Is configuration part of a layer’s responsibility?
You should see the unfinished proposal for ipv8. The authors think yes to a large degree, though not how you’re thinking.
Comment on What is the deal with IPv6?
Randelung@lemmy.world 7 hours agoOne of the main issues I think is holding IPv6 back is that we keep needing to memorize IPs and type them by hand. 192.168.0.16, 172.16/12, and 10.0.0.0/8 are easy to remember, and usually it’s just the last number that’s important, anyway, because we all use 192.168.1.0/24 by default.
But then IPv6 comes along with /48 prefixes and endless numbers to read, analyze (same subnet? typos?), memorize or write down. Ain’t nobody got time for that.
IPv6 would have to integrate some sort of DNS resolver on a network level so that people can work with computer names. That would make the hostname actually relevant and not have every Windows be called DESKTOP-W38D6M5P. If you already have a separate DNS service, it’s only the registration step that has slightly more friction, but still.
False@lemmy.world 3 hours ago
AA5B@lemmy.world 4 hours ago
This is a bigger deal than you may think. Those of us stubborn enough to use one of the other defined internal network ranges already hit more obstacles than we should, and that difference should be trivial to non-existent.
For me the latest is a smart home device that hard-coded 192.168.1.x, so I am not able to connect it to my network
False@lemmy.world 3 hours ago
Most network devices can have multiple IPs. Assign 192.168.1.1 to your router (in addition to your normal up) and it should probably start routing traffic to that device