• @[email protected]
      link
      fedilink
      English
      148 months ago

      To expand on this, we have functionally ran out of IPv4 addresses. Meaning IPv6 addresses are required.

      • @[email protected]
        link
        fedilink
        English
        128 months ago

        Not only that, but ipv6 makes networking easier and less complicated. No longer, needing port forwarding or NAT, amongst other improvements

        • @Blackmist
          link
          English
          18 months ago

          It’s that necessarily a good thing?

          I remember suddenly needing a firewall on my PC back in the days of the Blaster worm.

          Do we really want all those crappy IoT devices open on all ports to the general internet?

        • @Plopp
          link
          English
          -108 months ago

          I’d be fucked if I had to deal with IPv6 at home. Give me NAT, port forwarding and a dynamic public address that changes.

          • @[email protected]
            link
            fedilink
            English
            48 months ago

            Slaac does everything for you. You get dynamic public addresses that change (you can disable if you please). Nothing to deal with, just open a firewall port if you want to receive traffic

            • @Plopp
              link
              English
              -18 months ago

              I want static addresses on my LAN, and addresses I can remember and easily recognize in a list. And I don’t want my devices to have unique addresses outside my LAN, especially not static ones. NAT is great.

              • @[email protected]
                link
                fedilink
                English
                28 months ago

                You can statically number a LAN with fd00::/8 and NAT66 to the internet, if you really want to.

                  • @Plopp
                    link
                    English
                    18 months ago

                    See, what both of you wrote is completely alien and confusing to me. The look of IPv6 gives me an aneurysm. Let me keep my IPv4. You can run IPv6 on your own LAN. I’m not stopping you.

                • @Plopp
                  link
                  English
                  18 months ago

                  My brain stops me from remembering and recognizing IPv6 addresses. I can’t deal with long strings of hex. And why are people so against me running IPv4 on my own LAN? Do I make you sad? Do I ruin your day? I love IPv4, and NAT works perfectly fine for me. I’m not doing the translation, my router is.

                  • @[email protected]
                    link
                    fedilink
                    English
                    18 months ago

                    You don’t need to have long addresses, you should be using hostnames and domains anyway. Ipv6 addresses are often simpler than ipv4 ones. E.g. prefix::1 for your router. Prefix::2 for the next device, and so on to Prefix::FFFF for the first 65k machines if you wish to set it up that way. Ipv4 exclusively on your lan ruins my day because I have to maintain servers and software to support users that only use ipv4 and flat out refuse ipv6 connectivity - it’s expensive and takes a lot of effort to maintain dual stack support.

    • @[email protected]
      link
      fedilink
      English
      -11
      edit-2
      8 months ago

      No shit.

      But a private Lan will never need it.

      There are 4 billion+ possible IP v4 addresses, nearly 600 million in the current private range.

      Show me a private network with 600 million devices.

      There’s no reason a device that doesn’t have a direct internet connection needs IP6.

      • @[email protected]
        link
        fedilink
        English
        8
        edit-2
        8 months ago

        Ideally, using just IP6 would be simpler, as every device gets a global address. Then you don’t need to mess with NAT, port forwarding and all that bullshit. Every device having multiple addresses just complicates things.

      • @[email protected]
        link
        fedilink
        English
        18 months ago

        A device on your private IPv4 network can send packets directly to 104.21.36.127 via NAT. How will it send packets to 2606:4700:3033::6815:247f? There’s not enough space in the IPv4 header.