4 ms·
Everyone wants to have the larger address space that ipv6 provides. All the other stuff rolled into it and the obvious representation shortfalls etc are very un
by woah 11y ago
Everyone wants to have the larger address space that ipv6 provides. All the other stuff rolled into it and the obvious representation shortfalls etc are very unfortunate.
- XorNot 11y agoThere isn't a clean way to solve representation of a 128-bit number. It's a big number. It'll be big to represent. I am curious what other problems you think it has, that don't just come along with the bigger address space? The realistic perspective here is still essentially the cost one: most people who have IPv4 hardware see little reason to move at all, until they have a problem.
- mirimir 11y agoI'm concerned about privacy implications. Let's say that I'm a dissident somewhere. I'm using VPN services, JonDonym, Tor, etc to help obscure my identity. But then maybe WebRTC or whatever reveals the device IPv6. I'm sure that it's possible to generate a new IPv6 for each session. But it's yet another pitfall for the unwary. For now, I just disable and firewall.
- duskwuff 11y agoWhat you're describing already exists. RFC 4941 defines a standard method for regularly "rotating" IPv6 addresses on a client machine, which is implemented by most major operating systems.
- citrin_ru 11y agoRotating IP is nightmare for network admin: http://blog.bimajority.org/2014/09/05/the-network-nightmare-that-ate-my-week/ http://blog.bimajority.org/2014/09/05/the-network-nightmare-...
- mirimir 11y ago> UPDATE (2014-09-06): As Stéphane Bortzmeyer was the first to point out, RFC 7217 addresses all of my issues with “privacy” addresses. Let implementation come soon!
- mirimir 11y agoVery cool! Thanks :)
- bigbugbag 11y agoSo you're behind a NAT for ipv4 for so long that you have forgotten that your computer is supposed to have a public IP address. If you are a dissident or even a citizen concerned about privacy, you'd better be a part of the solution and not the problem as you are now by refusing to deal with ipv6.
- Joeri 11y agoThey could have used base 36 and made it 16 characters. That would have made it at least feasible to remember.
- specialist 11y agoI like this idea. A lot. For other readers: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Base36 https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Base36 I'd also want optional punctuation for formatting, for reading and data entry, just like with phone numbers. Maybe looking like this: 0123-ABCE-4567-FGHI