11 ms·
In what way is it backwards compatible? It's not as if all allocations are kept and people just add 96 bits to their existing addresses. They are completely dis
by lucb1e 6y ago
In what way is it backwards compatible? It's not as if all allocations are kept and people just add 96 bits to their existing addresses. They are completely disjoint address spaces and protocols, as compatible as Tor is with the general internet: to communicate between the two, you need a proxy.
- mulmen 6y agoTor operates over the Internet. Did you mean to compare Tor to the World Wide Web?
- eznzt 6y agoTor is sort of a virtual network. You need a gateway between the virtual network and the Internet to access the Internet.
- sushicalculus 6y agoI was wrong. I must have rememberd an early draft or the translation layer
- Dylan16807 6y agoSo I'm not saying it's backwards compatible, exactly, but what would you call 64:ff9b::?
- mulmen 6y agoA reserved gateway address space? https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/NAT64 https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/NAT64
- Dylan16807 6y agoBy embedding the IPv4 address space inside the IPv6 address space. They are different protocols but they are not disjoint address spaces. You add 96 bits to the address and boom it's converted.