IPv6 was a mistake. Jow Forums makes next version of IP protocol. What would you add , remove or change...

What kind of brainlet are you

I know a shit load of networking dude, it just depends what kind of network you are talking about.

>ITT: OP got his net+ and first IT job dealing with a flat /24 network with AD servers and users on the same ip network and wonders why we need big IP's.

If you knew anything about networking you knew that ipv6 is a fucking blessing. Setting up a decent, ((((big)))) network is super fucking easy, because everything just works. literally.
Now kys, kid.

Attached: me-crying.gif (1027x731, 111K)

Internal IP's should use ipv4, external should use ipv6.. NAT AND ARP is all you need after that

Attached: descarga.jpg (225x225, 10K)

Try being on an ISP with CGNAT and you will change your mind.

Please educate yourself first brah. I am a network administrator.

No. You don't need NAT. NAT is a stupid shitty hack which just causes trouble.

i wish we would just get rid of IPv4 already and replace fucking everything with IPv6

we use 6 base36 pairs for ip addresses. Eg. DQ:R3:56:O0:NA:ZZ

Reminder that IPV5 was perfect.
They just had to push it too far.

>base36

Maybe make it base32 and scrap 0, O, 1 and I?

Major issue with IPv4 was address count, so just raise it from 4x8 to 4x16
Easily implemented, backwards-compatible, and raises the count from 4.3E9 to 1.8E19
There's no fucking reason to jump from 32-bit addresses to 128-bit.

>There's no fucking reason to jump from 32-bit addresses to 128-bit.

Easier to track people.
Facebook and Google pushed for it.

this but quads instead of pairs to contain ipv6 address space

People who think NAT is a security feature and that pretend that firewalls doesn't exist are truly retarded.

IPv6 > IPv4 due to the following:
- Mandatory support for jumbo frames and MTU probing
- Mandatory support for mobile IP
- Stateless autoconf using SLAAC
- No more retarded NATs which means no more ICE/Turn/Stun fuckery, finally we can have truly decentralized communication

It's not backward compatible, unless you fuck around with IP header options, but variable length addressing is not ideal for routers and you also end up with two different "address spaces", a legacy address space and an extended addressing space.

Attached: 1521387203418.jpg (480x480, 16K)

This.

>It's not backward compatible

I think he means in his system all IPv4 addresses would be valid.
In the same way that ASCIII characters are also valid in UTF-8.

Might be called "forward compatible" I'm not sure.

>People who think NAT is a security feature and that pretend that firewalls doesn't exist are truly retarded.
This.
Sad story is that people will never understand this. NAT is by far the worst hack of internet history.

I don't think you understand what "backwards compatible" means.

And keeps your internal network secure enough

No, it fucking doesn't. A firewall would literally do that.

blog.webernetz.net/why-nat-has-nothing-to-do-with-security/

You need to +1 your reading comprehension.

ICE/Turn/Stun is a hack-around but required for WebRTC, which also is a hack. Unfortunately the WebRTC spec doesn't specify port-ranges at all, literally 1024-* UDP is required by browsers for WebRTC due to this goof. Good luck telling corporations they should allow random UDP traffic on all ports, for some random application.
Why is it such a mess, jezz

>secure enough
What does this even mean?
There is no "secure enough", you fucking retard. It is either secure or it ain't. There is nothing in between that, you dumbfuck nigger mongoloid. kys.

Attached: asdasd.png (718x270, 16K)

Boy I sure love fucking NAT, DHCP, subnetting, yup

Attached: F21EB106-3C8E-4E34-9CD0-DCE0DD0EBC3A.jpg (638x661, 73K)

>cant get into internal network without using phishing or malware
sounds secure enough to me

Facebook pushed for IPv6 to be created back in 1998, huh?

Attached: Brain short circuiting.jpg (198x175, 6K)

Literally not what NAT does.

4 billion IP addresses should have been more than enough. Do we really need more normies on the Internet?

>Facebook and Google pushed for it.
>before either existed

Attached: zoomer.gif (652x562, 626K)

>NAT
>A SECURITY FEATURE
I cannot imagine being this braindead.

i have a vulnerable service running on a machine on my lan, it's not accessible from anyone on the internet, sounds like security to me intentional or not

>ASCIII characters are also valid in UTF-8
actually they are not really. The best part it for example the Euro-Symbol. Convert that as/from Ascii to Utf-8 (and also back) and it is gone. Invisible. Space. Fuck.

look, a retard

only the enlightened Jow Forumsentoomen like ourselves shall enjoy the fruits of the internet

The last number however, the euro symbol €, is different. It is at position 128 in ISO-8859-1 and has the Unicode value 8364.

smashingmagazine.com/2012/06/all-about-unicode-utf8-character-sets/
You fucking retard.

it doesn't fit in ascii you idiot
>ISO-8859-1
OH NO NO NO NO NO

Yeah we have to deal with that shit a lot too. Older websites don't display it when changing everything to UTF-8.

because they're not in ascii, cretin

Running out of IPv4 addresses is the tech equivalent of global warming.

>Make new 32 + 4 bit ipv4 standard
>Add 4 bits in front of old ipv4 standard
>First 4 bits used to specify country
>Only apply these changes to DNS services so consumer tech doesn't have to be updated
It's not like anyone manually enters ip addresses to access websites.
Here you go, all of the world's problems solved.

It won't be accessible with ipv6 either, numbnuts

Embarassing.

the biggest problem with IPv6 is how much NAT is used in place of a firewall meaning if every device behind the network was exposed to the internet you would basically get mirai * 10000

>Jow Forums makes

do you know there are several byes in the ipv4 header that were specifically designed to extend the IP address range, but they aren't used because when ipv6 was being developed, businesses sank big bucks into it as a protocol means of control to keep you locked out from owning traffic flowing into and out of your computer?

>keep you locked out from owning traffic flowing into and out of your computer
plz explain

i will make the logo

Options headers.
IPv4 is software like everything else.
Options headers are used sparingly, and there is still plenty of room in them to extend the range to allow IP routers to correctly send the packets to where they need to be.

The one where you don't face all your shit towards the internet and blow your attack surface wide open because "it's hip, it's now, come to IPv6's clubhouse."

now now, hear me out:
IPv4.5 with more numbers
your move

ipv4 + anime gril
>192.168.1.52.maki

why didnt they just add more numbers to ipv4 instead? its almost impossible to remember those complex ipv6 addresses.

That's called a "firewall".

That's stupid. It would have all the same adoption issues as IPv6, but would need to be replaced sooner.

but thats wrong

I want to have the IP dead::beef

they would be but too many ips were allocated to people who would never need that many. just like everyone is now allocated a /64 ipv6 or even more.

no, not really. I'd give anyone who hosts a server an IP block and they can allow whoever they want on the internet and normies don't get a say.

cgnat is almost like a firewall for incoming connections tho. theres no way to connect to something that is there if the connection was not opened by someone thats in the network.

sensiblechuckle.jpg

>How to deal with that long ass, piece of garbage addresses?
...DNS?

Firewalls by default generally do not allow incoming external -> internal zone traffic. NAT is irrelevant to blocking that type of unsolicited traffic.

I work for a pretty huge company.
They all talk in IPv4 addresses.
We have DNS and shit, but everyone on the network team expects you to provide them with the actual IPs.
I'm not sure why, probably laziness.
I know all the firewall rules, vpns, etc are all done in IPs and not hostnames.
They also NAT to a public IP if leaving internal, but I think that is because legacy shit and no one wants to redo everything.

Attached: 1528344315612.jpg (1024x768, 149K)

ipv6 has way too many digits for the numbering to make sense. It's all gobbledy gook. They only needed another two octets at most.

Internal IPv6 isn't the same as the external address.

When using wireless phone data you don't have a "internal" ip. Your phone is litterally the modem for the net. So your dhcp resolver will respond accordingly.

>being this dumb

Attached: 1543459473336.jpg (600x663, 62K)

I second this. NAT is utter trash. Also there are a fuck ton of mobile ip connected to the net.

Why haven't cell phone services switched to ipv6?

with cgnat you have an internal ip tho.

Because they funnel their money to executive and investor pockets instead of updating their infrastructure.

Shut your fucking dogshit-eating mouth and never post again you absolute troglodyte

your entire network is now transpaent to the internet, goy

>your entire network is now transpaent to the internet
No, It's addressable by the internet. That's not the same thing.

You can have internal ipv6

Attached: logo.jpg (620x412, 187K)

>Well we're running out of ipv4 addresses
I have not one but two public IPv4 addresses that I can get reallocated at any time by just changing my router's MAC address and telling it to forget the DHCP lease. Had five addresses allocated at once for testing purposes. I don't pay anything extra for it, my ISP just doesn't seem to care. I suppose that happens when you own an entire /16 in spite of being one of the smallest countries in Europe.

enhancedip.org/index.html

I'll leave this here.

Why not just add 3 more numbers instead of making this mess? It was really necessary?

>why move forward when we can continue to delay the inevitable

good job

why didnt the ipv4 designers use numbers upto 999?

>Well we're running out of ipv4 addresses, so I guess ipv6 is perfectly fine.

We already ran out of ipv4 addresses, that's why the internet works on top of the most niggerlicious hacks, like the NAT protocol.

t. someone who doesn't know jack shit about networking

Go back to your home.

>being this retarded
Here's a hint: byte

Is there ANY fucking reason IP can’t just be a QR code in 2018?

Attached: 1543369301878.png (233x233, 80K)

If you're going to larp as an expert about something a quick google search might come in handy. Ipv6 is a god sent.

Any string of characters that's automatically hashed. The hash is the IP.

NAT is security through obscurity and should be fucking gone.