Today in our newest take on “older technology is better”: why NAT rules!

You are viewing a single thread.
View all comments
1 point
*

IPv6 = second system effect. It’s way too complicated for what was needed and this complexity hinders its adoption. We don’t need 100 ip addresses for every atom on the earth’s surface and we never will.

They should have just added an octet to IPv4 and be done with it.

permalink
report
reply
1 point

it’s not about using all 100 IP addresses for every atom

it’s about having large enough ranges to allocate them in ways that make sense instead of arbitrarily allocating them by availability

permalink
report
parent
reply
0 points
*

Every time there’s a “just add an extra octet” argument, I feel some people are completely clueless about how hardware works.

Most hardware comes with 32-bit or 64-bit registers. (Recall that IPv6 came out just a year before the Nintendo 64.) By adding only an extra octet, thus having 40 bits for addressing, you are wasting 24 bits of a 64-bit register. Or wasting 24 bits of a 32-bit register pair. Either way, this is inefficient.

And there’s also the fact that the modern internet is actually reaching the upper limits of a hypothetical 64-bit IPv5: https://lemmy.world/comment/10727792. Do we want to spend yet another two decades just to transition to a newer protocol?

permalink
report
parent
reply
0 points

64-bit IPv5

64-bit IP would be IPv8, not IPv5.

permalink
report
parent
reply
1 point
Deleted by creator
permalink
report
parent
reply

Programmer Humor

!programmer_humor@programming.dev

Create post

Welcome to Programmer Humor!

This is a place where you can post jokes, memes, humor, etc. related to programming!

For sharing awful code theres also Programming Horror.

Rules

  • Keep content in english
  • No advertisements
  • Posts must be related to programming or programmer topics

Community stats

  • 7K

    Monthly active users

  • 730

    Posts

  • 11K

    Comments