The internet is DYING: sites collapse as 512k limit is breached - Polidicks

Speaking of IPv4, is it that once an address is used, no one can ever use it again? Or are there just too many computers connected to the web?

[QUOTE=Mobon1;45731036]Speaking of IPv4, is it that once an address is used, no one can ever use it again? Or are there just too many computers connected to the web?[/QUOTE] IPs aren't burnt once someone uses it. We're just starting to run out because all available IP ranges has already been allocated to ISPs around the globe, and soon there won't be enough unique IP addresses to issues to each device connected to the internet.

[QUOTE=Mobon1;45731036]Speaking of IPv4, is it that once an address is used, no one can ever use it again? Or are there just too many computers connected to the web?[/QUOTE] Sort of. Like B!N4RY mentioned, we've allocated all possible IPv4 addresses to organizations, ISP's and special miscellaneous uses around the world. In the old days, you would buy a certain IP range and then use it for the internet. Problem is, back in the 80's and 90's when the internet was relatively young, they would just hand these out like nothing. So quite a few companies and organizations like Ford Motor Company or the Department of Defense are sitting on a bunch of Class A address that are ~16.7 million addresses each and are nowhere near exhausted. Ford owns every IP that begins with 19 for example.

[QUOTE=killermon;45727952]Anyone who uses NAT with IPv6 is doing it wrong :v: The security with NAT is not intentional and is a by product of NAT breaking true end to end connectivity. To be honest, even a lot of networking vendors are rather poor with their IPv6 support. I remember having problems with a Cisco Device that didn't support OSPFv3 inside a vrf which should be basic stuff! Not just Cisco to be fair, other vendors have been a bit poor with their IPv6 support.[/QUOTE] NAT for IPv6 is pretty much a side effect of the NAT rules being fairly protocol agnostic, so implementing it for both makes the code more robust (But yeah, shouldn't ever be using it) We do have "PAT" though, but that's a fairly special use case when you have multiple uplinks with different prefixes and you want a single prefix on the network.

It's time for a purge. I nominate foxnews.com and infowars.com to go first.

Here is what I don't quite understand. Where did this 120 billion go? I did a little bit of number crunching estimating the cost of laying fiber, I found a source that estimated $30,000 per mile of fiber laid. Now I took that number and found the total number of miles of electrical cable in the united states which is = 450,000 miles of electric lines/cable. Now I multiplied the cost of fiber per mile by number of miles for electric lines. I figured this number would show how much it would cost to put fiber (To the door) across the entire United States. The number I came up with was this 13,500,000,000 (Thirteen Billion Five Hundred Million) Meaning if they laid fiber line to every door in the US with the tax break they got they would still have over One Hundred Six Billion Five Hundred Million dollars left to fuck around with. Why are these assholes not held accountable for wasting/squandering/embezzling all this money? With that single tax break we could have laid fiber to almost the entire fucking world. But no the higher ups needed new yachts and 5 more summer homes. They should be forced to keep records of all the money they borrowed/got credit for and how they used it.