• chris@l.roofo.cc
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      0
      ·
      5 months 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

      • ngn@lemy.lol
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        0
        ·
        edit-2
        5 months 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?
        • chris@l.roofo.cc
          link
          fedilink
          arrow-up
          1
          ·
          5 months ago

          In my opinion NAT is a hack that makes lot of things harder than they should be. STUN and TURN are services that are created because there is no easy way to connect two hosts between different NATs. UPnP for port forwarding is another. CG-NAT is even worse. I have heard of so many people having problems with it.

          Breadcast is messy. It is like screaming into a room and waiting for an answer. Multicast lets the computer decide if it wants and needs to listen to a specific group message.

          IPv4 didn’t have cidr from the beginning. They only had classes. IPv6 was designed with complex routing and sub routing in mind.