this post was submitted on 12 Mar 2024
755 points (99.2% liked)
linuxmemes
21197 readers
181 users here now
Hint: :q!
Sister communities:
Community rules (click to expand)
1. Follow the site-wide rules
- Instance-wide TOS: https://legal.lemmy.world/tos/
- Lemmy code of conduct: https://join-lemmy.org/docs/code_of_conduct.html
2. Be civil
- Understand the difference between a joke and an insult.
- Do not harrass or attack members of the community for any reason.
- Leave remarks of "peasantry" to the PCMR community. If you dislike an OS/service/application, attack the thing you dislike, not the individuals who use it. Some people may not have a choice.
- Bigotry will not be tolerated.
- These rules are somewhat loosened when the subject is a public figure. Still, do not attack their person or incite harrassment.
3. Post Linux-related content
- Including Unix and BSD.
- Non-Linux content is acceptable as long as it makes a reference to Linux. For example, the poorly made mockery of
sudo
in Windows.
- No porn. Even if you watch it on a Linux machine.
4. No recent reposts
- Everybody uses Arch btw, can't quit Vim, and wants to interject for a moment. You can stop now.
Please report posts and comments that break these rules!
founded 1 year ago
MODERATORS
"32 bit is ought to be enough for everybody"
-- ipv4 inventors probably
"DNS never breaks. Nobody will ever have to type in an IP address"
The never ending network problems keep sysadmins happily employed. AI can't replace them yet because they need internet connection to work.
If I remember right, that is almost exactly what they thought. Or rather he. I think it was one guy. The one who wrote the RFC. And no-one called him on it because at the time, that did not seem unreasonable.
4.3 billion devices that all need their own unique address? It's not like everyone on Earth will need one.
What then followed was allocations of giant swaths of IPv4 addresses to large organisations, compounded by the fact that similarly large swaths were already reserved for special uses, leaving the whole thing with a problem basically from the outset.
I believe that one guy has said that he wishes he'd made it 64 bit and even thought about it at the time. But the "save every byte" mindset of the pre-Internet era was still very much alive and well, and I think that's why he went for the smaller option.