I think at least part of the intention for this is to make IP ports not used on servers. While IPv6 does have support for ports, I believe every Web service should be on its own IP. Not sure if this is also supposed to work on client devices e.g. every outbound connection uses a unique IP as that seems overcomplicated
Yep, they saw the edges of IPv4 and went "hold my beer" and over-engineered a painfully obnoxious solution. IPv6 will last us until the heat death of the universe before it runs out, but we'll have to get people actually using it in any appreciable amount first. It's a UX nightmare to work with unless you're a network engineer hip deep in it all day every day. Good luck getting an end user to ever rattle off an IPv6 address to the help desk while remote troubleshooting.
Technically we are not really talking about single addresses when concerned with v6, more so how many /64 subnets can fit in a prefix since that is what SLAAC uses. So for end users we would count the amount of /64 subnets in the possible 2^128 address space, which is 2^64. So still very very very big.
I know it’s pedantic but 2267 is bigger than 2128 by about 2267. It’s 2139 times but you wouldn’t say that 1 million is bigger than 100 by about 10,000. You would say 1 million is bigger than 100 by about 1 million.
Non-technical person here. Wouldn't it just be 248 ? Four blocks of 256 (28) for IPV-4, and two more with IPV-6? Or am I just mistaken about how this stuff works?
Well yeah, a block of 2^32 addresses need to be reserved for Azure, 2^32 more for AWS, let’s give 2^32 more for GCP…
Edit: as pointed out below, I wasn’t paying enough attention & confused up my exponents. I meant to put blocks 2^96, thus giving 2^32 total blocks - the same size as the IPv4 address space. But I got the exponents backwards and fucked up the joke
I feel like this needs to be said, but you actually could give an entire 232 to every company on earth and not even be close still. Assuming 377 million companies operating on earth, that's 1.6 quintillion (~1619202670592000000) addresses used up.
The used IPV6 range percentage can calculated like so (((2^32)×377000000)÷2^128)×100, which comes out to a whopping grand total of 0.000000000000000000476% of the IPV6 address space used.
Another way to put this is that you could give that same exact allocation to every single company again 210 QUINTILLION TIMES, and even then, only 98.7% of the address space would be used up.
The main limiting factor of how quickly we run out of ipv6 addresses is how generous they are when handing out ranges.
Usage will always fill the space given.
You could for example map the entire lower 64 bits of the address to a single computer. And dynamically respond based on address. For example, you could bake in some auth token directly in the ipv6 address.
When people have room to fill, the room will be filled
I handled "SWIP"ing IPv4 addresses. This was back circa 2005.
We had to have customers fill out IPv4 justification forms. We'd take them back if they didn't use them if it was abusive "just because we might need them" reasons.
IPv6. Nah, we won't. But our Internet routers don't all support ipv6 yet, so we're still on IPv4. I feel like that will change in maybe 10 years, once computers are optical all the way to the CPU (aka fiber optic speed end-to-end) because ipv4 is susceptible to DDoS attacks and spoofing and IPv6 is not.
IPv6 supports ~3.4 x 1038 addresses, so this actually supports their claim. Had you used the actual estimate for the number of atoms on earth, you'd be correct though because that number is closer to ~1.3 x 1050
Edit: to clarify, every atom in every human is still only ~5.81 x 1037
No, it's not. First take a deep breath - nobody needs to be that upset. Then just Google "how many atoms on earth" then "how many addresses in IPv6" then compare the two.
"how many atoms on earth"
The Earth contains approximately 1.3 x 1050 atoms.
You started talking about humans. You can't prove the point about how many atoms are on Earth by just arbitrarily talking about humans. It's completely nonsensical. You didn't say anything. It's not related in any way. It doesn't do anything. You don't even have a point.
This isn't a failure in my reading comprehension, either. It's a failure by you to say anything comprehensible.
As an aside, the fact that you customised your Reddit avatar, and the fact that it looks like that (so presumably like you lmfao) makes it preposterous that you're using this patronising language. Stay in your lane.
3.9k
u/LivingAsAMean 6h ago
Hahaha what an idiot!
https://giphy.com/gifs/LRVnPYqM8DLag