wouldn't surprise me if we end up in a situation where individual programs have their own IP. then individual variables, so different programs in different networks can access them.

that might actually end up consuming all the addresses ...

stupid suggestion. just saying that future technologies might figure up a way to fuck this up again

[–] bss03@infosec.pub 4 points 2 days ago (1 children)

Yeah, the Universe keep making bigger fools (of us all). But, we should still use IPv6 instead of clawing the tattered remains of IPv4. I just wish my ISP agreed.

[–] IAmNorRealTakeYourMeds@lemmy.world 1 points 2 days ago (1 children)

without a doubt ipv6 is an improvement. only loss is that it's humanely possible to remember ipv4 addressed, but that ain't necessary.

my only "objection" is that an actual solution should accommodate unlimited growth, rather than what we consider a big enough number.

[–] bss03@infosec.pub 1 points 2 days ago

I think that's a bad objection. It's idealistic in the worst way, it's making "Perfect [...] the enemy of the good". Plus, there are significant practical advantages to a fixed-length addressing scheme, and any fixed-length going to have a maximum. So, under the constraint of fixed-length addressing "big enough" is all we have.

128 bits really is quite hard to fill up, we'll have to worry about a lot of very different things before the run out of addresses. Like speed-of-light latency vs. TCP (and possibly TLS session) timers for interplanetary connections.

[–] cellardoor@lemmy.world 2 points 2 days ago (1 children)

There's enough V6 addresses for every atom on the planet and enough spare to do it 100x over. We'll be fine.

[–] IAmNorRealTakeYourMeds@lemmy.world 1 points 2 days ago

going to gave each atom in the solar system its own IP address.

checkmate