this post was submitted on 01 Aug 2025
666 points (96.5% liked)

Programmer Humor

25395 readers
1600 users here now

Welcome to Programmer Humor!

This is a place where you can post jokes, memes, humor, etc. related to programming!

For sharing awful code theres also Programming Horror.

Rules

founded 2 years ago
MODERATORS
top 50 comments
sorted by: hot top controversial new old
[–] Tiger_Man_@lemmy.blahaj.zone 33 points 9 hours ago (2 children)

I hope nat burns in hell when ipv6 will become standard

[–] Gonzako@lemmy.world 1 points 2 hours ago (1 children)

mind explaining? All 8 know about Nat is that it sometimes didn't let me play rainbow six siege

[–] Tiger_Man_@lemmy.blahaj.zone 3 points 1 hour ago

Having multiple hosts under one address for all hosts is annoying. Port forwarding is annoying. Some isps have their own nat and want you to pay additionally for public ip address

[–] Opisek@lemmy.world 11 points 5 hours ago

Any day now brother

[–] EldenLord@lemmy.world 18 points 9 hours ago (1 children)

Wait until we have IPv8, that‘s gonna byte us in the ass for real

[–] daniskarma@lemmy.dbzer0.com 12 points 5 hours ago* (last edited 3 hours ago) (1 children)

Every atom of the universe should have its own ip.

[–] Captain_Faraday@programming.dev 5 points 3 hours ago

For targeted location-based ads of course! Lots of revenue there

[–] Kolanaki@pawb.social 31 points 14 hours ago (1 children)

Surely we can do better. Why not IPv10? That's 4 higher than 6!

[–] gnuplusmatt@reddthat.com 14 points 10 hours ago (2 children)

not sure if you're aware thats a real thing https://www.ipv10.net/

[–] OozingPositron@feddit.cl 9 points 6 hours ago (1 children)

>Forbidden

>You don't have permission to access this resource.

Awesome.

[–] AnUnusualRelic@lemmy.world 6 points 2 hours ago

Obviously. You can only access it in IPv10.

[–] Kolanaki@pawb.social 20 points 10 hours ago

Guess we have to crank it up to 11, then.

[–] eah@programming.dev 18 points 13 hours ago (1 children)
[–] Wolf@lemmy.today 2 points 3 hours ago

That was beautiful

[–] nonentity@sh.itjust.works 36 points 16 hours ago (2 children)

The reason IPv6 was originally added to the DOCSIS specs, over 20 years ago, is because Comcast literally exhausted all RFC1918 addresses on their modem management networks.

My favourite feature of IPv6 is networks, and hosts therein, can have multiple prefixes and addresses as a core function. I use it to expose local functions on only ULA addresses, but provide locked down public access when and where needed. Access separation is handled at the IP stack, with IPv4 it’s expected to be handled by a firewall or equivalent.

[–] Bytemeister@lemmy.world 25 points 14 hours ago (1 children)

My favorite feature of IPv6 is that there are so many addresses available. Every single IPv4 address right now could have its own entire IPv4 range of addresses in IPv6. It's mind-boggling huge.

[–] gnuplusmatt@reddthat.com 14 points 10 hours ago* (last edited 10 hours ago) (2 children)

you could assign every square meter of the planet an ip and use it for location, and still have addresses left over

[–] SpaceCadet@feddit.nl 2 points 3 hours ago* (last edited 3 hours ago)

square centimeter is the one I heard

[–] Zink@programming.dev 7 points 5 hours ago* (last edited 5 hours ago)

Oh it’s way more than that!

After looking up some numbers, I note we could give every single square MILLIMETER on the planet its own entire IPv4 address space.

…And then every one of those IPv4 addresses could have its own entire copy of the IPv4 address space!

…And that would just be a drop in the bucket compared with IPv6! One good comparison I’ve seen is that you could assign an address to every atom on the surface of the earth (but not inside it) and have enough left over for 100+ more earths.

Rough math for the square millimeters:

The surface area of the earth is roughly 510 trillion square millimeters. Let’s round that up to a quadrillion or 10^15^.

The number of IPv6 addresses is 2^128^ or 3.4x10^38^. To be conservative again, let’s just round that down to 10^38^.

10^38^ / 10^15^ = 10^23^ IPv6 addresses per square mm of earth.

IPv4 address space is 2^32^ or around 4 billion. let’s round up to 10 billion or 10^10^.

So then 10^23^ / 10^10^ = 10^13^ IPv6 addresses per IPv4 address per square mm of earth.

10^13^ / 10^10^ =

1,000 IPv6 addresses per IPv4 address per IPv4 address per square mm of earth.

And that was with the conservative estimates along the way. I think it would actually be tens of thousands.

[–] madcaesar@lemmy.world 13 points 16 hours ago

I understand some of these words!

[–] 2910000@lemmy.world 17 points 14 hours ago

I love the flat earther energy in this

[–] ExLisper@lemmy.curiana.net 18 points 15 hours ago (1 children)
[–] SteveTech@programming.dev 14 points 13 hours ago

Fun fact: IP version 5 is actually reserved for the Internet Streaming Protocol.

[–] socsa@piefed.social 28 points 17 hours ago (1 children)

Meh, the idea of having every address be globally routable makes a lot of sense. NAT is a great bandaid but it's still a bandaid. It still limits how peer to peer and multicast applications function, especially on larger networks.

[–] Korhaka@sopuli.xyz 13 points 16 hours ago* (last edited 16 hours ago) (1 children)

NAT444 is shit. I can't even host a web server without routing it through a VPN, and my ISP can't work out how to provide an IPv6 addresses yet. Give it to me and I will work out how to use it.

Slight update - Just looked and apparently they had a goal of rolling out IPv6 addresses to all customers by earlier this year. I'll check my router config tomorrow and who knows. Maybe I will be able to get one now? Would be pretty sweet.

[–] cepelinas@sopuli.xyz 3 points 5 hours ago

I am sorry to interrupt, my ISP gave me an ipv6 address, but I just can't access anything through it even when I specify it in the firewall, maybe they are blocking this functionality because they sell static ips.

[–] frezik@lemmy.blahaj.zone 174 points 22 hours ago (17 children)

I know it's a joke, but the idea that NAT has any business existing makes me angry. It's a hack that causes real headaches for network admins and protocol design. The effects are mostly hidden from end users because those two groups have twisted things in knots to make sure end users don't notice too much. The Internet is more centralized and controlled because of it.

No, it is not a security feature. That's a laughable claim that shows you shouldn't be allowed near a firewall.

Fortunately, Google reports that IPv6 adoption is close to cracking 50%.

[–] Auli@lemmy.ca 2 points 3 hours ago

Ipv6 took awhile for me to understand. One of the biggest hurdles was how is it secure without NAT.

[–] truthfultemporarily@feddit.org 75 points 22 hours ago (3 children)

I think NAT is one reason why the internet is so centralized. If everyone had a static IP you could do all sorts of decentralized cool stuff.

[–] Creat@discuss.tchncs.de 29 points 19 hours ago (1 children)

Everyone having a static IP is a privacy nightmare.

There's a reason the recommendation in the standard for ipv6 had to be amended (it whatever the mechanic was) so that generated local suffixes aren't static. Before that, we were essentially globally identifiable because just the second half of your v6 address was static.

load more comments (1 replies)
[–] frezik@lemmy.blahaj.zone 57 points 21 hours ago

Right, not the only reason, but it's a sticking point.

You shouldn't need to connect to your smart thermostat by using the company's servers as an intermediary. That makes the whole thing slower, less reliable, and a point for the company to sell your personal data (that last one being the ultimate reason why it's done this way).

load more comments (1 replies)
load more comments (15 replies)
[–] domi@lemmy.secnd.me 40 points 18 hours ago (6 children)

My favorite thing to use IPv6 for is to use the privacy extension to get around IP blocks on YouTube when using alternative front ends. Blocked by Google on my laptop? No problem, let me just get another one of my 4,722,366,482,869,645,213,696 IP addresses.

I have a separate subnet which is IPv6 only and rotates through IP addresses every hour or so just for Indivious, Freetube and PipePipe.

[–] needanke@feddit.org 2 points 3 hours ago

What is stoping Google from just blocking your entire IP-Block?

[–] drmoose@lemmy.world 14 points 13 hours ago (1 children)

This is exactly why ipv6 was never widely adopted. There's too much power in a limited IP pool.

[–] domi@lemmy.secnd.me 4 points 3 hours ago

Define "widely".

According to Google 46.09% of their traffic is IPv6 and most servers support it. It's mostly large ISPs dragging their feet.

load more comments (4 replies)
[–] Blaster_M@lemmy.world 45 points 20 hours ago* (last edited 19 hours ago) (1 children)

Skill issue

IPv6 is easy to do.

2000::/3 is the internet range

fc00::/7 is the private network range (for non routing v6)

fe80::/64 is link local (like apipa but it never changes)

::1/128 is loopback

/64 is the smallest network allocation, and you still have 64 bits left for devices.

You don't need NAT when you can just do firewalling - default drop new connections on inbound wan and allow established, related on outbound wan like any IPv4 firewall does.

Use DHCPv6 and Prefix Delegation (DHCPv6-PD) to get your subnets and addresses (ask for a /60 on the wan to get 16 subnets).

Hook up to your printer using ipv6 link local address - that address never changes on its own, and now you don't have to play the static ip game to connect to it after changing your router or net config.

The real holdup is ISPs getting ultra cheap routers that use stupid network allocation systems (AT&T) that are incompat with the elegant simplicity of prefix delegation and dhcp.

load more comments (1 replies)
[–] LaLuzDelSol@lemmy.world 30 points 20 hours ago* (last edited 19 hours ago) (10 children)

Just my perspective as a controls (SCADA engineer):

I work for a large power company. We have close to 100 sites, each with hundreds of IP devices, and have never had a problem with ipv4. Especially when im out in the field I love being able to check IPs, calculate gateways, etc at a glance. Ipv6 is just completely freaking unreadable.

I see the value of outward-facing ipv6 devices (i.e. devices on the internet), considering we are out of ipv4s. But I don't see why we have to convert private networks to ipv6. Put more bluntly: at least industry, it just isn't gonna happen for decades (if it ever does). Unless you need more IPs it's just worse to work with. And there's a huge amount of inertia- got one singular device that doesn't talk ipv6 at a given generation site? What are you supposed to do?

[–] Captain_Faraday@programming.dev 1 points 2 hours ago* (last edited 2 hours ago)

I’m a protective relay settings engineer at a contractor for lots of power companies. I’m dipping my toes into my first substation automation project. Getting to design the device native files, IPs, and other networking parts from the drawings package of site and device manuals. It’s all SEL equipment with a gateway at the top and local powerWAN, RTAC, annunciators, and relays below. I live thousands of miles from the site, so local testing would be challenging but probably have to fly or something lol. I have been doing some research on how to emulate this is a lab setting when all you have is the RTAC and some relays. Is this something SCADA engineers have to do sometimes? Like if you need to test a scheme when you can’t build it physically first?

load more comments (9 replies)
load more comments
view more: next ›