What went wrong?

Are you retarded? NAT's secondary purpose is to obfuscate the layout of your internal network, whereas on IPv6 everything has a global address for some reason.

It would enable decentralized internet again, Governemt don't want that.

>NAT's secondary purpose is to obfuscate the layout of your internal network
That is incorrect.

>I don't get why they just didn't increase the maximum number from 255 to 999.
kek.
great post, I had a good laugh.

Thats what they basically did, dipshit. Instead of 255 it now supports upto 65535 per block

No thats a "side effect" rather than a "purpose" you should count on NAT for security

>I don't get why they just didn't increase the maximum number from 255 to 999.
Top lel

Attached: 1532643618081.jpg (600x632, 48K)

we saw the botnet approach and didn't implement it

You can still NAT if you want, but there really is no reason to anymore
Before NAT everyone got along just fine with every device having its own global IP, devices were secure enough (by contemporary standards) that they didn't need a router protecting them from port knocks.
Fuck, you can put a raspberry pi on the internet, given its own IP, and so long as you change the password from the image default it'll be fine.

>Implying 2001:DEAD:CAFE::BABE isn't a fantastic IP address that's easy as piss to remember
I'm just upset they used hexadecimal rather than extending it out to the rest of the alphabet.

>I don't get why they just didn't increase the maximum number from 255 to 999.
Sounds reasonable. We would go from around 4 billion IP addresses to just under a trillion which should be more than enough.

The internet greybeards who developed it assumed that they didn't have to worry about backwards compatibility or giving people an incentive to move to the new protocol. They assumed that address exhaustion would force everyone's hand and so they'd just have to put up with doing the work to move to IPv6. They liked this because it facilitated what they wanted to do. For example, not having any v4 compatibility means you simplify the routing tables going forward, you don't have to carry forward all the complexity of the v4 world, you can start with a clean slate. That elegance appealed to them. Also NAT offended their sense of technical elegance, they saw (and still see) it as an ugly hack that ought to have never existed.

But the rest of the world found NAT not nearly as painful as the greybeards thought, and using it was cheaper and easier than moving things to IPv6. Also the address-space expansion of IPv6 benefits people who don't already have addresses - people not already on the internet - but all the work has to be done by people who do already have addresses - those who are on the internet. Getting people to do a bunch of work that doesn't benefit them, only other people, is always a hard sell.

The big IPv6 adoption stores have all been in big organizations where moving to v6 did actually solve problems for the organization. The big one is Facebook, whose datacenters are all IPv6 internally. They'd exhausted 10.0.0.0/8, which was causing them issues.

Good idea. Everyone's is laughing cause they're too stupid to get it. That's what happens when everyone gets a JavaScript Science degree.

There is nothing preventing them specifying an IP address to be 999.999.999.999. It's literally just numbers. The computer can be made to understand addresses up to 999, just call it IPv4.1

This is literally what ipv6 is. Instead of 256 (2^8) per block they use 65356 (2^16) per block. And instead of 4 blocks they use 8.

IPV6 also introduces other bullshit which makes it easier to track people.

>It's literally just numbers.
Let's pick an ipv4 address, say, 192.168.22.15.
In binary, that's 11000000.10101000.00010110.00001111
So when the data is sent, you just set the address to 11000000101010000001011000001111
Now, that's a mid-range IP address, but what about the lowest?
0.0.0.0? Not usable, but it's as low at things go.
That's 00000000.00000000.00000000.00000000
How about the biggest? 255.255.255.255?
That's 11111111.11111111.11111111.11111111
Because the largest number you can hold in 8 bits is 255, or eight 1's, that's the highest it goes.
If you wanted to increase it, to, say, 999, well the problem is that in binary, it's 1111100111, but that's 10 digits long. Now, a byte is 8 binary digits, that's why in an ipv4 address, you use 4 bytes, you get 4 sets of max 255.
If you wanted to increase that, you'd have to jump from 1 byte, 8 digits, to 2 bytes, 16 digits.
Now 999 looks like 0000001111100111, so the max IP you're talking about would be 999.999.999.999, or 0000001111100111.0000001111100111.0000001111100111.0000001111100111
Nearly half of that is wasted.
So someone went
>Rather than max at 999, or
0000001111100111
let's fill all the binary up with 1's, and use that as the max, or
1111111111111111
or 65535.65535.65535.65535

The thing you don't get is that it isn't "Just numbers", we didn't just stop at 255 for the fuck of it, we worked out the technology in binary and then represented it in decimal.
Saying we're too stupid to get it when you don't understand how fucking addresses work is ridiculous.
> The computer can be made to understand addresses up to 999, just call it IPv4.1
Yes, it fucking could, and now each packet, rather than making use of every bit of header info, wastes half the fucking address space on something that literally can never be used.

how do you remember a fucking ipv6?
don't expect me to cary a pencil and a notepad everytime

Uh, DNS? Are you lost in the 1980s?

>I don't get why they just didn't increase the maximum number from 255 to 999.

Attached: 12486624.png (203x231, 3K)

you are so fucking retarded it's unbelievable
get of my fucking board you failed fucking abortion
go back to the fucking shithole where you came from you braindead fucking dipshit

>Not using CJK for maximum characters
Because in a bitwise pov, using 26 is wasting bits

>wastes half the fucking address space
Why not just use the other half of the address space as letters instead of binary?

Such as?

> NAT's secondary purpose is to obfuscate the layout of your internal network
No. NAT was never a security protocol. As others have stated, it's sole purpose is to cover networks where enough public addresses aren't available.

IPv6 also has a private range of fd00:/8.

Your argument is invalid...

The ISP embeds your physical home address in the IP data being sent.

Negro, take a CCNA course or something, you'll learb this shit nore clearly.

That's already done with IPv4

doxxing made easier, then?

Why? I can already configure my wireless ethernet connection and know the difference between crossover and straight pass cables.

I think he means the fact that the ipv6 address contains a customer identifier, which the ipv4 does not, so your identifier gets sent too.
AKA, dynamic IPs won't stop you from ban evading.

Whart our thiknig about is EUI-64, which means for the host part of the IP address, dhcp uses the device MAC address, not your physical location, which still, is a privacy concern.
You could just disable eui-64 from your OS, instead use a random number generator instead of device MAC address.

I can't find any info on "customer identifier" or "physical home address" in the wikipedia page for ipv6. Can you use the correct terms for whatever you're talking about?

Attached: 1547999413931.png (680x598, 299K)

Nah, it's just me being retarded.
I took the OP image seriously.

he is talking about EUI-64, my negro friend.

Based retard user

Fuck Jannies and fuck spam detection.
Also, you're both fucking idiots

Attached: Screen Shot 2019-01-24 at 10.21.46 pm.png (1200x491, 151K)

Botnet

See 2001:db8:234::3 is a (theoretical) global IPV6 address that refers to a specific device, not just a home network's router.
Get a good ISP and it can be 2001:A:A::3

Nigga I'm not writing an ip address in fucking Kanji

You don't fucking get it, letters convert down to binary. Your router doesn't go "Well I could send a 1 or a zero, or how about the letter H?"
This isn't fucking sesame street, everything goes down to binary.
You wanna send a letter? Fine, it gets converted to binary.

Every IP address is just a string of binary that gets sent from device to device, 8.8.8.8 is just a decimal representation of a binary string.
It's a fucking waste not to be using all the digits you're sending, how you display it to humans, in either decimal, hex, base64, whatever, is just for convenience.
Niggers decided that we're going from 32 binary digits, 1's and zeros, to 128 for ipv6. Display it how you fucking like.

Hey partner, is a career in networking worth it? Should i get ccna, ccnp certs or follow the programming meme

the fact that someone had to explain this on Jow Forums really shows how dumb people are here
I guess I hold people here too high

Nigga you can't just sniff an ipv6 packet and there in the header is your fucking home address.
With ipv4, they keep a record of who had what ip on what day, the exact time you were given an ip, and the exact time you were given a different one.
They do the same for ipv6.
Don't ya wanna know how to fuck around in IOS and all cisco's other proprietary useless shit as well?

In reality it's just a bunch of bored networking fags trolling each other.

I did my CCNA in 2014 and decided that IT was such a shitshow at the time that I just wouldn't bother, and switched careers entirely.
If you wanna make money, teach yourself programming, but use a classic compiled language, there's no money in frontend.
Networking/sysadmin stuff is in demand, because everyones' finally decided that india was a fucking mistake and is having everything done locally now.

If you wanna touch Cisco, CCNA is a mandatory starting point, because to do anything more, you're gonna wanna know all the cisco specific bullshit.
Don't skimp out on IOS, take notes, if you see someone using a command somewhere learn it all off by heart (but still write it down for god sake, your notebook will be your lifeblood).

I can only speak from experience, I honestly can't say what's a good idea and what's not. Just be aware that it's all a mess, and if you settle into a niche there's a 50/50 chance demand for it will have disappeared by the time you're employable.

All I can say is, good luck. I mean it.

It keeps me on my toes
I stopped going on Jow Forums years ago, I've only come back in the last month or so to check things out occasionally
If there's one thing I've learned, its that yes, there are people that dumb on Jow Forums, and there are a lot of them.

sure, go for ccna but dont think even for a second it will make you a networking genius or that its gonna land you a job in networking instantly. lectors will give you a taste of osi model and basic networking and after that its just virtual labbing (packet tracer). still worth it, but not very practical. ccnp is tho, but that will take a few years before you get there (3-4 if youre good)

Damn, so i guess ill keep that as a backup plan?
They are teaching me CCNA/CCNP in college and i liked it quite a bit.
But i guess ill stick to programming

>I don't get why they just didn't increase the maximum number from 255 to 999.
Lost hard. Owait is it not a YLYL?

Attached: kek.gif (450x450, 578K)

Duly noted, what are you currently doing?

Yeah drom CCNA i don't think I've learned anything practical (like how to set up a small network or even manage the fucking passwords of devices) do you think ill learn more "practical" stuff from ccnp? And why would it take 3-4 years to complete? Is it really that hard?

But he wants 999 not 65536
3 digits is max for people
oh no 1.5 bytes

>I don't get why they just didn't increase the maximum number from 255 to 999.

Attached: 237.jpg (640x633, 39K)

ccna will take 2 years, and you should do ccnp after ccna. it is usually divided in 4 semesters (half-years) and technically you could multiple of them at the same time (but hell to the no, do i not reccomend that at all). it certainly isnt easy, it takes some dedication.

ccnp is practical, but only if you want to work with cisco stuff only. i personally think thats little bit short minded, but hey, its better than nothing.

>Nat has no place in the world anymore
So you're saying that every device on my local network should be exposed to the internet with its own IP?

> He doesn't know what a firewall is...

It's evil and designed to support a massive surveillance apparatus, and also possibly post-human infrastructure. Not "i upload muh brainz fwer live 4ever n utohhpeea! gib robut body!", but rather "I'm literally dead and so is nearly everyone else".

>I don't get why they just didn't increase the maximum number from 255 to 999
Those numbers are 8 bit bytes written in decimal notation. With 8 bits you can represent 256 values, 0-255 inclusive.

>Nearly half of that is wasted.
Only if you do it the stupid way you did. Just pack them into one number very similar to the current way ipv4 is packed into one number but just on ten bit boundaries. I'd use a struct.

Design by committee seldom ends well.

少:女:心:事
Literally perfect.

which is optional and not the default, which is the IPv6 Privacy Extension

just look at it

>I don't get why they just didn't increase the maximum number from 255 to 999.

Attached: 1546376894454.gif (498x278, 558K)

Why do you need all that shit on the beginning? Why not just the EUI?

NAT happened

Is there any good alternative to ccnp then?

Attached: 1547217514116.gif (500x207, 3.06M)

>Only if you do it the stupid way you did. Just pack them into one number very similar to the current way ipv4 is packed into one number but just on ten bit boundaries. I'd use a struct.
you are the sarah sanders of this thread, making mouth noises but way too stupid for anyone ever to pay attention to

Attached: holy_fuck.gif (938x535, 2.58M)

I have ipv6. Idk.

If you enjoy networking, then by all means go for it, it's fun shit if you can get into it, I just felt like I was doing it out of obligation.
>what are you currently doing?
Self employed business owner doing whatever the hell I please, which is usually fuck-all unless I need money, then I'll take a large job or two, then go back to doing fuck all
>From CCNA i don't think I've learned anything practical
You're learning the theory, and that's important. If you have the time, doing a full CCNA is nice, but only to lead onto more complex certs.

>oh no 1.5 bytes
We haven't used anything other than multiples of 8 bits in computing since the mid 70's. Doing so for something as stupid as "999 is easier to remember than Cafe" is idiotic.
I did CCNA in 1 year (with some graphics design stuff on the side), and fuck me, it nearly killed me.
I'm a bit of a brainlet, your average 100 IQ normie, and it put me through my fucking paces like nothing else in life.
Retrospectively, if I was more skilled at studying, it wouldn't have been so bad, but I wasn't, and it was killer.

999.999.999.999, at minimum, is 40 bits.
Even 999999999999 is 1110100011010100101001010000111111111111, still 40 bits.
very similar to the current way ipv4 is packed into one number
IT ISN'T PACKED INTO A NUMBER, IT IS FOUR BYTES TRANSMITTED. FOUR REGULAR FUCKING BYTES, NOT ENCAPSULATED IN ANYTHING OTHER THAN THE PACKET ITSELF. THERE IS NO STRUCTURE HERE YOU MORON
>I'd use a struct.
JESUS SHIT, THIS ISN'T ABOUT HOW YOU FUCKING STORE IT, IT'S A FUCKING NETWORK ADDRESS, WHAT MATTERS IS HOW YOU TRANSMIT IT
WE'RE NOT GONNA THROW AWAY A SENSIBLE SYSTEM THAT WORKS FINE IF YOU HAVE FIVE FUCKING BRAINCELLS JUST SO WE CAN USE YOUR ARBITRARY HUMAN BASE 10 FUCKERY

>mfw trying to get all my remote access shit to work after my ISP shifted to CGNAT

Attached: 1546972883844.jpg (948x1199, 330K)

The power of legacy IP.

You can memorize the first 4 blocks, disable SLAAC and assign the suffixes to your devices yourself, so it makes it easier to remember.

>999
as if computers understood decimal

>Nat has no place in the world anymore, and DNS is a thing.
You're retarded and we can tell that you don't work, neet.

>I don't get why they just didn't increase the maximum number from 255 to 999.

Attached: i.jpg (237x282, 17K)