3 ms·
Sure it does. We can just move to ipv8, 5 octlets instead of 4. We can give 2.x.x.x.x to 10. to earth, maybe 100 to 110 for moon, mars, etc. 1.x.x.x.x will b
by b112 2y ago
Sure it does. We can just move to ipv8, 5 octlets instead of 4. We can give 2.x.x.x.x to 10. to earth, maybe 100 to 110 for moon, mars, etc.
1.x.x.x.x will be for legacy stuff. If anything is trying to route to only 4 octlets, routers add a 1. in front of it. Bam, legacy solved.
edit: I realised people don't see the big picture here.
Step 1) We collectively engineer and deploy ipv8, along with RFCs explaining how future expansion works
2) We put all sorts of preparatory work, conversation into the eventual expansion into 6 octlets, from 5. We'll need that once we colonize multiple systems.
3) The RFC will state that "new planetary systems get space on 5th oclet, 1.200.x.x.x.x to 1.250.x.x.x.x.
4) As systems grow to need more than an ipv4 range, we transition them to their own 6th oclet. It's easy for them, because they can retain legacy 5th octlet headers.
5) We then collectively freeze our brains, so that in the future, once interplanetary, faster than light communication exists, we are thawed to deal with the 5 to 6 oclet transition!
And we all become immortal.
But no, that's fine, think small, stay non-immortal with your ipv6 Flanders!
- deleted 2y ago[deleted]
- ynik 2y ago> If anything is trying to route to only 4 octlets, routers add a 1. in front of it. Bam, legacy solved. Only for unidirectional UDP. How do you think the other side would be able to respond if it's unaware of the 5th octlet? Basically every protocol in existence requires two-way communication and there's no backward compatible way of providing that.
- b112 2y agoI covered that. Edge routers transition 1.x.x.x.x to x.x.x.x as a default, and x.x.x.x to 1.x.x.x.x. This is an interim change, so that ipv4 can communicate to ipv4 forever. Legacy systems can be supported on ipv4 only, relegating them (just as they are now!) to not having access to that new address space.
- growse 2y agoYou realise that this idea of "embedding a smaller, old address space inside a newer bigger one" has existed in IPv6 for a pretty long time now?
- b112 2y agoA car and a motorcycle both travel on roads, but they are still not the same. - Henry Perkins
- tiberious726 2y agoYou mean this? https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/IPv6#IPv4-mapped_IPv6_addresses https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/IPv6#IPv4-mapped_IPv6_addres...
- humanfromearth9 2y ago1.x.x.x.x -> why not 0.x.x.x.x to represent x.x.x.x ?
- itchyouch 2y agoThe dotted quad notation is just a human readable notation. You can’t just add another octet willy nilly. That’s exactly what ipv6 did. They added an extra 12 octets, but used hex notation (0-F) to shorten the number of characters for human readability. Internally, an IP is just a 32bit number. Adding another octet is adding another 8bits to the number. IPv6 merely expands that number to a 128bit number. If you do the math of say converting 8.8.8.8 to 8256^3 + 8256^2 + 8256^1 + 8256^0 and ping the resulting number, it will work.
- b112 2y agoYes, but this is to aid in a proper transition. All old ipv4 addresses will route fine, using this method.
- ta1243 2y ago> The dotted quad notation is just a human readable notation. You can’t just add another octet willy nilly. That’s exactly what ipv6 did. They added an extra 12 octets, but used hex notation (0-F) to shorten the number of characters for human readability. If that's all IPv6 did that would have been one thing. ipv6 changed tons of things, from arp to nat, dhcp to dns.
- p_l 2y agoAnd all of them had to change because guess what, they had hardcoded v4 assumptions including "4 octets"
- eqvinox 2y agoIs this genuine or sarcasm? I can't tell.