Talk:IPv6

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
Jump to navigation Jump to search
WikiProject Computing / Networking (Rated C-class, High-importance)
WikiProject iconThis article is within the scope of WikiProject Computing, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of computers, computing, and information technology on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion and see a list of open tasks.
C-Class article C  This article has been rated as C-Class on the project's quality scale.
 High  This article has been rated as High-importance on the project's importance scale.
Taskforce icon
This article is supported by Networking task force (marked as High-importance).
 
WikiProject Internet (Rated C-class, Top-importance)
WikiProject iconThis article is within the scope of WikiProject Internet, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of the Internet on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion and see a list of open tasks.
C-Class article C  This article has been rated as C-Class on the project's quality scale.
 Top  This article has been rated as Top-importance on the project's importance scale.
 

Wikipedia IPv6 enabled[edit]

Comment by User:Eyreland[edit]

This table needs to be updated and put in the same location as it is on the IP4 page, to keep the two pages consistent with each other. Removing it pure sabotage -- no more no less. Access to the reserved IP6 addresses needs is as vital as the IP4 ones.

Special-use addresses[edit]

The Internet Engineering Task Force (IETF) and the Internet Assigned Numbers Authority (IANA) have restricted from general use various reserved IP addresses for special purposes. Some are used for maintenance of routing tables, for multicast traffic, operation under failure modes, or to provide addressing space for public, unrestricted uses on private networks.

Reserved address blocks
Range Description Reference
0.0.0.0/8 Current network (only valid as source address) RFC 6890
10.0.0.0/8 Private network RFC 1918
100.64.0.0/10 Shared Address Space RFC 6598
127.0.0.0/8 Loopback RFC 6890
169.254.0.0/16 Link-local RFC 3927
172.16.0.0/12 Private network RFC 1918
192.0.0.0/24 IETF Protocol Assignments RFC 6890
192.0.2.0/24 TEST-NET-1, documentation and examples RFC 5737
192.88.99.0/24 IPv6 to IPv4 relay RFC 3068


Eyreland (talk) 19:10, 15 July 2016 (UTC)

Big numbers[edit]

I reverted the recent change which introduced "unquadragintillion", as this seems to be 10128 rather than 2128. Also I think the previous consensus was that coming up with "xxx-illion" names that are way beyond anyone's experience is not useful. There's some discussion of this in the 2013 archive. Ttwaring (talk) 02:11, 13 March 2017 (UTC)

Thanks, I agree with your conclusion. Johnuniq (talk) 03:27, 13 March 2017 (UTC)

External links modified[edit]

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified 3 external links on IPv6. Please take a moment to review my edit. If you have any questions, or need the bot to ignore the links, or the page altogether, please visit this simple FaQ for additional information. I made the following changes:

When you have finished reviewing my changes, you may follow the instructions on the template below to fix any issues with the URLs.

As of February 2018, "External links modified" talk page sections are no longer generated or monitored by InternetArchiveBot. No special action is required regarding these talk page notices, other than regular verification using the archive tool instructions below. Editors have permission to delete the "External links modified" sections if they want, but see the RfC before doing mass systematic removals. This message is updated dynamically through the template {{sourcecheck}} (last update: 15 July 2018).

  • If you have discovered URLs which were erroneously considered dead by the bot, you can report them with this tool.
  • If you found an error with any archives or the URLs themselves, you can fix them with this tool.


Cheers.—InternetArchiveBot (Report bug) 01:35, 8 April 2017 (UTC)

fe80::/10 vs. fe80::/64[edit]

In this article the link-local address prefix is given as fe80::/10. Link-local_address says fe80::/64. Who is right? --RokerHRO (talk) 12:23, 28 July 2017 (UTC)

IANA has reserved fe80::/10 for link-local addresses (https://www.iana.org/assignments/ipv6-address-space/ipv6-address-space.xhtml) but the IPv6 implementation (RFC4291) only uses fe80::/64 out of that range. The change to Link-local_address was made by 178.250.166.134 in May 2017; the previous version went with IANA's /10 reservation. - Ttwaring (talk) 22:23, 28 July 2017 (UTC)

64 KiB[edit]

An edit on 26 February 2018 changed the start of IPv6#Jumbograms from

IPv4 limits packets to 65,535 (216−1) octets of payload. An IPv6 node can optionally handle packets over this limit, referred to as jumbograms, which can be as large as 4,294,967,295 (232−1) octets.

to

IPv4 limits packets to 65,535 (216−1) octets (64 KiB - 1 byte) of payload. An IPv6 node can optionally handle packets over this limit, referred to as jumbograms, which can be as large as 4,294,967,295 (232−1) octets (4 GiB - 1 byte).

I was asked about my revert on my talk. The edit introduces too many parentheticals. Also, anyone familiar with what KiB/GiB mean would not need the extra information. Johnuniq (talk) 00:10, 3 March 2018 (UTC)

As already mentioned on the user's talk page standardised prefixes for units were invented for a reason. Sure, one can do the mental math 232 = 230+2 = 22x232 = 4x230 but that's why gibi was defined as 230 so one doesn't need to do these calculations every time they come across a large number. One can write 4GiB and while reading not get lost in powers or unneccessary zeros/digits/decimals denoting powers/orders.
I agree the extra parenthesis in the edit are ugly. If anything we need to find a good/better way to express "less 1 byte/octet".
2001:569:79AE:3200:64B2:F010:5811:AFCB (talk) 20:46, 3 March 2018 (UTC)
I hope others join in but my feeling is that KiB/GiB is gibberish to all but a handful of techo types. However, if it were wanted, the way to say it might be in an additional sentence along the lines of "The payload for an IP packet therefore increases from almost 64 KiB using IPv4 to almost 4 GiB using IPv6." Hmm, "packet" is not right. That should be datagram. Johnuniq (talk) 22:29, 3 March 2018 (UTC)
I'm not a fan of binary kilo/giga either but we can't write 64KB or 4GB because it's technically incorrect eventhough all computer people would know what is meant by that. My point was that these bulk transfers will be used to transmit chunks of data (streamed video/audio, boot images, ...) and file sizes are normally given with prefix notation ("My JPG picture is 255KB big" - not "My JPG picture is almost 218 octets big").
I don't have a problem with the suggested additional sentence mentioning KiB/GiB. Another proposed wording: "The payload for an IP packet therefore increases from 64 KiB (less 1 byte) using IPv4 to 4 GiB (less 1 byte) using IPv6."
2001:569:79AE:3200:35C4:2CDF:990A:B0CA (talk) 09:40, 4 March 2018 (UTC)
I'd like to also point out this sentence in IPv6#Packet_format: "Without special options, a payload must be less than 64KB. With a Jumbo Payload option (in a Hop-By-Hop Options extension header), the payload must be less than 4 GB."
2001:569:79AE:3200:35C4:2CDF:990A:B0CA (talk) 06:21, 6 March 2018 (UTC)
  • Support version without KiB and GiB. The two-to-the-n notation makes the 16-bit and 32-bit limits crystal clear; the KiB and GiB notations require conversion to make that clear despite the notation being precise. The Ki/GiB notation is also jarring. I dislike KiB notation in general. For current engineering purposes, the differences are small enough to be insignificant. Brickbats to the marketing guys at the disk drive manufacturers. Glrx (talk) 00:39, 4 March 2018 (UTC)