In 2004, news reports emerged that China was developing a new "IPv9" technology to replace the existing Internet Protocol. This appears to have been a proposal to link Internet addressing with Chinese 10-digit telephone numbers.
@aster sorry but you can't come up with a funnier name than "Chinese IPv9" no context it made me actually confused because I knew IPv9 was an april fools joke I didn't know there was an attempt to make 256 bit addresses under IPv9 in China
@puppygirlhornypost I wonder why they stopped though, ik they love tracking their internet usage so their own ipv protocol would've made it easier right?
@aster@puppygirlhornypost fucking 256 bit addresses lmfao i already struggle to wrap my head around ipv6
chinese ipv9 was an attempt to link ip addresses to chinese phone numbers so yeah you're pretty right about the tracking part i think
@aster@puppygirlhornypost i do because i think actually having a distinct public ip for every device is really fucking cool and also my cheapo vps has 2^64 public addresses for me to mess around with
@aster@puppygirlhornypost i kind of learned the basics in school. my favourite concept is the one where you construct the upper part of your address (provided you're in a /64 net) from your MAC address. whoever came up with that was so blissfully unaware of how much advertisers would lust over an unique identifier like that
@aster@lea well, i mean mac addresses are funny because nowadays spoofing them is by default. you get mac address randomizing with virtual network interfaces as part of windows or ios even. I find it so funny that vendors were given a couple bits for mac addresses. https://macaddress.io/https://macaddress.io/mac-address-lookup/02Mwx9rpk9 here's one of my intel nics's hardware mac addresses.
@puppygirlhornypost@aster alternatively a mac address cloned from some other device in the same network because i am NOT paying for airplane wifi :neocat_uwu:
@aster@puppygirlhornypost okay so imagine going on a plane with paid wifi and cloning the identity of someone who paid for wifi to use it for free (and making their experience miserable in the process :3)
@aster@lea love how we know mac address collision is very much possible with the amount of devices today, and i've seen it happen. mac addresses are a lot less "static" and can change so it's fun.
@lea@aster ngl i wouldn't be surprised because this is a trust based system, there's nothing stopping you from using other people's mac addresses. nothing, no technical limitation. it's more of a formality for the big vendors who make network cards and equipment.
@puppygirlhornypost@aster yep. and luckily for the more knowledgeable of us a lot of public networks depend on MAC addresses to identify clients, which makes it trivial to steal someone else's access to a paid network :3
@lea@aster there's not even anything against reusing mac addresses. there's only so many. it's bound that you are going to reuse them at some point in time :kekw:
@lea@aster like yeah it sounds absurd to think about 2^48 mac addresses ever becoming a problem but if you think about it that definitely makes sense when you loop back to things like virtual network interfaces. How many virtual interfaces through VMWare's hypervisor ESXi alone? Thousands can exist within a single client so it's very much realistic when you get into virtual network interfaces. A single 16 mil allocation could definitely be eaten up by things like virtual network interfaces.
@aster@lea like yea if i really cared i could just buy another AX211 and boom now that previous mac address was useless. i doubt i am going to be connecting this laptop to a lot of networks at large (because i don't it's rare i connect this laptop to non trusted networks). find it really funny, i know that it is useful to track. you still get nintendo consoles broadcasting their mac addresses and you can just flat out denylist nintendo's oui as a "measure" to prohibit gaming on your network. tons of fun things to do with it
@lea@aster i think that was the problem, v6 is already pretty much an incomprehensible amount of ip addresses. it's 2^32 (v4) vs 2^128 (v6) is already ginormous and for the foreseeable future we're probably not going to run out. Why would you go to 2^256 because at that point it carries so much overhead for little to no gain as we're nowhere near close to saturating ipv6
Add comment