Are the IPv6 address space and IPv4 address space completely disjoint?IPv4 shortage is now becoming a reality - what is needed for IPv6 to work?MLD messages during IPv6 duplicate address detectionWhat is the advantage of multicasting in IPv6 (compared to broadcast)?Is it ok if multiple non-router devices send IPv6 RAs with same prefix in the same network?Why do we need IPv6?IPv6 6to4 mechanismHow does address resolution work with multicast, specifically IPv6?Are all the private IPv6 addresses nonoverlapping? If yes, is Route distinguisher required for IPv6?Cisco 3560G not passing IPv6 RA when VLAN without IPv6 addressHow are IPv6 addresses grouped?

A social experiment. What is the worst that can happen?

Has Darkwing Duck ever met Scrooge McDuck?

Global amount of publications over time

Some numbers are more equivalent than others

Indicating multiple different modes of speech (fantasy language or telepathy)

What is the gram­mat­i­cal term for “‑ed” words like these?

Can I rely on this github repository files?

Is there a word to describe the feeling of being transfixed out of horror?

How much character growth crosses the line into breaking the character

Fly on a jet pack vs fly with a jet pack?

Have I saved too much for retirement so far?

Using a siddur to Daven from in a seforim store

Why did the EU agree to delay the Brexit deadline?

What (else) happened July 1st 1858 in London?

Is XSS in canonical link possible?

Proving a function is onto where f(x)=|x|.

Did US corporations pay demonstrators in the German demonstrations against article 13?

Will adding a BY-SA image to a blog post make the entire post BY-SA?

What is this type of notehead called?

Flux received by a negative charge

Folder comparison

What does the Rambam mean when he says that the planets have souls?

How do ground effect vehicles perform turns?

We have a love-hate relationship



Are the IPv6 address space and IPv4 address space completely disjoint?


IPv4 shortage is now becoming a reality - what is needed for IPv6 to work?MLD messages during IPv6 duplicate address detectionWhat is the advantage of multicasting in IPv6 (compared to broadcast)?Is it ok if multiple non-router devices send IPv6 RAs with same prefix in the same network?Why do we need IPv6?IPv6 6to4 mechanismHow does address resolution work with multicast, specifically IPv6?Are all the private IPv6 addresses nonoverlapping? If yes, is Route distinguisher required for IPv6?Cisco 3560G not passing IPv6 RA when VLAN without IPv6 addressHow are IPv6 addresses grouped?













9















Tanenbaum's Computer Networks says




Finally, IPv4 addresses can be written as a pair of colons and an old dotted
decimal number, for example:



::192.31.20.46



  1. Does it mean the IPv4 address space is embedded into the lowest
    subrange of the IPv6 address space?


  2. Is such embedding fixed? Can the IPv4 address space be embedded
    into any continuous subrange of the IPv6 address space?



    Does https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/IPv6_address#Transition_from_IPv4 list several alternative ways of translation? If it is correct, then the embedding is not fixed.




  3. Does it mean that for any IPv4 address, there is some IPv6 address that refers to the same address as the IPv4 address?



    For example, are ::192.31.20.46 and 192.31.20.46 effectively the same address?



    • if I send a message to ::192.31.20.46, will 192.31.20.46 receive my message?


    • if I send a message to 192.31.20.46, will ::192.31.20.46 receive my message?


    Will ::127.0.0.1 still be a loopback IP address, and if yes, is it effectively the same address as 127.0.0.1?



  4. Or are the IPv6 address space and IPv4 address space completely
    disjoint (i.e. no overlapping), in the sense that when I communicate
    with a IPv6 address, I will not communicate with a IPv4 address?


Thanks.










share|improve this question
























  • If ::192.0.92.1 in IPv6 and 192.0.92.1 in IPv4 were equivalent and always referred to the same host (192.0.92.1 in IPv4-land), then how would a packet destined for ::0.0.0.1 be routed?

    – a CVn
    yesterday











  • @aCVn, IPv4 addresses in the 0.0.0.0/8 network cannot be destination addresses, anyway.

    – Ron Maupin
    yesterday






  • 3





    Beware of outdated textbooks. IPv4-compatible IPv6 addresses have been deprecated for almost 15 years, replaed by IPv4-mapped IPv6 addresses. Modern operating systems may not recognize them. See RFC 4291.

    – Michael Hampton
    yesterday












  • @RonMaupin Fair point, though ::1 was just an obvious example. The same reasoning would apply also to other addresses.

    – a CVn
    16 hours ago















9















Tanenbaum's Computer Networks says




Finally, IPv4 addresses can be written as a pair of colons and an old dotted
decimal number, for example:



::192.31.20.46



  1. Does it mean the IPv4 address space is embedded into the lowest
    subrange of the IPv6 address space?


  2. Is such embedding fixed? Can the IPv4 address space be embedded
    into any continuous subrange of the IPv6 address space?



    Does https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/IPv6_address#Transition_from_IPv4 list several alternative ways of translation? If it is correct, then the embedding is not fixed.




  3. Does it mean that for any IPv4 address, there is some IPv6 address that refers to the same address as the IPv4 address?



    For example, are ::192.31.20.46 and 192.31.20.46 effectively the same address?



    • if I send a message to ::192.31.20.46, will 192.31.20.46 receive my message?


    • if I send a message to 192.31.20.46, will ::192.31.20.46 receive my message?


    Will ::127.0.0.1 still be a loopback IP address, and if yes, is it effectively the same address as 127.0.0.1?



  4. Or are the IPv6 address space and IPv4 address space completely
    disjoint (i.e. no overlapping), in the sense that when I communicate
    with a IPv6 address, I will not communicate with a IPv4 address?


Thanks.










share|improve this question
























  • If ::192.0.92.1 in IPv6 and 192.0.92.1 in IPv4 were equivalent and always referred to the same host (192.0.92.1 in IPv4-land), then how would a packet destined for ::0.0.0.1 be routed?

    – a CVn
    yesterday











  • @aCVn, IPv4 addresses in the 0.0.0.0/8 network cannot be destination addresses, anyway.

    – Ron Maupin
    yesterday






  • 3





    Beware of outdated textbooks. IPv4-compatible IPv6 addresses have been deprecated for almost 15 years, replaed by IPv4-mapped IPv6 addresses. Modern operating systems may not recognize them. See RFC 4291.

    – Michael Hampton
    yesterday












  • @RonMaupin Fair point, though ::1 was just an obvious example. The same reasoning would apply also to other addresses.

    – a CVn
    16 hours ago













9












9








9








Tanenbaum's Computer Networks says




Finally, IPv4 addresses can be written as a pair of colons and an old dotted
decimal number, for example:



::192.31.20.46



  1. Does it mean the IPv4 address space is embedded into the lowest
    subrange of the IPv6 address space?


  2. Is such embedding fixed? Can the IPv4 address space be embedded
    into any continuous subrange of the IPv6 address space?



    Does https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/IPv6_address#Transition_from_IPv4 list several alternative ways of translation? If it is correct, then the embedding is not fixed.




  3. Does it mean that for any IPv4 address, there is some IPv6 address that refers to the same address as the IPv4 address?



    For example, are ::192.31.20.46 and 192.31.20.46 effectively the same address?



    • if I send a message to ::192.31.20.46, will 192.31.20.46 receive my message?


    • if I send a message to 192.31.20.46, will ::192.31.20.46 receive my message?


    Will ::127.0.0.1 still be a loopback IP address, and if yes, is it effectively the same address as 127.0.0.1?



  4. Or are the IPv6 address space and IPv4 address space completely
    disjoint (i.e. no overlapping), in the sense that when I communicate
    with a IPv6 address, I will not communicate with a IPv4 address?


Thanks.










share|improve this question
















Tanenbaum's Computer Networks says




Finally, IPv4 addresses can be written as a pair of colons and an old dotted
decimal number, for example:



::192.31.20.46



  1. Does it mean the IPv4 address space is embedded into the lowest
    subrange of the IPv6 address space?


  2. Is such embedding fixed? Can the IPv4 address space be embedded
    into any continuous subrange of the IPv6 address space?



    Does https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/IPv6_address#Transition_from_IPv4 list several alternative ways of translation? If it is correct, then the embedding is not fixed.




  3. Does it mean that for any IPv4 address, there is some IPv6 address that refers to the same address as the IPv4 address?



    For example, are ::192.31.20.46 and 192.31.20.46 effectively the same address?



    • if I send a message to ::192.31.20.46, will 192.31.20.46 receive my message?


    • if I send a message to 192.31.20.46, will ::192.31.20.46 receive my message?


    Will ::127.0.0.1 still be a loopback IP address, and if yes, is it effectively the same address as 127.0.0.1?



  4. Or are the IPv6 address space and IPv4 address space completely
    disjoint (i.e. no overlapping), in the sense that when I communicate
    with a IPv6 address, I will not communicate with a IPv4 address?


Thanks.







ip ipv4 ipv6 protocol-theory ip-address






share|improve this question















share|improve this question













share|improve this question




share|improve this question








edited yesterday









Ron Maupin

67.7k1369126




67.7k1369126










asked yesterday









TimTim

613516




613516












  • If ::192.0.92.1 in IPv6 and 192.0.92.1 in IPv4 were equivalent and always referred to the same host (192.0.92.1 in IPv4-land), then how would a packet destined for ::0.0.0.1 be routed?

    – a CVn
    yesterday











  • @aCVn, IPv4 addresses in the 0.0.0.0/8 network cannot be destination addresses, anyway.

    – Ron Maupin
    yesterday






  • 3





    Beware of outdated textbooks. IPv4-compatible IPv6 addresses have been deprecated for almost 15 years, replaed by IPv4-mapped IPv6 addresses. Modern operating systems may not recognize them. See RFC 4291.

    – Michael Hampton
    yesterday












  • @RonMaupin Fair point, though ::1 was just an obvious example. The same reasoning would apply also to other addresses.

    – a CVn
    16 hours ago

















  • If ::192.0.92.1 in IPv6 and 192.0.92.1 in IPv4 were equivalent and always referred to the same host (192.0.92.1 in IPv4-land), then how would a packet destined for ::0.0.0.1 be routed?

    – a CVn
    yesterday











  • @aCVn, IPv4 addresses in the 0.0.0.0/8 network cannot be destination addresses, anyway.

    – Ron Maupin
    yesterday






  • 3





    Beware of outdated textbooks. IPv4-compatible IPv6 addresses have been deprecated for almost 15 years, replaed by IPv4-mapped IPv6 addresses. Modern operating systems may not recognize them. See RFC 4291.

    – Michael Hampton
    yesterday












  • @RonMaupin Fair point, though ::1 was just an obvious example. The same reasoning would apply also to other addresses.

    – a CVn
    16 hours ago
















If ::192.0.92.1 in IPv6 and 192.0.92.1 in IPv4 were equivalent and always referred to the same host (192.0.92.1 in IPv4-land), then how would a packet destined for ::0.0.0.1 be routed?

– a CVn
yesterday





If ::192.0.92.1 in IPv6 and 192.0.92.1 in IPv4 were equivalent and always referred to the same host (192.0.92.1 in IPv4-land), then how would a packet destined for ::0.0.0.1 be routed?

– a CVn
yesterday













@aCVn, IPv4 addresses in the 0.0.0.0/8 network cannot be destination addresses, anyway.

– Ron Maupin
yesterday





@aCVn, IPv4 addresses in the 0.0.0.0/8 network cannot be destination addresses, anyway.

– Ron Maupin
yesterday




3




3





Beware of outdated textbooks. IPv4-compatible IPv6 addresses have been deprecated for almost 15 years, replaed by IPv4-mapped IPv6 addresses. Modern operating systems may not recognize them. See RFC 4291.

– Michael Hampton
yesterday






Beware of outdated textbooks. IPv4-compatible IPv6 addresses have been deprecated for almost 15 years, replaed by IPv4-mapped IPv6 addresses. Modern operating systems may not recognize them. See RFC 4291.

– Michael Hampton
yesterday














@RonMaupin Fair point, though ::1 was just an obvious example. The same reasoning would apply also to other addresses.

– a CVn
16 hours ago





@RonMaupin Fair point, though ::1 was just an obvious example. The same reasoning would apply also to other addresses.

– a CVn
16 hours ago










3 Answers
3






active

oldest

votes


















6















Are the IPv6 address space and IPv4 address space completely disjoint?




Yes, they are two separate, incompatible protocols with completely different addressing.



That book is out-of-date. The addressing to which it refers was deprecated a long time ago. it is referring to the old IPv4-Compatible addressing for IPv6 that was deprecated. See RFC 5156, Special-Use IPv6 Addresses:




2.3. IPv4-Compatible Addresses



::/96 are the IPv4-compatible addresses [RFC4291].
These addresses are deprecated and should not appear on the public
Internet.




There is IPv4-Mapped addressing for IPv6, but it is not really used as addressing for packets:




2.2. IPv4-Mapped Addresses



::FFFF:0:0/96 are the IPv4-mapped addresses [RFC4291]. Addresses
within this block should not appear on the public Internet.




Also see the referenced RFC 4291, IP Version 6 Addressing Architecture:




2.5.5. IPv6 Addresses with Embedded IPv4 Addresses



Two types of IPv6 addresses are defined that carry an IPv4 address in
the low-order 32 bits of the address. These are the "IPv4-Compatible
IPv6 address" and the "IPv4-mapped IPv6 address".



2.5.5.1. IPv4-Compatible IPv6 Address



The "IPv4-Compatible IPv6 address" was defined to assist in the IPv6
transition. The format of the "IPv4-Compatible IPv6 address" is as
follows:



| 80 bits | 16 | 32 bits |
+--------------------------------------+--------------------------+
|0000..............................0000|0000| IPv4 address |
+--------------------------------------+----+---------------------+


Note: The IPv4 address used in the "IPv4-Compatible IPv6 address" must
be a globally-unique IPv4 unicast address.



The "IPv4-Compatible IPv6 address" is now deprecated because the
current IPv6 transition mechanisms no longer use these addresses. New
or updated implementations are not required to support this address
type.



2.5.5.2. IPv4-Mapped IPv6 Address



A second type of IPv6 address that holds an embedded IPv4 address is
defined. This address type is used to represent the addresses of IPv4
nodes as IPv6 addresses. The format of the "IPv4-mapped IPv6 address"
is as follows:



| 80 bits | 16 | 32 bits |
+--------------------------------------+--------------------------+
|0000..............................0000|FFFF| IPv4 address |
+--------------------------------------+----+---------------------+


See [RFC4038] for background on the usage of the "IPv4-mapped
IPv6 address".






Does it mean the IPv4 address space is embedded into the lowest
subrange of the IPv6 address space?




Only under certain circumstances, but this is not normally recommended.




Is such embedding fixed? Can the IPv4 address space be embedded into
any continuous subrange of the IPv6 address space?




Only a couple of IPv6 address ranges are designed for this, and they are not used for sending packets. This is not used in Global IPv6 addressing.




Does it mean that for any IPv4 address, there is some IPv6 address
that refers to the same address as the IPv4 address?




Not really. Conceptually, yes, for IPv4-Mapped addressing for IPv6, but that is not actually used for sending packets.




For example, are ::192.31.20.46 and 192.31.20.46 effectively the
same address?



  • if I send a message to ::192.31.20.46, will 192.31.20.46 receive my message?

  • if I send a message to 192.31.20.46, will ::192.31.20.46 receive my message?

Will ::127.0.0.1 still be a loopback IP address, and if yes, is it
effectively the same address as 127.0.0.1?




No, ::192.31.20.46 is an invalid IPv6 address because the IPv4-Compatible addressing for IPv6 has been deprecated.



IPv4 and IPv6 are two separate, incompatible protocols that can coexist, but cannot directly communicate.



IPv6 has a loopback address of ::1.




Or are the IPv6 address space and IPv4 address space completely
disjoint (i.e. no overlapping), in the sense that when I communicate
with a IPv6 address, I will not communicate with a IPv4 address?




IPv4 and IPv6 have completely separate addressing. IPv4 uses 32-bit addressing that is incompatible with the IPv6 128-bit addressing. The protocol headers are also very different in other ways. IPv6 was created after lessons learned in IPv4. Remember that IPv4 was an academic/government experiment that was never intended to be used the way it is today, and IPv6 is an attempt to correct the deficiencies in IPv4, but it is incompatible with IPv4 because of that.






share|improve this answer
































    10














    Number 4 is correct. V4 and v6 protocols are completely different with different formats and addressing schemes. The two addresses have the same relationship as telephone numbers and lottery numbers— that is, none.



    There have been many proposed methods of mapping v4 to v6 to allow for protocol translation, but most are deprecated today.






    share|improve this answer























    • I like to use appletalk vs. ipx. (very clearly different systems)

      – Ricky Beam
      yesterday






    • 5





      @RickyBeam Ain’t many of us left who remember AppleTalk or ipx.

      – Ron Trunk
      yesterday











    • @RonTrunk, I used to install IPX on S-Net (Novell ShareNet), the Novell proprietary box. We installed a site for a company that moved to Austin, and the bulding drilled a floor hole for the printer cable, shorting a 208V line to the 120V line that served the S-Net Box. The board in the box looked like an atomic bomb went off. At the time, there were only two authorized Novell dealers in Texas (Houston and Dallas), and I had to travel to Dallas to get the replacement board (15,000 1986 dollars).

      – Ron Maupin
      yesterday



















    0














    I'm somewhat surprised that no existing answer mentioned 6to4.



    It allows to send an IPv6 packet to an IPv4 host, encapsulated within IPv4 packet of protocol type 41.



    6to4 addresses are of the type 2002:AABB:CCDD:suffix corresponding to IPv4 address A.B.C.D where A,B,C,D are decimal and AA,BB,CC,DD are hexadecimal. So, each IPv4 address actually has a whole /48 block of IPv6 addresses.



    6to4 is not just some notation mechanism allowing IPv4 addresses to be notated using IPv6 addresses, it's a real and working IPv6 transition mechanism.



    The performance and latency of 6to4 connectivity will be poor, however, so native IPv6 is preferred where such connectivity is available.



    So, my answer to IPv4 and IPv6 spaces being disjoint: not really, each IPv4 address has a /48 block of IPv6 addresses.






    share|improve this answer























    • The problem with your answer is that it leads people to believe that you can have an IPv6-only host directly communicate with an IPv4-only host or vice versa, and that simply isn't true. There is a lot more to it than that, including relay routers to translate the protocols, so, yes, the address space is still separate, but you have something that can talk in both protocols to do translation.

      – Ron Maupin
      14 hours ago










    Your Answer








    StackExchange.ready(function()
    var channelOptions =
    tags: "".split(" "),
    id: "496"
    ;
    initTagRenderer("".split(" "), "".split(" "), channelOptions);

    StackExchange.using("externalEditor", function()
    // Have to fire editor after snippets, if snippets enabled
    if (StackExchange.settings.snippets.snippetsEnabled)
    StackExchange.using("snippets", function()
    createEditor();
    );

    else
    createEditor();

    );

    function createEditor()
    StackExchange.prepareEditor(
    heartbeatType: 'answer',
    autoActivateHeartbeat: false,
    convertImagesToLinks: false,
    noModals: true,
    showLowRepImageUploadWarning: true,
    reputationToPostImages: null,
    bindNavPrevention: true,
    postfix: "",
    imageUploader:
    brandingHtml: "Powered by u003ca class="icon-imgur-white" href="https://imgur.com/"u003eu003c/au003e",
    contentPolicyHtml: "User contributions licensed under u003ca href="https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-sa/3.0/"u003ecc by-sa 3.0 with attribution requiredu003c/au003e u003ca href="https://stackoverflow.com/legal/content-policy"u003e(content policy)u003c/au003e",
    allowUrls: true
    ,
    noCode: true, onDemand: true,
    discardSelector: ".discard-answer"
    ,immediatelyShowMarkdownHelp:true
    );



    );













    draft saved

    draft discarded


















    StackExchange.ready(
    function ()
    StackExchange.openid.initPostLogin('.new-post-login', 'https%3a%2f%2fnetworkengineering.stackexchange.com%2fquestions%2f57903%2fare-the-ipv6-address-space-and-ipv4-address-space-completely-disjoint%23new-answer', 'question_page');

    );

    Post as a guest















    Required, but never shown

























    3 Answers
    3






    active

    oldest

    votes








    3 Answers
    3






    active

    oldest

    votes









    active

    oldest

    votes






    active

    oldest

    votes









    6















    Are the IPv6 address space and IPv4 address space completely disjoint?




    Yes, they are two separate, incompatible protocols with completely different addressing.



    That book is out-of-date. The addressing to which it refers was deprecated a long time ago. it is referring to the old IPv4-Compatible addressing for IPv6 that was deprecated. See RFC 5156, Special-Use IPv6 Addresses:




    2.3. IPv4-Compatible Addresses



    ::/96 are the IPv4-compatible addresses [RFC4291].
    These addresses are deprecated and should not appear on the public
    Internet.




    There is IPv4-Mapped addressing for IPv6, but it is not really used as addressing for packets:




    2.2. IPv4-Mapped Addresses



    ::FFFF:0:0/96 are the IPv4-mapped addresses [RFC4291]. Addresses
    within this block should not appear on the public Internet.




    Also see the referenced RFC 4291, IP Version 6 Addressing Architecture:




    2.5.5. IPv6 Addresses with Embedded IPv4 Addresses



    Two types of IPv6 addresses are defined that carry an IPv4 address in
    the low-order 32 bits of the address. These are the "IPv4-Compatible
    IPv6 address" and the "IPv4-mapped IPv6 address".



    2.5.5.1. IPv4-Compatible IPv6 Address



    The "IPv4-Compatible IPv6 address" was defined to assist in the IPv6
    transition. The format of the "IPv4-Compatible IPv6 address" is as
    follows:



    | 80 bits | 16 | 32 bits |
    +--------------------------------------+--------------------------+
    |0000..............................0000|0000| IPv4 address |
    +--------------------------------------+----+---------------------+


    Note: The IPv4 address used in the "IPv4-Compatible IPv6 address" must
    be a globally-unique IPv4 unicast address.



    The "IPv4-Compatible IPv6 address" is now deprecated because the
    current IPv6 transition mechanisms no longer use these addresses. New
    or updated implementations are not required to support this address
    type.



    2.5.5.2. IPv4-Mapped IPv6 Address



    A second type of IPv6 address that holds an embedded IPv4 address is
    defined. This address type is used to represent the addresses of IPv4
    nodes as IPv6 addresses. The format of the "IPv4-mapped IPv6 address"
    is as follows:



    | 80 bits | 16 | 32 bits |
    +--------------------------------------+--------------------------+
    |0000..............................0000|FFFF| IPv4 address |
    +--------------------------------------+----+---------------------+


    See [RFC4038] for background on the usage of the "IPv4-mapped
    IPv6 address".






    Does it mean the IPv4 address space is embedded into the lowest
    subrange of the IPv6 address space?




    Only under certain circumstances, but this is not normally recommended.




    Is such embedding fixed? Can the IPv4 address space be embedded into
    any continuous subrange of the IPv6 address space?




    Only a couple of IPv6 address ranges are designed for this, and they are not used for sending packets. This is not used in Global IPv6 addressing.




    Does it mean that for any IPv4 address, there is some IPv6 address
    that refers to the same address as the IPv4 address?




    Not really. Conceptually, yes, for IPv4-Mapped addressing for IPv6, but that is not actually used for sending packets.




    For example, are ::192.31.20.46 and 192.31.20.46 effectively the
    same address?



    • if I send a message to ::192.31.20.46, will 192.31.20.46 receive my message?

    • if I send a message to 192.31.20.46, will ::192.31.20.46 receive my message?

    Will ::127.0.0.1 still be a loopback IP address, and if yes, is it
    effectively the same address as 127.0.0.1?




    No, ::192.31.20.46 is an invalid IPv6 address because the IPv4-Compatible addressing for IPv6 has been deprecated.



    IPv4 and IPv6 are two separate, incompatible protocols that can coexist, but cannot directly communicate.



    IPv6 has a loopback address of ::1.




    Or are the IPv6 address space and IPv4 address space completely
    disjoint (i.e. no overlapping), in the sense that when I communicate
    with a IPv6 address, I will not communicate with a IPv4 address?




    IPv4 and IPv6 have completely separate addressing. IPv4 uses 32-bit addressing that is incompatible with the IPv6 128-bit addressing. The protocol headers are also very different in other ways. IPv6 was created after lessons learned in IPv4. Remember that IPv4 was an academic/government experiment that was never intended to be used the way it is today, and IPv6 is an attempt to correct the deficiencies in IPv4, but it is incompatible with IPv4 because of that.






    share|improve this answer





























      6















      Are the IPv6 address space and IPv4 address space completely disjoint?




      Yes, they are two separate, incompatible protocols with completely different addressing.



      That book is out-of-date. The addressing to which it refers was deprecated a long time ago. it is referring to the old IPv4-Compatible addressing for IPv6 that was deprecated. See RFC 5156, Special-Use IPv6 Addresses:




      2.3. IPv4-Compatible Addresses



      ::/96 are the IPv4-compatible addresses [RFC4291].
      These addresses are deprecated and should not appear on the public
      Internet.




      There is IPv4-Mapped addressing for IPv6, but it is not really used as addressing for packets:




      2.2. IPv4-Mapped Addresses



      ::FFFF:0:0/96 are the IPv4-mapped addresses [RFC4291]. Addresses
      within this block should not appear on the public Internet.




      Also see the referenced RFC 4291, IP Version 6 Addressing Architecture:




      2.5.5. IPv6 Addresses with Embedded IPv4 Addresses



      Two types of IPv6 addresses are defined that carry an IPv4 address in
      the low-order 32 bits of the address. These are the "IPv4-Compatible
      IPv6 address" and the "IPv4-mapped IPv6 address".



      2.5.5.1. IPv4-Compatible IPv6 Address



      The "IPv4-Compatible IPv6 address" was defined to assist in the IPv6
      transition. The format of the "IPv4-Compatible IPv6 address" is as
      follows:



      | 80 bits | 16 | 32 bits |
      +--------------------------------------+--------------------------+
      |0000..............................0000|0000| IPv4 address |
      +--------------------------------------+----+---------------------+


      Note: The IPv4 address used in the "IPv4-Compatible IPv6 address" must
      be a globally-unique IPv4 unicast address.



      The "IPv4-Compatible IPv6 address" is now deprecated because the
      current IPv6 transition mechanisms no longer use these addresses. New
      or updated implementations are not required to support this address
      type.



      2.5.5.2. IPv4-Mapped IPv6 Address



      A second type of IPv6 address that holds an embedded IPv4 address is
      defined. This address type is used to represent the addresses of IPv4
      nodes as IPv6 addresses. The format of the "IPv4-mapped IPv6 address"
      is as follows:



      | 80 bits | 16 | 32 bits |
      +--------------------------------------+--------------------------+
      |0000..............................0000|FFFF| IPv4 address |
      +--------------------------------------+----+---------------------+


      See [RFC4038] for background on the usage of the "IPv4-mapped
      IPv6 address".






      Does it mean the IPv4 address space is embedded into the lowest
      subrange of the IPv6 address space?




      Only under certain circumstances, but this is not normally recommended.




      Is such embedding fixed? Can the IPv4 address space be embedded into
      any continuous subrange of the IPv6 address space?




      Only a couple of IPv6 address ranges are designed for this, and they are not used for sending packets. This is not used in Global IPv6 addressing.




      Does it mean that for any IPv4 address, there is some IPv6 address
      that refers to the same address as the IPv4 address?




      Not really. Conceptually, yes, for IPv4-Mapped addressing for IPv6, but that is not actually used for sending packets.




      For example, are ::192.31.20.46 and 192.31.20.46 effectively the
      same address?



      • if I send a message to ::192.31.20.46, will 192.31.20.46 receive my message?

      • if I send a message to 192.31.20.46, will ::192.31.20.46 receive my message?

      Will ::127.0.0.1 still be a loopback IP address, and if yes, is it
      effectively the same address as 127.0.0.1?




      No, ::192.31.20.46 is an invalid IPv6 address because the IPv4-Compatible addressing for IPv6 has been deprecated.



      IPv4 and IPv6 are two separate, incompatible protocols that can coexist, but cannot directly communicate.



      IPv6 has a loopback address of ::1.




      Or are the IPv6 address space and IPv4 address space completely
      disjoint (i.e. no overlapping), in the sense that when I communicate
      with a IPv6 address, I will not communicate with a IPv4 address?




      IPv4 and IPv6 have completely separate addressing. IPv4 uses 32-bit addressing that is incompatible with the IPv6 128-bit addressing. The protocol headers are also very different in other ways. IPv6 was created after lessons learned in IPv4. Remember that IPv4 was an academic/government experiment that was never intended to be used the way it is today, and IPv6 is an attempt to correct the deficiencies in IPv4, but it is incompatible with IPv4 because of that.






      share|improve this answer



























        6












        6








        6








        Are the IPv6 address space and IPv4 address space completely disjoint?




        Yes, they are two separate, incompatible protocols with completely different addressing.



        That book is out-of-date. The addressing to which it refers was deprecated a long time ago. it is referring to the old IPv4-Compatible addressing for IPv6 that was deprecated. See RFC 5156, Special-Use IPv6 Addresses:




        2.3. IPv4-Compatible Addresses



        ::/96 are the IPv4-compatible addresses [RFC4291].
        These addresses are deprecated and should not appear on the public
        Internet.




        There is IPv4-Mapped addressing for IPv6, but it is not really used as addressing for packets:




        2.2. IPv4-Mapped Addresses



        ::FFFF:0:0/96 are the IPv4-mapped addresses [RFC4291]. Addresses
        within this block should not appear on the public Internet.




        Also see the referenced RFC 4291, IP Version 6 Addressing Architecture:




        2.5.5. IPv6 Addresses with Embedded IPv4 Addresses



        Two types of IPv6 addresses are defined that carry an IPv4 address in
        the low-order 32 bits of the address. These are the "IPv4-Compatible
        IPv6 address" and the "IPv4-mapped IPv6 address".



        2.5.5.1. IPv4-Compatible IPv6 Address



        The "IPv4-Compatible IPv6 address" was defined to assist in the IPv6
        transition. The format of the "IPv4-Compatible IPv6 address" is as
        follows:



        | 80 bits | 16 | 32 bits |
        +--------------------------------------+--------------------------+
        |0000..............................0000|0000| IPv4 address |
        +--------------------------------------+----+---------------------+


        Note: The IPv4 address used in the "IPv4-Compatible IPv6 address" must
        be a globally-unique IPv4 unicast address.



        The "IPv4-Compatible IPv6 address" is now deprecated because the
        current IPv6 transition mechanisms no longer use these addresses. New
        or updated implementations are not required to support this address
        type.



        2.5.5.2. IPv4-Mapped IPv6 Address



        A second type of IPv6 address that holds an embedded IPv4 address is
        defined. This address type is used to represent the addresses of IPv4
        nodes as IPv6 addresses. The format of the "IPv4-mapped IPv6 address"
        is as follows:



        | 80 bits | 16 | 32 bits |
        +--------------------------------------+--------------------------+
        |0000..............................0000|FFFF| IPv4 address |
        +--------------------------------------+----+---------------------+


        See [RFC4038] for background on the usage of the "IPv4-mapped
        IPv6 address".






        Does it mean the IPv4 address space is embedded into the lowest
        subrange of the IPv6 address space?




        Only under certain circumstances, but this is not normally recommended.




        Is such embedding fixed? Can the IPv4 address space be embedded into
        any continuous subrange of the IPv6 address space?




        Only a couple of IPv6 address ranges are designed for this, and they are not used for sending packets. This is not used in Global IPv6 addressing.




        Does it mean that for any IPv4 address, there is some IPv6 address
        that refers to the same address as the IPv4 address?




        Not really. Conceptually, yes, for IPv4-Mapped addressing for IPv6, but that is not actually used for sending packets.




        For example, are ::192.31.20.46 and 192.31.20.46 effectively the
        same address?



        • if I send a message to ::192.31.20.46, will 192.31.20.46 receive my message?

        • if I send a message to 192.31.20.46, will ::192.31.20.46 receive my message?

        Will ::127.0.0.1 still be a loopback IP address, and if yes, is it
        effectively the same address as 127.0.0.1?




        No, ::192.31.20.46 is an invalid IPv6 address because the IPv4-Compatible addressing for IPv6 has been deprecated.



        IPv4 and IPv6 are two separate, incompatible protocols that can coexist, but cannot directly communicate.



        IPv6 has a loopback address of ::1.




        Or are the IPv6 address space and IPv4 address space completely
        disjoint (i.e. no overlapping), in the sense that when I communicate
        with a IPv6 address, I will not communicate with a IPv4 address?




        IPv4 and IPv6 have completely separate addressing. IPv4 uses 32-bit addressing that is incompatible with the IPv6 128-bit addressing. The protocol headers are also very different in other ways. IPv6 was created after lessons learned in IPv4. Remember that IPv4 was an academic/government experiment that was never intended to be used the way it is today, and IPv6 is an attempt to correct the deficiencies in IPv4, but it is incompatible with IPv4 because of that.






        share|improve this answer
















        Are the IPv6 address space and IPv4 address space completely disjoint?




        Yes, they are two separate, incompatible protocols with completely different addressing.



        That book is out-of-date. The addressing to which it refers was deprecated a long time ago. it is referring to the old IPv4-Compatible addressing for IPv6 that was deprecated. See RFC 5156, Special-Use IPv6 Addresses:




        2.3. IPv4-Compatible Addresses



        ::/96 are the IPv4-compatible addresses [RFC4291].
        These addresses are deprecated and should not appear on the public
        Internet.




        There is IPv4-Mapped addressing for IPv6, but it is not really used as addressing for packets:




        2.2. IPv4-Mapped Addresses



        ::FFFF:0:0/96 are the IPv4-mapped addresses [RFC4291]. Addresses
        within this block should not appear on the public Internet.




        Also see the referenced RFC 4291, IP Version 6 Addressing Architecture:




        2.5.5. IPv6 Addresses with Embedded IPv4 Addresses



        Two types of IPv6 addresses are defined that carry an IPv4 address in
        the low-order 32 bits of the address. These are the "IPv4-Compatible
        IPv6 address" and the "IPv4-mapped IPv6 address".



        2.5.5.1. IPv4-Compatible IPv6 Address



        The "IPv4-Compatible IPv6 address" was defined to assist in the IPv6
        transition. The format of the "IPv4-Compatible IPv6 address" is as
        follows:



        | 80 bits | 16 | 32 bits |
        +--------------------------------------+--------------------------+
        |0000..............................0000|0000| IPv4 address |
        +--------------------------------------+----+---------------------+


        Note: The IPv4 address used in the "IPv4-Compatible IPv6 address" must
        be a globally-unique IPv4 unicast address.



        The "IPv4-Compatible IPv6 address" is now deprecated because the
        current IPv6 transition mechanisms no longer use these addresses. New
        or updated implementations are not required to support this address
        type.



        2.5.5.2. IPv4-Mapped IPv6 Address



        A second type of IPv6 address that holds an embedded IPv4 address is
        defined. This address type is used to represent the addresses of IPv4
        nodes as IPv6 addresses. The format of the "IPv4-mapped IPv6 address"
        is as follows:



        | 80 bits | 16 | 32 bits |
        +--------------------------------------+--------------------------+
        |0000..............................0000|FFFF| IPv4 address |
        +--------------------------------------+----+---------------------+


        See [RFC4038] for background on the usage of the "IPv4-mapped
        IPv6 address".






        Does it mean the IPv4 address space is embedded into the lowest
        subrange of the IPv6 address space?




        Only under certain circumstances, but this is not normally recommended.




        Is such embedding fixed? Can the IPv4 address space be embedded into
        any continuous subrange of the IPv6 address space?




        Only a couple of IPv6 address ranges are designed for this, and they are not used for sending packets. This is not used in Global IPv6 addressing.




        Does it mean that for any IPv4 address, there is some IPv6 address
        that refers to the same address as the IPv4 address?




        Not really. Conceptually, yes, for IPv4-Mapped addressing for IPv6, but that is not actually used for sending packets.




        For example, are ::192.31.20.46 and 192.31.20.46 effectively the
        same address?



        • if I send a message to ::192.31.20.46, will 192.31.20.46 receive my message?

        • if I send a message to 192.31.20.46, will ::192.31.20.46 receive my message?

        Will ::127.0.0.1 still be a loopback IP address, and if yes, is it
        effectively the same address as 127.0.0.1?




        No, ::192.31.20.46 is an invalid IPv6 address because the IPv4-Compatible addressing for IPv6 has been deprecated.



        IPv4 and IPv6 are two separate, incompatible protocols that can coexist, but cannot directly communicate.



        IPv6 has a loopback address of ::1.




        Or are the IPv6 address space and IPv4 address space completely
        disjoint (i.e. no overlapping), in the sense that when I communicate
        with a IPv6 address, I will not communicate with a IPv4 address?




        IPv4 and IPv6 have completely separate addressing. IPv4 uses 32-bit addressing that is incompatible with the IPv6 128-bit addressing. The protocol headers are also very different in other ways. IPv6 was created after lessons learned in IPv4. Remember that IPv4 was an academic/government experiment that was never intended to be used the way it is today, and IPv6 is an attempt to correct the deficiencies in IPv4, but it is incompatible with IPv4 because of that.







        share|improve this answer














        share|improve this answer



        share|improve this answer








        edited yesterday

























        answered yesterday









        Ron MaupinRon Maupin

        67.7k1369126




        67.7k1369126





















            10














            Number 4 is correct. V4 and v6 protocols are completely different with different formats and addressing schemes. The two addresses have the same relationship as telephone numbers and lottery numbers— that is, none.



            There have been many proposed methods of mapping v4 to v6 to allow for protocol translation, but most are deprecated today.






            share|improve this answer























            • I like to use appletalk vs. ipx. (very clearly different systems)

              – Ricky Beam
              yesterday






            • 5





              @RickyBeam Ain’t many of us left who remember AppleTalk or ipx.

              – Ron Trunk
              yesterday











            • @RonTrunk, I used to install IPX on S-Net (Novell ShareNet), the Novell proprietary box. We installed a site for a company that moved to Austin, and the bulding drilled a floor hole for the printer cable, shorting a 208V line to the 120V line that served the S-Net Box. The board in the box looked like an atomic bomb went off. At the time, there were only two authorized Novell dealers in Texas (Houston and Dallas), and I had to travel to Dallas to get the replacement board (15,000 1986 dollars).

              – Ron Maupin
              yesterday
















            10














            Number 4 is correct. V4 and v6 protocols are completely different with different formats and addressing schemes. The two addresses have the same relationship as telephone numbers and lottery numbers— that is, none.



            There have been many proposed methods of mapping v4 to v6 to allow for protocol translation, but most are deprecated today.






            share|improve this answer























            • I like to use appletalk vs. ipx. (very clearly different systems)

              – Ricky Beam
              yesterday






            • 5





              @RickyBeam Ain’t many of us left who remember AppleTalk or ipx.

              – Ron Trunk
              yesterday











            • @RonTrunk, I used to install IPX on S-Net (Novell ShareNet), the Novell proprietary box. We installed a site for a company that moved to Austin, and the bulding drilled a floor hole for the printer cable, shorting a 208V line to the 120V line that served the S-Net Box. The board in the box looked like an atomic bomb went off. At the time, there were only two authorized Novell dealers in Texas (Houston and Dallas), and I had to travel to Dallas to get the replacement board (15,000 1986 dollars).

              – Ron Maupin
              yesterday














            10












            10








            10







            Number 4 is correct. V4 and v6 protocols are completely different with different formats and addressing schemes. The two addresses have the same relationship as telephone numbers and lottery numbers— that is, none.



            There have been many proposed methods of mapping v4 to v6 to allow for protocol translation, but most are deprecated today.






            share|improve this answer













            Number 4 is correct. V4 and v6 protocols are completely different with different formats and addressing schemes. The two addresses have the same relationship as telephone numbers and lottery numbers— that is, none.



            There have been many proposed methods of mapping v4 to v6 to allow for protocol translation, but most are deprecated today.







            share|improve this answer












            share|improve this answer



            share|improve this answer










            answered yesterday









            Ron TrunkRon Trunk

            38.7k33780




            38.7k33780












            • I like to use appletalk vs. ipx. (very clearly different systems)

              – Ricky Beam
              yesterday






            • 5





              @RickyBeam Ain’t many of us left who remember AppleTalk or ipx.

              – Ron Trunk
              yesterday











            • @RonTrunk, I used to install IPX on S-Net (Novell ShareNet), the Novell proprietary box. We installed a site for a company that moved to Austin, and the bulding drilled a floor hole for the printer cable, shorting a 208V line to the 120V line that served the S-Net Box. The board in the box looked like an atomic bomb went off. At the time, there were only two authorized Novell dealers in Texas (Houston and Dallas), and I had to travel to Dallas to get the replacement board (15,000 1986 dollars).

              – Ron Maupin
              yesterday


















            • I like to use appletalk vs. ipx. (very clearly different systems)

              – Ricky Beam
              yesterday






            • 5





              @RickyBeam Ain’t many of us left who remember AppleTalk or ipx.

              – Ron Trunk
              yesterday











            • @RonTrunk, I used to install IPX on S-Net (Novell ShareNet), the Novell proprietary box. We installed a site for a company that moved to Austin, and the bulding drilled a floor hole for the printer cable, shorting a 208V line to the 120V line that served the S-Net Box. The board in the box looked like an atomic bomb went off. At the time, there were only two authorized Novell dealers in Texas (Houston and Dallas), and I had to travel to Dallas to get the replacement board (15,000 1986 dollars).

              – Ron Maupin
              yesterday

















            I like to use appletalk vs. ipx. (very clearly different systems)

            – Ricky Beam
            yesterday





            I like to use appletalk vs. ipx. (very clearly different systems)

            – Ricky Beam
            yesterday




            5




            5





            @RickyBeam Ain’t many of us left who remember AppleTalk or ipx.

            – Ron Trunk
            yesterday





            @RickyBeam Ain’t many of us left who remember AppleTalk or ipx.

            – Ron Trunk
            yesterday













            @RonTrunk, I used to install IPX on S-Net (Novell ShareNet), the Novell proprietary box. We installed a site for a company that moved to Austin, and the bulding drilled a floor hole for the printer cable, shorting a 208V line to the 120V line that served the S-Net Box. The board in the box looked like an atomic bomb went off. At the time, there were only two authorized Novell dealers in Texas (Houston and Dallas), and I had to travel to Dallas to get the replacement board (15,000 1986 dollars).

            – Ron Maupin
            yesterday






            @RonTrunk, I used to install IPX on S-Net (Novell ShareNet), the Novell proprietary box. We installed a site for a company that moved to Austin, and the bulding drilled a floor hole for the printer cable, shorting a 208V line to the 120V line that served the S-Net Box. The board in the box looked like an atomic bomb went off. At the time, there were only two authorized Novell dealers in Texas (Houston and Dallas), and I had to travel to Dallas to get the replacement board (15,000 1986 dollars).

            – Ron Maupin
            yesterday












            0














            I'm somewhat surprised that no existing answer mentioned 6to4.



            It allows to send an IPv6 packet to an IPv4 host, encapsulated within IPv4 packet of protocol type 41.



            6to4 addresses are of the type 2002:AABB:CCDD:suffix corresponding to IPv4 address A.B.C.D where A,B,C,D are decimal and AA,BB,CC,DD are hexadecimal. So, each IPv4 address actually has a whole /48 block of IPv6 addresses.



            6to4 is not just some notation mechanism allowing IPv4 addresses to be notated using IPv6 addresses, it's a real and working IPv6 transition mechanism.



            The performance and latency of 6to4 connectivity will be poor, however, so native IPv6 is preferred where such connectivity is available.



            So, my answer to IPv4 and IPv6 spaces being disjoint: not really, each IPv4 address has a /48 block of IPv6 addresses.






            share|improve this answer























            • The problem with your answer is that it leads people to believe that you can have an IPv6-only host directly communicate with an IPv4-only host or vice versa, and that simply isn't true. There is a lot more to it than that, including relay routers to translate the protocols, so, yes, the address space is still separate, but you have something that can talk in both protocols to do translation.

              – Ron Maupin
              14 hours ago















            0














            I'm somewhat surprised that no existing answer mentioned 6to4.



            It allows to send an IPv6 packet to an IPv4 host, encapsulated within IPv4 packet of protocol type 41.



            6to4 addresses are of the type 2002:AABB:CCDD:suffix corresponding to IPv4 address A.B.C.D where A,B,C,D are decimal and AA,BB,CC,DD are hexadecimal. So, each IPv4 address actually has a whole /48 block of IPv6 addresses.



            6to4 is not just some notation mechanism allowing IPv4 addresses to be notated using IPv6 addresses, it's a real and working IPv6 transition mechanism.



            The performance and latency of 6to4 connectivity will be poor, however, so native IPv6 is preferred where such connectivity is available.



            So, my answer to IPv4 and IPv6 spaces being disjoint: not really, each IPv4 address has a /48 block of IPv6 addresses.






            share|improve this answer























            • The problem with your answer is that it leads people to believe that you can have an IPv6-only host directly communicate with an IPv4-only host or vice versa, and that simply isn't true. There is a lot more to it than that, including relay routers to translate the protocols, so, yes, the address space is still separate, but you have something that can talk in both protocols to do translation.

              – Ron Maupin
              14 hours ago













            0












            0








            0







            I'm somewhat surprised that no existing answer mentioned 6to4.



            It allows to send an IPv6 packet to an IPv4 host, encapsulated within IPv4 packet of protocol type 41.



            6to4 addresses are of the type 2002:AABB:CCDD:suffix corresponding to IPv4 address A.B.C.D where A,B,C,D are decimal and AA,BB,CC,DD are hexadecimal. So, each IPv4 address actually has a whole /48 block of IPv6 addresses.



            6to4 is not just some notation mechanism allowing IPv4 addresses to be notated using IPv6 addresses, it's a real and working IPv6 transition mechanism.



            The performance and latency of 6to4 connectivity will be poor, however, so native IPv6 is preferred where such connectivity is available.



            So, my answer to IPv4 and IPv6 spaces being disjoint: not really, each IPv4 address has a /48 block of IPv6 addresses.






            share|improve this answer













            I'm somewhat surprised that no existing answer mentioned 6to4.



            It allows to send an IPv6 packet to an IPv4 host, encapsulated within IPv4 packet of protocol type 41.



            6to4 addresses are of the type 2002:AABB:CCDD:suffix corresponding to IPv4 address A.B.C.D where A,B,C,D are decimal and AA,BB,CC,DD are hexadecimal. So, each IPv4 address actually has a whole /48 block of IPv6 addresses.



            6to4 is not just some notation mechanism allowing IPv4 addresses to be notated using IPv6 addresses, it's a real and working IPv6 transition mechanism.



            The performance and latency of 6to4 connectivity will be poor, however, so native IPv6 is preferred where such connectivity is available.



            So, my answer to IPv4 and IPv6 spaces being disjoint: not really, each IPv4 address has a /48 block of IPv6 addresses.







            share|improve this answer












            share|improve this answer



            share|improve this answer










            answered 17 hours ago









            juhistjuhist

            37217




            37217












            • The problem with your answer is that it leads people to believe that you can have an IPv6-only host directly communicate with an IPv4-only host or vice versa, and that simply isn't true. There is a lot more to it than that, including relay routers to translate the protocols, so, yes, the address space is still separate, but you have something that can talk in both protocols to do translation.

              – Ron Maupin
              14 hours ago

















            • The problem with your answer is that it leads people to believe that you can have an IPv6-only host directly communicate with an IPv4-only host or vice versa, and that simply isn't true. There is a lot more to it than that, including relay routers to translate the protocols, so, yes, the address space is still separate, but you have something that can talk in both protocols to do translation.

              – Ron Maupin
              14 hours ago
















            The problem with your answer is that it leads people to believe that you can have an IPv6-only host directly communicate with an IPv4-only host or vice versa, and that simply isn't true. There is a lot more to it than that, including relay routers to translate the protocols, so, yes, the address space is still separate, but you have something that can talk in both protocols to do translation.

            – Ron Maupin
            14 hours ago





            The problem with your answer is that it leads people to believe that you can have an IPv6-only host directly communicate with an IPv4-only host or vice versa, and that simply isn't true. There is a lot more to it than that, including relay routers to translate the protocols, so, yes, the address space is still separate, but you have something that can talk in both protocols to do translation.

            – Ron Maupin
            14 hours ago

















            draft saved

            draft discarded
















































            Thanks for contributing an answer to Network Engineering Stack Exchange!


            • Please be sure to answer the question. Provide details and share your research!

            But avoid


            • Asking for help, clarification, or responding to other answers.

            • Making statements based on opinion; back them up with references or personal experience.

            To learn more, see our tips on writing great answers.




            draft saved


            draft discarded














            StackExchange.ready(
            function ()
            StackExchange.openid.initPostLogin('.new-post-login', 'https%3a%2f%2fnetworkengineering.stackexchange.com%2fquestions%2f57903%2fare-the-ipv6-address-space-and-ipv4-address-space-completely-disjoint%23new-answer', 'question_page');

            );

            Post as a guest















            Required, but never shown





















































            Required, but never shown














            Required, but never shown












            Required, but never shown







            Required, but never shown

































            Required, but never shown














            Required, but never shown












            Required, but never shown







            Required, but never shown







            Popular posts from this blog

            getting Checkpoint VPN SSL Network Extender working in the command lineHow to connect to CheckPoint VPN on Ubuntu 18.04LTS?Will the Linux ( red-hat ) Open VPNC Client connect to checkpoint or nortel VPN gateways?VPN client for linux machine + support checkpoint gatewayVPN SSL Network Extender in FirefoxLinux Checkpoint SNX tool configuration issuesCheck Point - Connect under Linux - snx + OTPSNX VPN Ububuntu 18.XXUsing Checkpoint VPN SSL Network Extender CLI with certificateVPN with network manager (nm-applet) is not workingWill the Linux ( red-hat ) Open VPNC Client connect to checkpoint or nortel VPN gateways?VPN client for linux machine + support checkpoint gatewayImport VPN config files to NetworkManager from command lineTrouble connecting to VPN using network-manager, while command line worksStart a VPN connection with PPTP protocol on command linestarting a docker service daemon breaks the vpn networkCan't connect to vpn with Network-managerVPN SSL Network Extender in FirefoxUsing Checkpoint VPN SSL Network Extender CLI with certificate

            NetworkManager fails with “Could not find source connection”Trouble connecting to VPN using network-manager, while command line worksHow can I be notified about state changes to a VPN adapterBacktrack 5 R3 - Refuses to connect to VPNFeed all traffic through OpenVPN for a specific network namespace onlyRun daemon on startup in Debian once openvpn connection establishedpfsense tcp connection between openvpn and lan is brokenInternet connection problem with web browsers onlyWhy does NetworkManager explicitly support tun/tap devices?Browser issues with VPNTwo IP addresses assigned to the same network card - OpenVPN issues?Cannot connect to WiFi with nmcli, although secrets are provided

            대한민국 목차 국명 지리 역사 정치 국방 경제 사회 문화 국제 순위 관련 항목 각주 외부 링크 둘러보기 메뉴북위 37° 34′ 08″ 동경 126° 58′ 36″ / 북위 37.568889° 동경 126.976667°  / 37.568889; 126.976667ehThe Korean Repository문단을 편집문단을 편집추가해Clarkson PLC 사Report for Selected Countries and Subjects-Korea“Human Development Index and its components: P.198”“http://www.law.go.kr/%EB%B2%95%EB%A0%B9/%EB%8C%80%ED%95%9C%EB%AF%BC%EA%B5%AD%EA%B5%AD%EA%B8%B0%EB%B2%95”"한국은 국제법상 한반도 유일 합법정부 아니다" - 오마이뉴스 모바일Report for Selected Countries and Subjects: South Korea격동의 역사와 함께한 조선일보 90년 : 조선일보 인수해 혁신시킨 신석우, 임시정부 때는 '대한민국' 국호(國號) 정해《우리가 몰랐던 우리 역사: 나라 이름의 비밀을 찾아가는 역사 여행》“남북 공식호칭 ‘남한’‘북한’으로 쓴다”“Corea 대 Korea, 누가 이긴 거야?”국내기후자료 - 한국[김대중 前 대통령 서거] 과감한 구조개혁 'DJ노믹스'로 최단기간 환란극복 :: 네이버 뉴스“이라크 "韓-쿠르드 유전개발 MOU 승인 안해"(종합)”“해외 우리국민 추방사례 43%가 일본”차기전차 K2'흑표'의 세계 최고 전력 분석, 쿠키뉴스 엄기영, 2007-03-02두산인프라, 헬기잡는 장갑차 'K21'...내년부터 공급, 고뉴스 이대준, 2008-10-30과거 내용 찾기mk 뉴스 - 구매력 기준으로 보면 한국 1인당 소득 3만弗과거 내용 찾기"The N-11: More Than an Acronym"Archived조선일보 최우석, 2008-11-01Global 500 2008: Countries - South Korea“몇년째 '시한폭탄'... 가계부채, 올해는 터질까”가구당 부채 5000만원 처음 넘어서“‘빚’으로 내몰리는 사회.. 위기의 가계대출”“[경제365] 공공부문 부채 급증…800조 육박”“"소득 양극화 다소 완화...불평등은 여전"”“공정사회·공생발전 한참 멀었네”iSuppli,08年2QのDRAMシェア・ランキングを発表(08/8/11)South Korea dominates shipbuilding industry | Stock Market News & Stocks to Watch from StraightStocks한국 자동차 생산, 3년 연속 세계 5위자동차수출 '현대-삼성 웃고 기아-대우-쌍용은 울고' 과거 내용 찾기동반성장위 창립 1주년 맞아Archived"중기적합 3개업종 합의 무시한 채 선정"李대통령, 사업 무분별 확장 소상공인 생계 위협 질타삼성-LG, 서민업종인 빵·분식사업 잇따라 철수상생은 뒷전…SSM ‘몸집 불리기’ 혈안Archived“경부고속도에 '아시안하이웨이' 표지판”'철의 실크로드' 앞서 '말(言)의 실크로드'부터, 프레시안 정창현, 2008-10-01“'서울 지하철은 안전한가?'”“서울시 “올해 안에 모든 지하철역 스크린도어 설치””“부산지하철 1,2호선 승강장 안전펜스 설치 완료”“전교조, 정부 노조 통계서 처음 빠져”“[Weekly BIZ] 도요타 '제로 이사회'가 리콜 사태 불러들였다”“S Korea slams high tuition costs”““정치가 여론 양극화 부채질… 합리주의 절실””“〈"`촛불집회'는 민주주의의 질적 변화 상징"〉”““촛불집회가 민주주의 왜곡 초래””“국민 65%, "한국 노사관계 대립적"”“한국 국가경쟁력 27위‥노사관계 '꼴찌'”“제대로 형성되지 않은 대한민국 이념지형”“[신년기획-갈등의 시대] 갈등지수 OECD 4위…사회적 손실 GDP 27% 무려 300조”“2012 총선-대선의 키워드는 '국민과 소통'”“한국 삶의 질 27위, 2000년과 2008년 연속 하위권 머물러”“[해피 코리아] 행복점수 68점…해외 평가선 '낙제점'”“한국 어린이·청소년 행복지수 3년 연속 OECD ‘꼴찌’”“한국 이혼율 OECD중 8위”“[통계청] 한국 이혼율 OECD 4위”“오피니언 [이렇게 생각한다] `부부의 날` 에 돌아본 이혼율 1위 한국”“Suicide Rates by Country, Global Health Observatory Data Repository.”“1. 또 다른 차별”“오피니언 [편집자에게] '왕따'와 '패거리 정치' 심리는 닮은꼴”“[미래한국리포트] 무한경쟁에 빠진 대한민국”“대학생 98% "외모가 경쟁력이라는 말 동의"”“특급호텔 웨딩·200만원대 유모차… "남보다 더…" 호화病, 고질병 됐다”“[스트레스 공화국] ① 경쟁사회, 스트레스 쌓인다”““매일 30여명 자살 한국, 의사보다 무속인에…””“"자살 부르는 '우울증', 환자 중 85% 치료 안 받아"”“정신병원을 가다”“대한민국도 ‘묻지마 범죄’,안전지대 아니다”“유엔 "학생 '성적 지향'에 따른 차별 금지하라"”“유엔아동권리위원회 보고서 및 번역본 원문”“고졸 성공스토리 담은 '제빵왕 김탁구' 드라마 나온다”“‘빛 좋은 개살구’ 고졸 취업…실습 대신 착취”원본 문서“정신건강, 사회적 편견부터 고쳐드립니다”‘소통’과 ‘행복’에 목 마른 사회가 잠들어 있던 ‘심리학’ 깨웠다“[포토] 사유리-곽금주 교수의 유쾌한 심리상담”“"올해 한국인 평균 영화관람횟수 세계 1위"(종합)”“[게임연중기획] 게임은 문화다-여가활동 1순위 게임”“영화속 ‘영어 지상주의’ …“왠지 씁쓸한데””“2월 `신문 부수 인증기관` 지정..방송법 후속작업”“무료신문 성장동력 ‘차별성’과 ‘갈등해소’”대한민국 국회 법률지식정보시스템"Pew Research Center's Religion & Public Life Project: South Korea"“amp;vwcd=MT_ZTITLE&path=인구·가구%20>%20인구총조사%20>%20인구부문%20>%20 총조사인구(2005)%20>%20전수부문&oper_YN=Y&item=&keyword=종교별%20인구& amp;lang_mode=kor&list_id= 2005년 통계청 인구 총조사”원본 문서“한국인이 좋아하는 취미와 운동 (2004-2009)”“한국인이 좋아하는 취미와 운동 (2004-2014)”Archived“한국, `부분적 언론자유국' 강등〈프리덤하우스〉”“국경없는기자회 "한국, 인터넷감시 대상국"”“한국, 조선산업 1위 유지(S. Korea Stays Top Shipbuilding Nation) RZD-Partner Portal”원본 문서“한국, 4년 만에 ‘선박건조 1위’”“옛 마산시,인터넷속도 세계 1위”“"한국 초고속 인터넷망 세계1위"”“인터넷·휴대폰 요금, 외국보다 훨씬 비싸”“한국 관세행정 6년 연속 세계 '1위'”“한국 교통사고 사망자 수 OECD 회원국 중 2위”“결핵 후진국' 한국, 환자가 급증한 이유는”“수술은 신중해야… 자칫하면 생명 위협”대한민국분류대한민국의 지도대한민국 정부대표 다국어포털대한민국 전자정부대한민국 국회한국방송공사about korea and information korea브리태니커 백과사전(한국편)론리플래닛의 정보(한국편)CIA의 세계 정보(한국편)마리암 부디아 (Mariam Budia),『한국: 하늘이 내린 한 폭의 그림』, 서울: 트랜스라틴 19호 (2012년 3월)대한민국ehehehehehehehehehehehehehehWorldCat132441370n791268020000 0001 2308 81034078029-6026373548cb11863345f(데이터)00573706ge128495