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












10















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




















  • 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    Beware of outdated textbooks.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
    Mar 23 at 23:45


















10















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




















  • 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
    Mar 23 at 23:45
















10












10








10








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 Mar 23 at 17:19









Ron Maupin

68k1369126




68k1369126










asked Mar 23 at 14:38









TimTim

655518




655518








  • 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
    Mar 23 at 23:45
















  • 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
    Mar 23 at 23:45










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
Mar 23 at 23:45







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
Mar 23 at 23:45












3 Answers
3






active

oldest

votes


















7















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































      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
        Mar 24 at 15:03












      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









      7















      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






























        7















        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




























          7












          7








          7








          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 Mar 23 at 17:36

























          answered Mar 23 at 17:08









          Ron MaupinRon Maupin

          68k1369126




          68k1369126























              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




























                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


























                  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 Mar 23 at 17:07









                  Ron TrunkRon Trunk

                  39.5k33780




                  39.5k33780























                      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
                        Mar 24 at 15:03
















                      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
                        Mar 24 at 15:03














                      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 Mar 24 at 11:48









                      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
                        Mar 24 at 15:03



















                      • 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
                        Mar 24 at 15:03

















                      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
                      Mar 24 at 15:03





                      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
                      Mar 24 at 15:03


















                      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

                      "Incorrect syntax near the keyword 'ON'. (on update cascade, on delete cascade,)

                      Alcedinidae

                      Origin of the phrase “under your belt”?