4 ms·
Not sure I understand why this is necessary... The IPv6 address space covers the IPv4 address space already: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/IPv6_address#Represe
by nickcw 9y ago
Not sure I understand why this is necessary...
The IPv6 address space covers the IPv4 address space already: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/IPv6_address#Representation https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/IPv6_address#Representation
> During the transition of the Internet from IPv4 to IPv6, it is typical to operate in a mixed addressing environment. For such use cases, a special notation has been introduced, which expresses IPv4-mapped and IPv4-compatible IPv6 addresses by writing the least-significant 32 bits of an address in the familiar IPv4 dot-decimal notation, whereas all preceding ones are written in IPv6 format. For example, the IPv4-mapped IPv6 address ::ffff:c000:0280 is written as ::ffff:192.0.2.128, thus expressing clearly the original IPv4 address that was mapped to IPv6.
That needs some sort of gateway to work, but I'm assuming that that is the kind of thing your ISP would do for you.
And if you have to convert each IPv4 only host to an IPv10 host to use it, why not convert it to dual stack IPv4/IPv6 instead?
- mtgx 9y agoSome good not-easy-to-screw-up and default security and privacy features at the IP level would be nice to have in a new IP protocol.
- walshemj 9y agoBecause ipv6 was designed with not much thought to migration and interworking with ipv4
- davros 9y agoAnd migrating is all cost no benefit. And the problems ipv6 was intended to solve have long since been addressed better by other means (eg NAT).
- snuxoll 9y agoNAT doesn't solve the issues with IPv4, it merely delayed them. IPv6 is still the future, but everyone from ISP's to switch and router manufacturers have been dragging their feet on a real push to get us off IPv4. Hell, there are still modern switch platforms out there with full Layer 3 IPv4 support but IPv6 is curiously omitted - you've got to buy a bigger switch to get support for modern protocols (or an implementation that isn't totally gimped).
- walshemj 9y agoNAT does give you some valuable security features though
- snuxoll 9y agoNAT is still ultimately a kludge for security, a stateful firewall is a much better solution and doesn’t interfere with the assumption that an IP address represents a device and not an entire corporate/home network.