Hello everyone,
Why can you only use the double "::" once in an IPv6 address? That's what my professor told me, but I don't quite believe him. Do you know anything more about this?
(1 votes)
Loading...As in the following video;
Hello, I would like to start a dual degree program in computer science in 2024. I've now received acceptances from two companies: Check24 (myself as the only student) and SAP (with many other students). I'm very unsure which company to choose, as I like both. Perhaps you have friends or acquaintances who have worked at…
I feel like the potential of AI in this area is often underestimated. If you know how to use ChatGPT correctly, it can be extremely valuable.
Hello, I have to write a thesis for my HTL degree, and it requires me to explain PDFs in detail (10 pages). Can you think of any interesting topics related to PDFs? The best ones would be technical aspects (libraries, reverse engineering, etc.) where I can incorporate some practical aspects (source code, metadata, etc.). My…
Do you know any law students who finished their studies but then went on to do something completely different that had nothing to do with law?
Firstly, because it is fixed that way, and secondly, because I only know the length of the word and could inflate it to the total length if :: occurs twice in two places with different weightings.
One or more successive blocks whose value 0 can be represented by “:” in a shortened manner.
If you have the “:” but at several in one address you can not necessarily say how many 0-en were in the respective places.
Example:
1111:0000:1111:0000:0000:0000:111111
If you cut both areas where there are several blocks with the value 0, the following would come out: 1111::111111::1111
Here it is no longer possible to see how long the two blocks were, so that the actual address can no longer be determined.
The following addresses would therefore be possible:
1111:0000:0000:0000:111111:0000:111111
1111:0000:0000:111111:0000:111111
1111:0000:1111:0000:0000:0000:111111
1111:0000:111111:0000:0000:0000:0000:111111
In order to prevent this, only one place may be shortened.
I never understood why you don’t just
can do. This would eliminate the problem and still allow the cut.
This would make the rules for writing IPv6 addresses even more complex. This is why
1111:0:0:1111::111111 If I have not counted myself, it is no longer
https://datatracker.ietf.org/doc/html/rfc5952#section-2.2
Analogous to the previous versions of this RFC.
Why is that? Why do you know how many zeros have been replaced?