submitted 1 month ago by Sunshine@piefed.zip to c/ask@piefed.social

17 comments fedilink hide all child comments

A lot of technical folks are saying it’s a large upgrade for networking.

you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments

[-] Laser@feddit.org 1 points 1 month ago

They should have just like doubled ipv4 so 192.168.1.1.1.1.1.1 at least that would have made sense

IP addresses aren't meant to be consumed by humans, that's what DNS is for. That being said, nothing stops you from converting IPv6 addresses to that format. Two "digits" in an IPv6 address correspond to one block in IPv4.

Also what people don't understand is that the huge address space is not meant to to be exhausted. It provides "layers" with significant reserves to make routing easier and flexible.

Nothing is wrong with NAT

Except everything

this post was submitted on 17 Apr 2026

9 points (90.9% liked)

Ask

1533 readers

2 users here now

Rules

Be nice
Posts must be legitimate questions (no rage bait or sea lioning)
No spam
NSFW allowed if tagged
No politics
For support questions, please go to !newcomers@piefed.zip

Icon by Hilmy Abiyyu A.

founded 1 year ago

MODERATORS

BoozeOrWater@piefed.social

cloudless@piefed.social

fxomt@piefed.social