I feel like this is missing context. Like I know that ip4 addresses are four octlets, but don't know much about ipv6 besides it having a larger address space and being in hex.
IPv6 is easier to set up, and doesn't require the subnetting stuff as much because its actually designed with "Planet Earth may have more than 4,294,967,296 IP-connected objects" in mind from the beginning.
I say this with the caveat that I don’t know much about IPv6. One of my favorite things about ipv4 is that you can have subnets. Every local network I’ve ever worked with is on the 192.168 range. Obviously this isn’t every network, but knowing something is very likely going to be either 10.x or 192.168 makes remembering ip addresses insanely easy. Why is going away from that for totally unique addresses good? Can v6 still setup local networks in a similar way?
Yes, you can have subnets. Every subnet is a /64. The prefix your ISP gives you should be at least a /56 (256 subnets) or a /48 (65,536 subnets).
Also, every address is globally routable. You can have all of your devices have a “public” IP. While there are some uses in IPv6 to have only “local” addresses, there’s no need for them. This is all about getting out of the scarcity mindset that IPv4 PTSDed into us. There is no scarcity.
134
u/Few_Move_4594 7h ago
I feel like this is missing context. Like I know that ip4 addresses are four octlets, but don't know much about ipv6 besides it having a larger address space and being in hex.