4 ms·

Like fd::1? Valid ipv6 that is shorter than an ipv4 address

by apearson 4y ago

Miiko 4y ago
Nah, "1.1" is a valid IPv4 address (Cloudflare DNS) and it's shorter
- apearson 4y ago
  Touché, I guess I should’ve said a typical v4 address. Short hand v4 addresses aren’t as common knowledge though
p1mrx 4y ago
fd::1 is a reserved address. Did you mean fd00::1?
- apearson 4y ago
  fd::1 == 00fd::1. The :: expands to fill the available bits with 0
  - deleted 4y ago
    [deleted]
  - p1mrx 4y ago
    fd::1 == 00fd::0001, which is reserved by IETF. The :: only expands to fill all-zero hextets.
    - apearson 4y ago
      Good catch, that is correct. Thank you
      - hot_gril 4y ago
        ...This thread shows that the ipv6 notation is more complicated. It's good to at least use a smaller address space on a LAN like this, but I want the basic decimal notation.
        p1mrx 4y ago
        Decimal is actually a nightmare for dealing with common CIDR prefixes. Would you rather write '1111111111110000' as fff0 or 65520?
        hot_gril 4y ago
        Yes, which is why they shouldn't use those huge prefixes. There's an existing 32-bit address space represented nicely like 8.8.8.8 or 192.168.1.2 for local. Now that we want to extend the address space for more users, the newer ones can be like 8.8.8.8.6 without messing with the existing ones. Oh and I'd actually prefer the 65520.
        apearson 4y ago
        You'd still need to upgrade and change every device. There have been transitional software that used ipv6 but allowed for ipv4 address notation. [1] Example: ::ffff:0:8.8.8.8 The huge prefixes allow for a simple hierarchical network structure and gives us room to redo the address scheme if we end up wanting to (only a portion of addresses space is currently allocated right now) without having to go through this entire upgrade the internet again. [1] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/IPv6_transition_mechanism https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/IPv6_transition_mechanism
        hot_gril 4y ago
        Right, I've seen the padded v4-like v6 address spec, but that's not how they attempted to transition everything. ISPs gave everyone new v6 addresses, and the whole home/office router/NAT/PC ecosystem put v6 on a totally separate plane with ::: style addresses presented to users. I understand that the clean slate of reallocated addresses would solve some problems, but they could have focused on just getting all that hardware and software onto the ipv6 protocol with minimal changes before attempting to basically redo the entire Internet along with every LAN. As an end user who has a choice, they have to give me something that's not harder to use than before. I think they could have managed that if it were a priority.

Like fd::1? Valid ipv6 that is shorter than an ipv4 address

Miiko 4y ago

Nah, "1.1" is a valid IPv4 address (Cloudflare DNS) and it's shorter

apearson 4y ago
Touché, I guess I should’ve said a typical v4 address. Short hand v4 addresses aren’t as common knowledge though

p1mrx 4y ago

fd::1 is a reserved address. Did you mean fd00::1?

apearson 4y ago
fd::1 == 00fd::1. The :: expands to fill the available bits with 0
- deleted 4y ago
  [deleted]
- p1mrx 4y ago
  fd::1 == 00fd::0001, which is reserved by IETF. The :: only expands to fill all-zero hextets.
  - apearson 4y ago
    Good catch, that is correct. Thank you
    - hot_gril 4y ago
      ...This thread shows that the ipv6 notation is more complicated. It's good to at least use a smaller address space on a LAN like this, but I want the basic decimal notation.
      - p1mrx 4y ago
        Decimal is actually a nightmare for dealing with common CIDR prefixes. Would you rather write '1111111111110000' as fff0 or 65520?
        hot_gril 4y ago
        Yes, which is why they shouldn't use those huge prefixes. There's an existing 32-bit address space represented nicely like 8.8.8.8 or 192.168.1.2 for local. Now that we want to extend the address space for more users, the newer ones can be like 8.8.8.8.6 without messing with the existing ones. Oh and I'd actually prefer the 65520.
        apearson 4y ago
        You'd still need to upgrade and change every device. There have been transitional software that used ipv6 but allowed for ipv4 address notation. [1] Example: ::ffff:0:8.8.8.8 The huge prefixes allow for a simple hierarchical network structure and gives us room to redo the address scheme if we end up wanting to (only a portion of addresses space is currently allocated right now) without having to go through this entire upgrade the internet again. [1] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/IPv6_transition_mechanism https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/IPv6_transition_mechanism
        hot_gril 4y ago
        Right, I've seen the padded v4-like v6 address spec, but that's not how they attempted to transition everything. ISPs gave everyone new v6 addresses, and the whole home/office router/NAT/PC ecosystem put v6 on a totally separate plane with ::: style addresses presented to users. I understand that the clean slate of reallocated addresses would solve some problems, but they could have focused on just getting all that hardware and software onto the ipv6 protocol with minimal changes before attempting to basically redo the entire Internet along with every LAN. As an end user who has a choice, they have to give me something that's not harder to use than before. I think they could have managed that if it were a priority.