Why isn't ipv6 backwards compatible ipv4?

Vasiliev

newbie

Activity: 55

Merit: 0

Quote from: genjix on March 05, 2011, 04:18:07 PM

Quote from: error on March 05, 2011, 02:33:03 PM

Quote from: genjix on March 05, 2011, 05:12:07 AM

Do they honestly believe the whole internet to upgrade to a non-backwards compatible address?

The whole Internet will upgrade. IPv4 is reaching its end of useful life. End of story.

Or ISPs will just migrate us more and more behind NATs killing peering & bittorrent and making us back into consumers.

There's only so far they can go. It's estimated that Asia is going to start having new clients IPv6-only in less than a year due to their constant rapid expansion of internet.

srb123

newbie

Activity: 58

Merit: 0

Quote from: dsg on March 05, 2011, 07:14:57 AM

Quote from: srb123 on March 05, 2011, 06:56:56 AM

I think that when they sat down and tried to figure out a neat way to do this they quickly realised that legacy support=more code=more bugs=more exploits and less reliability.

IPv6 was a chance to re-imagine the internet all over again. (And lets face it, the internet is still in it infancy, we don't even have a full set of working browsers yes. Tongue

), and they have done everything they can to make sure these problems don't come up again.

No, the answer given by jib was completely correct, it is completely impossible (not merely "hard" or "too much work") to build such a protocol.

Nah, I dont think its hard to imagine a cross compatible protocol with IPv4, it just would have needed to be implemented top-down, assigning "IPvX" a huge subnet of availabe IPv4 addresses, with ISP's providing transparent bridging. Eventually enough Devices would be in the new subnet and the Ipv4 bridging can be cut and the rest of the new address space opened up.

Anyway the moment is past, IPv6 is what we got, so any type of seemless migration is impossible.

genjix

legendary

Activity: 1232

Merit: 1076

Quote from: error on March 05, 2011, 02:33:03 PM

Quote from: genjix on March 05, 2011, 05:12:07 AM

Do they honestly believe the whole internet to upgrade to a non-backwards compatible address?

The whole Internet will upgrade. IPv4 is reaching its end of useful life. End of story.

Or ISPs will just migrate us more and more behind NATs killing peering & bittorrent and making us back into consumers.

error

hero member

Activity: 588

Merit: 500

Quote from: genjix on March 05, 2011, 05:12:07 AM

Do they honestly believe the whole internet to upgrade to a non-backwards compatible address?

The whole Internet will upgrade. IPv4 is reaching its end of useful life. End of story.

dsg

jr. member

Activity: 37

Merit: 2

Quote from: srb123 on March 05, 2011, 06:56:56 AM

I think that when they sat down and tried to figure out a neat way to do this they quickly realised that legacy support=more code=more bugs=more exploits and less reliability.

IPv6 was a chance to re-imagine the internet all over again. (And lets face it, the internet is still in it infancy, we don't even have a full set of working browsers yes. Tongue

), and they have done everything they can to make sure these problems don't come up again.

No, the answer given by jib was completely correct, it is completely impossible (not merely "hard" or "too much work") to build such a protocol.

srb123

newbie

Activity: 58

Merit: 0

Quote from: genjix on March 05, 2011, 05:12:07 AM

Why did they choose such a format?

Why not free a top level IP (e.g 200 as an example) and then whenever that byte is selected, you can have variable length fields:
200.num_of_bytes.89.123.42.76.43.108.2

Or change each each number field to a 64 bit int.

7843843.9084394.12333232.89

Therefore since some sites need IP addresses, ISPs and router manufacturers would lose out by not providing access to those addresses. ipv6 is ridiculous made by academics. Do they honestly believe the whole internet to upgrade to a non-backwards compatible address?

I think that when they sat down and tried to figure out a neat way to do this they quickly realised that legacy support=more code=more bugs=more exploits and less reliability.

IPv6 was a chance to re-imagine the internet all over again. (And lets face it, the internet is still in it infancy, we don't even have a full set of working browsers yes. Tongue

), and they have done everything they can to make sure these problems don't come up again.

jib

member

Activity: 92

Merit: 10

A host that hadn't been upgraded wouldn't be able to communicate with anything that uses your new IP address format. What you're proposing wouldn't be any more backwards-compatible than the current solution of running dual-stack IPv4/IPv6.

Without a traditional IPv4 address you can't communicate with IPv4-only hosts except through some sort of relay. This will always be true no matter how you design the new addresses.

genjix

legendary

Activity: 1232

Merit: 1076

Why did they choose such a format?

Why not free a top level IP (e.g 200 as an example) and then whenever that byte is selected, you can have variable length fields:
200.num_of_bytes.89.123.42.76.43.108.2

Or change each each number field to a 64 bit int.

7843843.9084394.12333232.89

Therefore since some sites need IP addresses, ISPs and router manufacturers would lose out by not providing access to those addresses. ipv6 is ridiculous made by academics. Do they honestly believe the whole internet to upgrade to a non-backwards compatible address?

Topic: Why isn't ipv6 backwards compatible ipv4? (Read 2396 times)