a dirt torpedo pic.twitter.com/oQFKsVISkI
— Mental Videos (@MentalVids) March 15, 2023
16 million IPs won't be enough once those nanobots from the vaccine starts replicating
>the vaxx
I'm so fucked bros... Why did I do it?
Does anyone actually use that 172 range? I see 10 and 192 but never 172
pretty sure your machine uses it internally
Surely you meant 127.0.0.0/8?
>Yeah it makes the address very unfriendly.
Clearly, we have hit the ceiling and we're falling at a tremendous speed.
more common for vm networks or some stupid docker shit
IPv6 is the most retarded shit ever why didnt they just make an extension of IPv4 with octects going up to 999 it would be backwards compatible
No, it wouldn't.
>IPv6 shill henchmen arrive to the thread
Cope!
>no argument
it literally would work though. think about it
Why do you post when you have no idea what you're talking about? Do you fetishize letting everyone know you're a retard?
ipv4 as you know it is just decimal notation for the 4 bytes of a 32 bit integer, you can represent ipv4 as integer notation by taking the decimal value of the ip address as one number, its valid and part of the spec. Anyways, the reason why it can't just go to 999 is because each octet only has 4 bits in it, the highest number that can be represented in 4 bits is 255, hence why network masks are represented as 255.255.255.255, it's literally a bitmask, all of which can be represented in cidr notation, which just counts how many bits are static in the network schema out of 32. ipv6 could have literally just been extended as 255.255.255.255.255.255.255.255.255.255.255.255.255.255.255.255 oh wait that's exactly what ipv6 is but its often notated in hecadecimal instead with colon delimiters like ffff:ffff:ffff:ffff:ffff:ffff:ffff:ffff, so theoretically ipv4 in hex notation would just be ffff:ffff
192.168.1.0 would then be c0a8:0100 So if you wanted to have cia.gov ipv4 in hex notation it would look like 687c:8546
hexadecimal is the dumbest shit ever
Yeah it makes the address very unfriendly.
>octets going up to 999
>999
BLOAT
10.1.1.1 requires the fewest finger movements.
192.168 for home network
10 for office intranet
no conflicts on VPN
simple as
I pay ~1$ for static IP address, why do I keep hearing that we're going to run out of IPv4 addresses?
Because the IP you bought was 2nd hand.
There's no unassigned IPs left.
And why does that should concern me? Every finite address pool will be assigned sooner or later, is this really a big deal?
ISPs are struggling to afford more IPs as the prices continue to go up.
>as the prices continue to go up.
No, I'm still paying ~1$ as I was paying for exact same address 10 years ago. Why don't they raise price on them if demand keeps growing and supply stays the same?
https://auctions.ipv4.global/prior-sales
>$45-60 per IPv4 address
You're renting, not buying.
I still don't understand who should be concerned about that, and even $60 for a lifetime doesn't look like a huge price for something that considered insufficient worldwide.
The people actually running the ISPs consider spending $40k on new IPs every couple of months to be unsustainable, which is why they're moving to IPv6 and activating CGNAT on IPv4.
And why my ISP don't charge me more for my address if it costs him... nothing? Because $40k/mo for ISP is a fucking nothing, especially if we talk about USA with their ridiculous internet prices? And how come ISPs from shitholes can afford addresses for same prices yet providing very cheap access?
$40k/mo isn't nothing for a small business. And the reason shitty ISPs are more affordable is because they put everyone behind CGNAT so they need way less addresses, or they just use v6 only.
We have been "desperately running out" of ipv4 addresses for more than 10 years. But a ipv4 address is still just $1.5mo.
There's not really any shortage, and since ipv6 is so bad, no reason to "upgrade". They totally overstepped when making ipv6 and added all kinds of shit no one wants.
ipv6 addresses should have been 255.255.255.255.255.255, More than enough addresses for everyone, easy to read, and interface-compatible. Hexadecimal is very unfriendly and holds it back. The reason they made it hex is because they made the addresses way too long to push other stupid shit:
The idea that every device should have it's own IP on the internet is awful. "routers" are an essential security barrier today since most devices consumers connect to their network are not secure.
IPv6 should have been made at least superficially backwards compatible. Keeping the format the same really helps with that. If the user inputs a ipv4 address, it should seamlessly work until there are no more ipv4 in use.
This can be achieved by giving every ipv6 address a fallback ipv4 address(Which works like NAT). This fallback will be given by whatever assigns your address, your ISP for your router and your router for your computer.
We'd be using purely ipv6 at this point if they did that instead.
>and since ipv6 is so bad
There's nothing wrong with ipv6
>b-b-b-but how will I remember my ipv6 off heart
DNS you fucking retard. This problem was solved decades ago.
Less readable and easy to remember is never good. DNS exists, but you and me both know of IP addresses for a reason.
fd69:1488:420:<ten bytes to slice whenever you want>
Only thing to remember is `69:1488:420`, which is one random string per administrative domain (and if you are not crippingly autistic and ignore randomness requirement, just slap zeroes there).
10. for everything.
a