I pinged every IP address that wasn’t reserved. The image is 8k by 8k and is re-encoded as an AVIF to be friendlier to mobile devices. Like every other survey done, it is using a Hilbert Curve to convert the linear address space to a contiguous 2d space. The hotter the colors (blue is coolest), the denser the ping responses were.
(If you are interested the full-resolution pyramidal-tiled TIFF can be downloaded and viewed in QuPath on desktop. I’ve also compressed the ping response data into its own format down to about 150 MB. PM me for a link)
Here is a 2006 survey to compare.
Some observations: Big Tech (USA) is in the top left. US government allocations, for the most part, did not respond to any pings. And maybe you didn’t realize this before, but Multicast (Class D) & Class E consume a whopping 12% of the IPv4 range.
Writing it out like 000 is just a convention.
.1is the same as.001. They are actually hex numbers from0toFF.They’re not “actually hex”. Hex is just a representation. Same as base 10.
What communicates what they need to know at the level they’re at? I can get technical about octets and bounded decimals, or I can give a simple answer that puts those values into a familiar context.
You think introducing hex was clarifying?
Yes I do.
https://lemmy.ca/comment/24351633
Feel free to explain to them how “it’s all just a representation, man. Nothing means anything. It’s just electrons moving around.”
I mean - they are “numbers”. Numbers are not in hex or decimal. Saying “they’re really hex numbers” is not just wrong it’s kinda meaningless since
ff==255.You’ve explained it badly.
If anything, it’s actually binary…
It’s all binary.
Ahh…makes sense. Thanks.
They’re supposed to be (traditionally) written in octal. Which is why they are called ‘octets’.
That smells a little like folk etymology to me, are you sure about that? My understanding is that since the word is older than computers and can refer to any group of 8 things, “octet” in computing just came from the need to communicate a group of exactly 8 bits given that bytes aren’t always that size.
I was not implying that the word octet comes from octal.
You said they’re called octets because they’re supposed to be written in octal. I was saying why I don’t think that’s true.
I could be mistaken, but I think based on the question, that would not be clarifying. I suppose I could’ve just left it as they are numeric.
The only possible improvement would be to mention that they are bytes - as said otherwise, representation is meaningless, but they factually are 8 bits each segment, which means they are effectively just a number between 0-255.
Still, I think you were able to explain yourself to the other comment, so there’s that.
That’s a valid correction and unlike the other comment provides more information rather than just “that’s technically bullshit.”