mahboi

7 ms·

1.
by mahboi 1mo ago
There's a weird number of shared words between Basque and old Armenian, also names of places. But I've only seen random articles trying to link the two, not real scientific papers.
2.
by mahboi 3mo ago
You can use the 8-byte addresses earlier if you want, just requires your hosts and stuff in between to support v5, same story as with v6 there. The point is that you aren't asking everyone to do nearly as difficult of a migration to su
3.
by mahboi 3mo ago
Not going to jump through those hoops to run software
4.
by mahboi 3mo ago
Meant that the states in those boxes work with ipv5. Yeah a totally unmodified ipv4 DHCP server would only accept queries over v4, but the address it leases would be valid for v5 too. I get why this part was unclear, it was assuming the afo
5.
by mahboi 3mo ago
Even Apple's PC lets you install whatever you want
6.
by mahboi 3mo ago
Exactly, it'd be horrible. They picked the right format for v6. The problem isn't the space size, it's the entropy. V6 addrs are randomly spread, but if you were using the most significant bytes first, you could have somethin
7.
by mahboi 3mo ago
Need an IP address and a prompt explaining to Claude how to parse it
8.
by mahboi 3mo ago
Github.com doesn't have an AAAA record, so I don't know how you're reaching it if you don't have a v4 anywhere. Even if they had that, they said that basic features like cloning repos won't work over v6. Only one ex
9.
by mahboi 3mo ago
> "v-next" 8.8.8.8 isn't the same thing as IPv4 8.8.8.8, so you now have two "interfaces" running different versions of IP with identical addresses. Yes that's what I wanted. You don't do #4 that way. B
10.
by mahboi 3mo ago
Because devices randomly generate the last 64 bits of the address without coordinating. They need it to be long to avoid collisions.
11.
by mahboi 3mo ago
You need ipv4 to reach GitHub right now. The ipv5 "people can turn it on but not use the last bytes" stage wouldn't require ipv4 to reach it.
12.
by mahboi 3mo ago
The problem is they designed v6 with no good compatibility in either direction. I get that there's no way for v6 to support v4, but at least going from v4 to v6 should've been easier. 6to4 etc didn't cut it. Assigning IPs, DN
13.
by mahboi 3mo ago
Maybe your ISP is really tunneling v6 over v4?
14.
by mahboi 3mo ago
Most people will never touch their router config, so the defaults are important. Default-deny inbound is better than allow. But it's surprisingly dumb that the router won't even let you configure it to allow, you sure there's
15.
by mahboi 3mo ago
Because you can't generally turn on v6 without thinking about it. Maybe consumers can, even then not always cause it messes random things up. Power users and offices maybe can't. Service operators really can't. If it were as
16.
by mahboi 3mo ago
Oh I mixed it up with 3. Yes you don't need #4. I could still have 8.8.8.8 routed to me in v-next, and then later do something with 8.8.8.8.1, so it's 1:1 but not onto. Instead v6 did completely new /64s with random addrs ins
17.
by mahboi 3mo ago
That's using v4 like the parent comment said. But anyway I don't want ipv6 to be dominant, I want them to scrap it and do something easier.
18.
by mahboi 3mo ago
No I know it's point 4, that was the point. You can do forwards compatibility that way.
19.
by mahboi 3mo ago
6to4 wasn't that. 8.8.8.8 didn't get routed to you in v6, instead it went to a relay server that then translated to v4 then sent it to you. And even if you actually owned 8.8.8.8, it didn't give you 8.8.8.8.1 etc, because it
20.
by mahboi 3mo ago
It'd be useless until everyone switches to the 5-byte thing and people can start putting something besides 0 into that last byte. But at least they could turn on v5 or whatever it's called without having to think about it. Right n
21.
by mahboi 3mo ago
Yes, we want ipv5 that just does 1, 2, 3 instead of ipv6 which does the most complicated variants of those and more. We didn't have requirements 4. change all the pre-existing addresses 5. make addresses randomly assigned 6. make route
22.
by mahboi 3mo ago
You've put yourself in a position where you can't access a lot of websites, including things like GitHub. That might be fine for you personally but isn't what most people do.
23.
by mahboi 3mo ago
> how do you think we got several billion smartphones connected to the Internet Only because of NAT. Those cellular CGNATs are v6 on the inside but v4 on the outside (well also v6 but customers need the v4 more).
24.
by mahboi 3mo ago
Shouldn't blocking v6 also be based on /32 if you want the attacker's cost to be the same?
25.
by mahboi 3mo ago
Yeah but they could've picked something that at least lets the 4 byte host talk to a 5 byte one. Like if I have 8.8.8.8 and they want to give me 8.8.8.8.0, cool. Or make it 8 bytes instead of 5, same thing.
26.
by mahboi 3mo ago
That's what overengineered implies, it's capable of things you don't need. The problem with v6 isn't 128-bit addrs though.
27.
by mahboi 3mo ago
If ipv5 worked just like ipv4 except with a larger address space, it would be easier than moving to ipv6. I shouldn't have to change my address to switch for example.
28.
by mahboi 3mo ago
If they're going to make ipv5, might as well make it 8 bytes instead of 4