Oh, you don't know anything about IPv6?

Most people aren't using macs anyway and they have really good security because they're Linux based. I don't think ipv6 giving out the address is a big deal a hacker still has a lot of work to do even knowing that

That's news to me. Are ISPs using IPv6 doing some kind of 1:1 NAT-ish modification? That seems strange to me because your global IPv4 address would never be modified across hops

>Most people aren't using macs anyway
could you elaborate? I'm pretty sure every device connected to a network requires a mac address

>>Most people aren't using macs anyway
>could you elaborate? I'm pretty sure every device connected to a network requires a mac address
Only about 6 percent, user...

>all these poorfags can't into ipv6

Attached: chrome_2018-10-08_13-14-35.png (1163x267, 47K)

Forgot to attach image. Don't know exactly how accurate this is but assume it's closeish

Attached: Screenshot_20181008-111606_Chrome.jpg (1440x2960, 1.01M)

just to make sure we're on the same page, you're talking about a layer-2 MAC address, right? could you explain to me how supposedly 94% of people connect to a network without a network interface that has a MAC address?

oh shit never mind, i've been troled epic style

Attached: 1538855485604.gif (440x330, 453K)

When I added IPv6 support to our company's website 2 years ago, I was surprised by how much IPv6 traffic it immediately started getting. I mean, it wasn't a lot, but I was expecting ~0.01% and it was actually ~2%. Presumably they still were able to access us via 6to4 beforehand. I just checked the webserver logs now, and we got 2056 accesses since logs rotated, of which 150 were IPv6, so ~7%.

Of course, moot got a job at Google despite Jow Forums being completely IPv6 retarded, so the OP premise is lacking.

fixed:
tools.ietf.org/html/rfc4941

Basically each interface has 3 ipv6 addresses:
the local one, the one calculated from your MAC and a random temporary address which is the one actually used by the system.

Cool, thanks for the link.

IPv6 is a glow-in-the-dark CIA nigger protocol used to track and flush everyone out of their cozy little NATs into the blinding, unwavering gaze of their many eyes. I will never use any device I cannot disable this shit completely on, I even compiled my kernel with any support for it whatsoever. Don't fall for their dirty tricks.

Attached: 1527396721898.jpg (500x701, 103K)

Just go work for Verizon Fios -- apparently they've never heard of this "IPv6" technology.

You obviously haven't been keeping up to date.

Active in some areas as of a week or two ago.

Attached: 2018-10-08 16_06_58.png (1239x536, 208K)

Attached: 2018-10-08 16_11_56.png (837x991, 186K)

As a consumer, does IPv6 realistically mean anything to me?

I understand for an ISP it can have some advantages over IPv4, but as a consumer, what exactly do I need IPv6 for TODAY in 2018?

More direct routing due to unique addresses per device. Though realistically you wont notice this particularly.

Supposedly my ISP actually supports native IPv6 now. I never bothered to set it up, since some time ago I got fed up with plastic-box routers and set up everything manually on a Linux machine. (Forwarding, firewall, DNS, DHCP, hostapd, vnstat...) If all I wanted was a single /64 subnet given to me on which all my things would reside, at addresses determined by SLAAC, that'd probably be pretty simple. But I don't bridge my wireless onto my LAN, it's on a separate subnet, as is the guest wi-fi (so I can firewall them separately), so I'd have to request a prefix delegation, and then somehow get dhclient to then tell radvd and the DHCP server about that and have those prefixes assigned to interfaces. Every time I've looked this up I get the impression that this talking-to-the-other-programs stuff just does not happen and its black magic to make things work if you actually care to use a prefix delegation and not a single /64. I've vaguely considered just subnetting a single /64 since I care not in the slightest about breaking SLAAC, but supposedly other mysterious problems crop up since everything assumes a /64 is the smallest possible subnet, not just SLAAC.

>tfw still struggling to understand OSI vs TCP/IP on comptia network cert self study guides
I really wish I could understand what you nerds are talking about. All I know right now is having a mac adress does not make you a macfaggot.

Attached: 1527129423245.jpg (580x580, 196K)

>mac
Found your problem.

Ds lite is a fucking abomination

>wan prefix /56
Fuck, that's a lot of addresses. Comcast does /64 or /60.

a /64 is already 18,446,744,073,709,551,616 addresses.
18 Quintillion addresses.

/60 is ~295 Quintillion addresses.

/56 is ~4.7 Sextillion addresses.

/64 is standard residential IPv6 deployment, with a /48 for business customers. Verizon offering /56 for residential service is surprising.

those are big numbers

This is new to me. Any links where I can read more about this?

Attached: apusnap.jpg (800x546, 45K)

Think about it, Bill...

This retard is mixing Macs (from Apple) with mac addresses.

This retard is biting

He's retarded, your device specific IP address changes every 24 hours, and it's not like firewalls don't work with IPv6, they still deny traffic when needed.

They're basically doing that because the internet greybeards recommended a /56 allocation to residential customers, and a /48 for businesses. Originally they wanted a /48 for everyone.

That might one day turn out to have been rather too generous, since pretty much all of that /64 standard subnet size is wasted. It's only that big to make SLAAC work. They should have just made the "standard" subnet size say a /96 (giving you 2^32 addresses in a subnet, as much as all of IPv4) and just accepting DHCP as something that works well enough to not need replacing. Statelessness is always far more trouble than its worth in a protocol, but people keep doing it because its theoretically elegant.

>IPv6
Botnet

>We couldn't possibly exhaust a 128-bit address space
>hold my beer

Oh yeah, the other thing that's led to my lack of urgency about ipv6 is that I think there's been problems with VPN leaks over it. Supposedly that's all fixed now and OpenVPN is properly dual stack and everything. But I know how to make sure of that in a v4-only world in a way that I don't in a dual-stack world.

I'll probably stay v4-only unless and until lavk of v6 connectivity starts being a problem. I've never found anything on the internet that's v6-only and wasn't a "test your IPv6 connectivity" website.

OSI and TCP/IP are two different concepts you weeaboo faggot. Try to watch less anime and it might not rot your degenerate brain

More specifically. TCP/IP are in the OSI model

That, and CGNAT works decently.

>"IPv6 should be universally adopted within the next 10 years"
-Andy Tannenbaum, in his book "Computer Networks," in 1996

While IPv6 is much more streamlined and efficient than IPv4, It just didn't turn out to be as necessary as people thought. As long as routers speak IPv6 to the outside world, there's no reason devices that are only attached to a LAN would ever need to be able to speak IPv6.

I mean, it's not like they couldn't reduce people down to a /64 later if they decided they needed to. Or even further to a /96. They're not gone for good once they're used or anything.

>It's not the 00's anymore
How do you guys pronounce it?
Double Os, double zeroes, Ohs, something else entirely?

I have heard that decade unironically called the "oughties"

Do you still not realize how incredibly huge 2**64 addresses are?
Protip: assuming a very liberal 10 billion computers that exist, we'll still be able to give out 1,844,674,407 IPs to each computer. That's 1 BILLION networks PER computer
Realistically, we would only need to upgrade on a few occasions
> nanobots take over, and are absolutely EVERYWHERE
>connecting up hundreds of planets under a single IP standard