(18:10:53) <&Shawn> The IPv6's are in Hexidecimal's :o
(18:10:55) <~Zenexer> More or less; I started to memorize hex multiplication tables and such... never got far.
(18:10:56) <@Tyler> Heya zen
(18:11:05) <~Zenexer> Shawn: IPv4 is, too.
(18:11:08) <~Zenexer> Tyler: Hello
(18:11:56) <&Shawn> IPv4 isn't in hexidecimal..
Whois -> [Earth2Me-IRC:Louis|]
(18:12:06) <~Zenexer> It doesn't appear as if it is...
(18:12:10) <&Shawn> Its not.
(18:12:10) <~Zenexer> But I assure you, it is ;_0
(18:12:13) <~Zenexer> ;)*
(18:12:13) <&Shawn> It is not.
(18:12:18) <~Zenexer> Okay, I'll prove it to you.
(18:12:25) <~Zenexer> What's 0xFF?
(18:12:28) <&Shawn> If it was, we wouldn't be switching to IPv6 to create more addresses
(18:12:33) <&Shawn> idk, I can't do it in my head yet.
(18:12:34) <Louis|> IPV6 FTW
(18:12:35) <Louis|> IPV6 FTW
(18:12:36) <Louis|> :|
(18:12:38) <~Zenexer> 256
(18:12:47) <~Zenexer> We'll take away one, for computer-purposes :P
(18:12:48) <~Zenexer> 255
(18:13:04) <~Zenexer> Ever wonder why each "digit" of an IP is separated by a .
(18:13:17) <&Shawn> In IPv4, its called an octec
(18:13:17) <~Zenexer> It's because we're representing "digit" in hex.
(18:13:34) <&Shawn> 4 octects of 8 bits each = 32bit addressing.
(18:13:34) <~Zenexer> I don't care what it's called... it's two hex digits :P
(18:13:52) <Louis|> Shawn
(18:13:54) <&Shawn> ?
(18:13:54) <Louis|> You know how to IPv4?
(18:13:55) <~Zenexer> octets?
(18:14:02) <&Shawn> 127.0.0.1
(18:14:07) <&Shawn> 127 = octect 1
(18:14:07) <~Zenexer> I don't think it's octec or octect
(18:14:12) <~Zenexer> I think it's octet
(18:14:15) <&Shawn> I can't spell.
(18:14:21) <Louis|> You know how to IPv4?
(18:14:21) <~Zenexer> Or maybe octect... but I think it's octet.
(18:14:21) <Louis|> You know how to IPv4?
(18:14:22) <&Shawn> but anyway, thats what it is.
(18:14:35) <~Zenexer> Shawn: Yes.
(18:14:38) <&Shawn> Yeah
(18:14:40) <~Zenexer> That's because it's based in Hex.
(18:14:48) <&Shawn> Its not based in Hex >_>
(18:14:50) <~Zenexer> It gets translated into hex, more or less.
(18:14:54) <~Zenexer> I assure you it is.
(18:15:18) <~Zenexer> Why limit the "digits" to 255?
(18:15:20) <&Shawn> If it was based in hex, we wouldn't have to worry about the number of addresses running out.
(18:15:22) <~Zenexer> Why such an odd number?
(18:15:29) <~Zenexer> Ah, but we would.
(18:15:33) <~Zenexer> Think about it.
(18:15:38) <~Zenexer> It's the same as a color code.
(18:15:40) <&Shawn> It runs in a base 2 system, Binary.
(18:15:42) <~Zenexer> Same number of digits.
(18:15:44) <~Zenexer> Yes...
(18:15:46) <~Zenexer> But...
(18:15:50) <&Shawn> Not hexidecimal.
(18:16:01) <~Zenexer> Let's see, what's 10.10.0.1
(18:16:12) <~Zenexer> 1010 1010 0000 0001
(18:16:14) <~Zenexer> Right?
(18:16:17) <&Shawn> Yes
(18:16:26) <~Zenexer> Now...
(18:16:27) <Louis|> Still banned of SSirc...........
(18:16:28) <&Shawn> But IPv4 wouldn't care about it in hex
(18:16:28) <~Zenexer> Watch.
(18:16:46) <~Zenexer> 0A0A0001
(18:16:50) <~Zenexer> That's the hex version of it.
(18:17:05) <~Zenexer> In hex, it will always be the same number of digits.
(18:17:12) <~Zenexer> However...
(18:17:23) <~Zenexer> We're trying to use decimals to represent hex place values.
(18:17:33) <~Zenexer> So, we separate every other place value with a .
(18:17:43) <~Zenexer> 0A.0A.00.01
(18:17:49) <~Zenexer> 10.10.0.1
(18:17:53) <~Zenexer> ;)
(18:18:03) <~Zenexer> In reality, 10.10.0.1 simply represents...
(18:18:10) <~Zenexer> (Pulls out calculator...)
(18:18:24) <&Shawn> So why would IPv6 show the actual addressing in hex, instead of decimial like IPv4, if its based on the same system but with a larger address?
(18:18:32) <~Zenexer> 168427521
(18:18:40) <~Zenexer> That's what 10.10.0.1 represents.
(18:18:55) <~Zenexer> Simply because it takes up less space, and it's closer to what it really is.
(18:19:06) <&Shawn> >_> Lame
(18:19:20) <~Zenexer> Not really.
(18:19:31) <~Zenexer> It was lame to represent IPv4 addresses the way we did.