# How Infinite Is the Internet? (a Probability Question) **URL:** \ **Category:** Factual Questions\ **Created:** [May 8, 2003, 10:43pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/how-infinite-is-the-internet-a-probability-question/173990 "2003-05-08T22:43:11Z")\ **Posts on this page:** 8\ **Page:** 2
**Author:** ![El\_Cid\_Viscoso](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/e/41988e/32.png) [@El\_Cid\_Viscoso](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/El_Cid_Viscoso)\ **Post date:** [May 9, 2003, 6:49am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/how-infinite-is-the-internet-a-probability-question/173990/21 "2003-05-09T06:49:15Z")
Move along now, ‘sun’ (sic) adults are speaking. We have a chance, albeit a “radical” one in a “far out way.” Just read the PATRIOT and its successors and you’ll start to understand the gravity of our current situation. Subdomains are simply a naming convention. ---
**Author:** ![Bill\_H](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/b/a5b964/32.png) [@Bill\_H](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Bill_H)\ **Post date:** [May 9, 2003, 9:48am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/how-infinite-is-the-internet-a-probability-question/173990/22 "2003-05-09T09:48:37Z")
Say again? ---
**Author:** ![aahala](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/a/a88e4f/32.png) [@aahala](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/aahala)\ **Post date:** [May 9, 2003, 12:40pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/how-infinite-is-the-internet-a-probability-question/173990/23 "2003-05-09T12:40:23Z")
> [@](#): > > \*Originally posted by Chronos \* > And **Mr. B** , what the heck are you talking about, being limited to “www.”? Look up your screen a bit: The web page you’re on at the very moment is [boards.straightdope.com](http://boards.straightdope.com)… , without a “www.” in sight. \*\* A website without the “www” is the same domain. Whether you can assess it with/without the www depends upon how the server is setup and to a lesser extent on your browser. ---
**Author:** ![SenorBeef](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/senorbeef/32/2220_2.png) [@SenorBeef](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/SenorBeef)\ **Post date:** [May 9, 2003, 11:34pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/how-infinite-is-the-internet-a-probability-question/173990/24 "2003-05-09T23:34:18Z")
WWW is just a convention that allows the user to easily identify a given host as a web server. It’s absolutely no difference, from the computer’s point of view, than having XYZ or 123 as the host name. ---
**Author:** ![bugg](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/b/ecae2f/32.png) [@bugg](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/bugg)\ **Post date:** [May 10, 2003, 12:29am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/how-infinite-is-the-internet-a-probability-question/173990/25 "2003-05-10T00:29:56Z")
aahala, it’s certainly possible for a lookup on the domain ([yahoo.com](http://yahoo.com)) to resolve to a different address than a host on that network ([www.yahoo.com](http://www.yahoo.com)) so it’s not fair to say that [yahoo.com](http://yahoo.com) is short for [www.yahoo.com](http://www.yahoo.com). Bill H., I find it’s interesting that you mention CIDR as something that alleviates the IPv4 shortage and them shrug off any gains IPv6 will have in routing. A larger address space may very well bring about the need for fewer networks (less subnetting) and therefore make routing tables less complex. I would classify simpler routing tables as making “routing easier.” It also ends the need for NAT, as no user would be assigned simply one address. This too makes routing, in total, easier. ---
**Author:** ![Bill\_H](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/b/a5b964/32.png) [@Bill\_H](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Bill_H)\ **Post date:** [May 10, 2003, 1:15am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/how-infinite-is-the-internet-a-probability-question/173990/26 "2003-05-10T01:15:48Z")
**bugg** wrote > [@](#): > > Bill H., I find it’s interesting that you mention CIDR as something that alleviates the IPv4 shortage and them shrug off any gains IPv6 will have in routing. A larger address space may very well bring about the need for fewer networks (less subnetting) and therefore make routing tables less complex. I would classify simpler routing tables as making “routing easier.” It also ends the need for NAT, as no user would be assigned simply one address. This too makes routing, in total, easier. Technically, that is true. But… You’re describing two advantages: fewer routing table entries, and removal of NAT devices. Fewer routing table entries: Where this really comes into play is inside the NAPs. At even large edge areas, they don’t deal with very massive amounts of routes. But even inside the NAPs, with their massive routing tables, the current system works fine today. But even if that was a problem, let’s face it: if we implemented IPv6 this weekend, within a few months, the size of the address space would likely double, just as when they increase the size of a freeway, more people fill it up. Every Palm, Phone and Toaster would have an address. So, very quickly the advantage of smaller routing tables would actually reverse to larger routing tables. NAT devices: It’s true that one of the big reasons for the invention and deployment of NAT was the lack of space. But it’s not the only reason, and any more not even the main reason. The big reason any more is security. NAT is a cheap, easy firewall. And the fact that most addresses behind a NAT device don’t need a publicly accessible address makes giving them one a bad idea from a security perspective. So, even after IPv6 is put in place, most NAT devices will remain where they are. ---
**Author:** ![Jplacer](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/j/85f322/32.png) [@Jplacer](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Jplacer)\ **Post date:** [May 10, 2003, 4:17am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/how-infinite-is-the-internet-a-probability-question/173990/27 "2003-05-10T04:17:41Z")
[www.menwholooklikekennyrogers.com](http://www.menwholooklikekennyrogers.com) Is a long name 🙂 ---
**Author:** ![Hauky](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/h/0ea827/32.png) [@Hauky](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Hauky)\ **Post date:** [May 10, 2003, 4:51am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/how-infinite-is-the-internet-a-probability-question/173990/28 "2003-05-10T04:51:43Z")
> [@](#): > > \*Originally posted by bugg \* > \*\*Or we’ll all wisen up to IPv6, where I think it’s safe to say we’ll never have to worry about there being IP shortages again… \*\* One can reasonably assume that this same thing was said somewhere by someone at the dawn of IPv4 technology. 😉 Just wait until all our blenders can update their firmware to support that new serrated blade type and need their own IP addresses to do it. [Previous page](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/how-infinite-is-the-internet-a-probability-question/173990.md?page=1)