Re: IPv4 v IPv6

To: debian-user@lists.debian.org
Subject: Re: IPv4 v IPv6
From: Jonathan Dowland <jmtd@debian.org>
Date: Fri, 21 Jun 2019 15:42:38 +0100
Message-id: <[🔎] 20190621144238.novjo4rxusbsiw7j@qusp>
In-reply-to: <[🔎] 18ddd6fe-4f6a-4941-0241-23b1f89b3a99@walnut.gen.nz>
References: <[🔎] b04173f9596abe835b5d70d62daf1cf2@gmail.com> <[🔎] 20190617095952.ig7lhy6aegbyixr7@chew.redmars.org> <[🔎] 18ddd6fe-4f6a-4941-0241-23b1f89b3a99@walnut.gen.nz>

On Tue, Jun 18, 2019 at 09:49:10PM +1200, Richard Hector wrote:

127.0.0.0/8 is for loopback addresses; ::1 is the IPv6 equivalent.
Reserved ranges for local use are the RFC1918 ranges (192.168.0.0/16,
172.16.0.0/12 and 10.0.0.0/8), and more closely replaced by ULAs
(fd00::/8) in IPv6.


Yes sorry, 127.0.0.0/8 is a typo here (I intended to type 192.168.0.0/16)




--
Jonathan Dowland

Reply to:

References:
- IPv4 v IPv6
  - From: mick crane <mick.crane@gmail.com>
- Re: IPv4 v IPv6
  - From: Jonathan Dowland <jmtd@debian.org>
- Re: IPv4 v IPv6
  - From: Richard Hector <richard@walnut.gen.nz>

Prev by Date: Re: Does 32-bit x86 support (aka [multilib] ) have a future with Debian after Buster
Next by Date: Converting text subtitles to vobsub
Previous by thread: Re: IPv4 v IPv6
Next by thread: Re: IPv4 v IPv6
Index(es):
- Date
- Thread