ipv6 - 16 byte??

ipv4 it's a *little bit* too small (only approx 4.000.000.000 hosts... )

ipv6, 128 bit, approx
1.000.000.000.000.000.000.000.000.000.000 hosts
1.000.000.000.000 <- this is a trillion

It'n only my opinion, or ipv6 is a little bit *expensive* and *wasteful*?

Everything in computer is logical... there's a logical in it too?

world surface: approx 510.065.600.000.000 mq (wikipedia)
one computer: approx 1mq

If a fill the entire surface of the world with coputer one attached to
another, i can have, at most, 1.000.000.000.000.000, approx 6/7 bytes

using ipv6 (16 bytes) I can fill the entire surface of the entire planets of
the Solar System... and maybe someone of other galaxies

On 07/07/2007 12:22 PM, toni wrote:
> ipv4 it's a *little bit* too small (only approx 4.000.000.000 hosts... )
>
> ipv6, 128 bit, approx
> 1.000.000.000.000.000.000.000.000.000.000 hosts
> 1.000.000.000.000 <- this is a trillion
>
> It'n only my opinion, or ipv6 is a little bit *expensive* and *wasteful*?
>
> Everything in computer is logical... there's a logical in it too?

On pointing browser to google
http://www.google.com/linux?q=why+ipv6&restrict=linux

I get:
Results 1 - 10 of about 114,000 for why ipv6. (0.11 seconds)

and ... the very first link
http://en.linuxreviews.org/Why_you_want_IPv6

reveals a lot of information.

Plz do some homework yourself first, before you post such a silly questions.

--
Dr Balwinder S "bsd" Dheeman Registered Linux User: #229709
Anu'z Linux@HOME Machines: #168573, 170593, 259192
Chandigarh, UT, 160062, India Gentoo, Fedora, Debian/FreeBSD/XP
Home: http://cto.homelinux.net/~bsd/ Visit: http://counter.li.org/

I have read something about ipv6, but nothing about motivation of it's
lenght.
Why It's not enough 8*1 byte, instead of 8*2?
I must read more, it's ok, but 16 byte for one address is really really
really large.


example:
What's your phone number?
My phone number is:

1364367276374173165025385264946

This is the phone number of E.T.


I really want to make only smart question
If it's a silly one, I hope it's at least funny...
If neither, I'm honestly regretful for your time-lost.

I have read something about ipv6, but nothing about motivation of it's
lenght.
Why It's not enough 8*1 byte, instead of 8*2?
I must read more, it's ok, but 16 byte for one address is really really
really large.


example:
What's your phone number?
My phone number is:

1364367276374173165025385264946

This is the phone number of E.T.


I really want to make only smart question
If it's a silly one, I hope it's at least funny...
If neither, I'm honestly regretful for your time-lost.

On Jul 6, 11:52 pm, "toni" <noso...@nospam.ns> wrote:
> ipv4 it's a *little bit* too small (only approx 4.000.000.000 hosts... )
>
> ipv6, 128 bit, approx
> 1.000.000.000.000.000.000.000.000.000.000 hosts
> 1.000.000.000.000 <- this is a trillion
>
> It'n only my opinion, or ipv6 is a little bit *expensive* and *wasteful*?
>
> Everything in computer is logical... there's a logical in it too?

Efficiency has a cost. Sometimes it's better to take a bit of
inefficiency rather than pay the cost of efficiency. For example, with
128-bits, a computer needs to know only its network and its MAC
address to generate a unique address.

DS

> inefficiency rather than pay the cost of efficiency. For example, with
> 128-bits, a computer needs to know only its network and its MAC
> address to generate a unique address.

At this time MAC address is a private information
(.doc word file write it inside the document... strange thing...)

With ipv6, MAC address became public.
IMHO, this is'nt a good thing about our privacy... and perhaps about our
freedom...

But maybe I'm paranoiac

Em Sábado, 7 de Julho de 2007 12:48, toni escreveu:

>> inefficiency rather than pay the cost of efficiency. For example, with
>> 128-bits, a computer needs to know only its network and its MAC
>> address to generate a unique address.
>
> At this time MAC address is a private information
> (.doc word file write it inside the document... strange thing...)
>
> With ipv6, MAC address became public.
> IMHO, this is'nt a good thing about our privacy... and perhaps about our
> freedom...
>
> But maybe I'm paranoiac

Even the easter bunny can see your mac-adress if it knows your ip.

Ipv6 is not the Mac adress

Soon Ipv4 will not have ip adresses for everybody, ipv6 will be needed, and
i just hope that it won't be late with so many delays.

and yes, you're been paranoid.

> Even the easter bunny can see your mac-adress if it knows your ip.
> and yes, you're been paranoid.

Well... better this than the opposite.
Thanks

On Jul 7, 4:48 am, "toni" <noso...@nospam.ns> wrote:
> > inefficiency rather than pay the cost of efficiency. For example, with
> > 128-bits, a computer needs to know only its network and its MAC
> > address to generate a unique address.
>
> At this time MAC address is a private information
> (.doc word file write it inside the document... strange thing...)

> With ipv6, MAC address became public.
> IMHO, this is'nt a good thing about our privacy... and perhaps about our
> freedom...

> But maybe I'm paranoiac

IPv6 does not require you to use a MAC address as part of the node
address. I'm just saying that's one of the options you gain. With a 64-
bit space (inside a subnet), you can also choose your address
randomly.

DS