• NakedGardenGnome@lemmy.dbzer0.com
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      0
      ·
      24 days ago

      Their ranges are running dry. Nearly all address spaces are taken, so we will need to migrate eventually. However, since almost everyone still supports both, and ipv4 is much easier to read and maintain, adoption of IPv6 has been slow.

    • chris@l.roofo.cc
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      0
      ·
      24 days ago

      IPv6 changed some things. First and foremost it has a huge address space:

      • IPv4: 4294967296 (2^32)
      • IPv6: 340282366920938463463374607431768211456 (2^128)

      Then they simplyfied some things:

      • Removed Broadcast in favor of Multicast and Anycast
      • Added autoconfiguration without a DHCP server
      • Better subnetting support

      And much more

      • JohnEdwa@sopuli.xyz
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        0
        ·
        edit-2
        24 days ago

        They went just a teeny tiny little bit overboard with the address space. Ipv4 is four groups between 0 and 255, ipv6 is eight groups of four digit hex, 0000 to ffff - e.g the Google DNS ipv4 address is 8.8.8.8. the ipv6 one is 2001:4860:4860:0:0:0:0:8888 (thankfully at least some devices allow using :: to skip all the zeroes, so it’s “just” 2001:4860:4860::8888)

        But we now have enough ipv6 addresses to give more than 10 billion ipv6 addresses to every single grain of sand on earth, and still have some left over.

        • KillingTimeItself@lemmy.dbzer0.com
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          0
          ·
          24 days ago

          They went just a teeny tiny little bit overboard with the address space.

          as is seemingly standard for bit range increases. y2038 is now y2,900,000,000 due to added a silly amount of bits.

        • chris@l.roofo.cc
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          0
          ·
          24 days ago

          They never wanted to worry about address space size again. And this makes subnetting much easier. I have a /56 allocation so I could do 256 /64 subnets. I hope that at some point home routers will have the option for seperate subnets built in. This way you could easily have guest, IoT, work or whatever networks without NAT.

          One thing you have to consider though is that the minimum network size that allows autoconf is /64 and that because of the privacy extension a device usually has 3-4 IPv6 adresses.

      • ngn@lemy.lol
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        0
        ·
        edit-2
        22 days ago
        • we already have enough IPv4 addresses thanks to stuff such as NAT and CG-NAT, these devices also protect the end-user by not directly exposing their IP to the internet
        • what’s the problem with broadcast? also afaik IPv4 also supports multicast
        • what’s the problem with IPv4 subnetting?