Why doesn’t every computer have 256 char domain name, along with a private key to prove it is the sole owner of the address?

Edits: For those technically inclined: Stuff like DHCP seems unnecessary if every device has a serial number based address that’s known not to collide. It seems way more simple and faster than leasing dynamic addresses. On top of that with VOIP I can get phone calls even without cell service, even behind a NAT. Why is the network designed in such a way where that is possible, but I can’t buy a static address that will persist across networks endpoint changes (e.g. laptop connecting to a new unconfigured wifi connection) such that I can initiate a connection to my laptop while it is behind a NAT.

  • Yes, it would be a privacy nightmare, I want to know why it didnt turn out that way
  • When I say phone number, I mean including area/country code
  • AFAIK IP addresses (even static public ones) are not equivlent to phone numbers. I don’t get a new phone number every time I connect to a new cell tower. Even if a static IP is assigned to a device, my understanding is that connecting the device to a new uncontrolled WiFi, especially a router with a NAT, will make it so that people who try to connect to the static IP will simply fail.
  • No, MAC addresses are not equivalent phone numbers. 1. Phone numbers have one unique owner, MAC addresses can have many owners because they can be changed at any time to any thing on most laptops. 2. A message can’t be sent directly to a MAC address in the same way as a phone number
  • Yes, IMEI is unique, but my laptop doesn’t have one and even if it did its not the same as an eSim or sim card. We can send a message to an activated Sim, we can’t send a message to an IMEI or serial number
  • JakenVeina@lemm.ee
    cake
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    53
    ·
    2 months ago

    They do, it’s called an IP address.

    Phones get numbers assigned to them by a cell service provider, in order to communicate on their network, which is basically the exact process for computers and IP addresses.

    If you’re asking about the equivalent of like a SIM card, in the computer/internet world, that’s handled at higher layers, by digital certificates. And again, the process is almost exactly the same, except they don’t (usually) get put on physical chips.

    • 800XL@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      3
      ·
      2 months ago

      Except you can spoof an IP address or get another one from the ISP just by asking. You can spoof a MAC address too.

      Intel introduced unique processor id’s back in the late 90s.

    • jeffhykin@lemm.eeOP
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      2
      ·
      edit-2
      2 months ago

      Cell phones don’t get a new phone number every time they switch cell towers, so why do laptops.

      Its not like I can write down the IP address of my friends laptop so I can send it a message once he gets to a new city. Right?

      • SchmidtGenetics@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        2
        ·
        2 months ago

        Its not like I can write down the IP address of my friends laptop so I can send it a message once he gets to a new city.

        With static IPs that’s possible, but you already do that when you email them already.

      • JakenVeina@lemm.ee
        cake
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        1
        ·
        2 months ago

        Main difference there being that switching cities means probably switching ISPs. You can absolutely carry over your IP address when you move between the same provider, if that’s part of your service plan, and that may well happen with some ISPs even without it being part of your plan. There just isn’t really much of a need for people to carry a static IP, except for some businesses, and I’d say the main reason is that people don’t visit websites by memorizing and typing in an IP. They do memorize and type in phone numbers.

        • jeffhykin@lemm.eeOP
          link
          fedilink
          arrow-up
          1
          ·
          edit-2
          2 months ago

          I can send a message to the IP address but AFAIK the message won’t get to him because he will almost certainly have a new address when he connects to the airport WiFi in the new city.

    • Guest_User@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      11
      ·
      2 months ago

      You will always be able to spoof your MAC address if needed. I don’t see the standard ever changing enough to prevent that.

    • jeffhykin@lemm.eeOP
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      3
      ·
      edit-2
      2 months ago

      I’m shocked this answer has so many upvotes. No, a MAC address is not close to a phone number. No two people have the same phone number, and I can’t just edit my phone number to be someone else’s number.

      • “two network interfaces connected to two different networks can share the same MAC address”
      • “Many network interfaces, however, support changing their MAC addresses”

      https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/MAC_address

      • SchmidtGenetics@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        9
        ·
        edit-2
        2 months ago

        You ask a “no stupid” question then try to call out an answer? Bold move cotton.

        Sure you can change your phone number, it’s called spoofing, or just call your provider and get a new one, sometimes they charge sometimes they don’t. So why are you claiming it’s not possible?

        People have the same phone numbers, that’s why area codes exist, that’s kinda the same thing as a provider and a MAC address, no…?

        Edit well then.

        • jeffhykin@lemm.eeOP
          link
          fedilink
          arrow-up
          2
          ·
          2 months ago

          Fair, I could have said fully qualified number, including country code.

          And also fair, instead of saying a MAC could be edited, I should’ve said each phone number has one global owner, while each MAC address could have many owners.

          Corrections have been made 👍

  • Honytawk@lemmy.zip
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    20
    ·
    2 months ago

    MAC’s used to be static, but then hackers found ways to spoof it. Now manufacturers don’t care to make them static anymore.

    Get a laptop with a SIM and you will have an IMEI and phone number, plus 5G.

  • ArbiterXero@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    9
    ·
    2 months ago

    It’s called a MAC address.

    The problem with it is mostly routing.

    The osi model has 7 layers of connection to form a proper internet connection.

    The MAC address exists but doesn’t leave the physical network. The MAC address is used to physically connect your computer to the router, and it defines your piece of hardware.

    The IP address can change, because your computer can connect to different networks.

    If you tried to route everything with a MAC address, (which isn’t possible, but for arguments sake we will pretend it is) the problem is that when you take your phone with its MAC address off your wifi and on to your work wifi, Where would the registry be? How would the Internet know how to find your phone? Do you just log into one giant global registry so that everyone can find your phone when they are trying to communicate with it? That would be a giant fucking database and everyone would always be trying to use it.

    Routing is a big and complex problem, and these things didn’t work with ipv4

    They do work better with IPv6. IPv6 adresses don’t need to change like ipv4 for a bunch of reasons.

    From a philosophical level, the Internet was designed for people to be anonymous and make relatively anonymous connections. You wanted to be flexible enough that you can just be assigned a new number and work with that new number quickly.

    This is a really simple explanation, and I got some basic facts wrong just for ease of understanding, but the principals are correct.

    • slazer2au@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      2
      ·
      2 months ago

      If you tried to route everything with a MAC address, (which isn’t possible, but for arguments sake we will pretend it is) the problem is that when you take your phone with its MAC address off your wifi and on to your work wifi, Where would the registry be? How would the Internet know how to find your phone? Do you just log into one giant global registry so that everyone can find your phone when they are trying to communicate with it? That would be a giant fucking database and everyone would always be trying to use it.

      This is a solved issue called EUI-64 IPv6 addressing. It is a privacy nightmare.

    • jeffhykin@lemm.eeOP
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      1
      ·
      edit-2
      2 months ago

      Every phone number has one owner, but MAC addresses can have many owners. They’re categorically different.

      How would the internet know how to find your phone?

      The same way phone calls try to find a phone when its powered off. Attempt, and then fail under a timeout.

      Where would the registery be?

      Same place as the phone number registry. Or the domain name registry.

      That would be one giant database

      Yep the domain name registry and cell phone registry very much are AFAIK

      • ArbiterXero@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        1
        ·
        2 months ago

        The domain registry is NOT, and it’s categorised by various tld’s the scope of the routing is MUCH higher traffic.

        Your cell phone is run by a provider and has maybe 0.0000001% as much lookups as routing would have.

        These things are all done in various tree light structures to try and eliminate central points of failure . The Internet was designed to try and resist failure, and you are creating some central failure points.

        Even if you created several of them, synchronisation issues would be Basically impossible to fix or take up unbelievable amounts of bandwidth

        • jeffhykin@lemm.eeOP
          link
          fedilink
          arrow-up
          1
          ·
          edit-2
          2 months ago

          This I’m interested in, because its at the edge/limits of my knowledge when it comes to domains and cellular networking.

          Are you saying if cell phones had a larger address space, let’s say 32 digits base 10, and every device was given a cell phone number, it would overwhelm the existing infrastructure?

          • ArbiterXero@lemmy.world
            link
            fedilink
            arrow-up
            2
            ·
            2 months ago

            It’s not just the address space, but also the sheer number of lookups.

            DNS has authoritative name servers based on tld, and then domain, and then maybe subdomain.

            When you’re dealing with IP addresses, there is no such tree that I lookup, I just fire it into the abyss and let the routing hardware do the lookups. I know who my gateway is to the internet, but I usually don’t keep the routing information.

            My ISP’s routing hardware then says “this IP was last found somewhere in Europe so I’ll fire it at my European connection and hope they get it right.”

            Losses are expected.

            IPv6 CAN route with larger address tables, but the “fire and forget” method still exists.

            There’s also a method to scream at all my peers “do you know where 5.5.5.5 is, because I don’t know” I’ll remember their answer for a bit because that’s useful, but I’ll eventually forget it because I expect it to move. I expect this ip movement because I’m fault tolerant. I might not find the fastest way there, but I’ll find it.

            Philosophically, the internet is designed to be fault tolerant and pseudo anonymous. So if 5.5.5.5 is somewhere in Spain and my Spain peer dies, I recognise that the packets are failing and then I start blasting them at England, because my British connection knows all about the Spanish villa and can pass along my messages. I don’t really care where Spain is, I care about who can get my message there and that’s it. It’s too onerous to always keep track of where everyone is, and MOST people on the internet I don’t actually know about because they’re behind a Nat gateway and I don’t care about them. This makes it so I only have to care about edge devices and greatly simplifies my list.

            So for example, your laptop isn’t actually on the internet. Your modem/router is, but your laptop doesn’t exist to the internet. When I want to send you a packet, I just send it to your router and let the router handle it. I don’t even know that your laptop exists, and I don’t care.

            Well your router will send the data to your laptop instead of your phone because the Nat is keeping track of who requested it and your phone didn’t ask for it. This causes problems because it means that from outside your network, I can’t just connect and send data inside your network unless someone asked for it. So I can’t just call your cell phone unless it reaches out first because I don’t know that your cell phone exists, and even if I did, the router would block it. This is why port forwarding exists, it allows you to have your laptop get ALL data sent to the router on port 12345. I still don’t know about your laptop, but I know that there’s a server on your IP address on port 12345 that I can connect to and request/send data to. Keeping track of all of this just so that I always know where your laptop is requires a fair bit of coordination at many layers.

            Ideally it has a domain at a registrar that I can ask about where it currently is. The routing is still “fire and forget “ because it simplifies my list of “where every IP is” and even then, I only know about the laptop’s edge connection to the internet and let that edge take care of where to actually send the data so I don’t have to think about it.

            In IPv6, Nat works a little different, but it’s still close.

            I’m honestly not sure how many mistakes I made, I just kinda brain dumped info, so let me know which pieces don’t make sense.

            • jeffhykin@lemm.eeOP
              link
              fedilink
              arrow-up
              1
              ·
              edit-2
              2 months ago

              If I’m understanding correctly, you’re saying that right now the network doesn’t have an exhaustive table of IP addresses to physical locations. It has a cache, and a hierarchy, and the path to a location of the IP is fluid.

              But a system where every device could be directly contacted/identified like a Sim card, would effectively require a complete table of “what network is device ABC at”. A table that is updated every time the device changes network connections. It would be like trying to change domain name to point to a different IP address.

              The problem is, updating a domain to point to a new IP takes hours or days not seconds, so doing that every time a phone changes WiFi is not practical.

              Is that a good summary?

              • ArbiterXero@lemmy.world
                link
                fedilink
                arrow-up
                1
                ·
                2 months ago

                Yes, but we’re talking about “seconds” and “nanoseconds” rather than hours.

                Networks move much faster than we do.

                There’s also no hierarchy of IP addresses, and that matters for lookups.

                So the 1 second it takes to do a dns lookup is WAY too long for continuous ip lookups, and the size of the database and chains requires explaining where to find ip address X is too long and updates WAY too much to be accurate and/or kept.

                Lookups are easiest if you know “I lookup .uk addresses at this particular server in England” because that particular “ authoritative DNS server” only really handles its own little segment of lookups.

                There is no such hierarchy in ip addresses, and they can’t really be cached for long.

                You would have to continually know and update all of them. And we sorta do in the larger routers, but keeping that up to date at the edges would require a TON of bandwidth.

  • slazer2au@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    8
    ·
    2 months ago

    You seem to have be missing a fundamental thing about tech but I can’t pin down what it is. So I will respond to your edits.

    but I can’t buy a static address that will persist across networks endpoint changes

    You can. It’s called Provider Independent Space and it a pain to go with as an individual.

    Yes, it would be a privacy nightmare, I want to know why it didnt turn out that way

    Because people smarter than you, I, and everyone else in this post said 'Yes EUI-64 is a good idea in principe but the problems on a privacy perspective outweigh the advantages. So let’s build a system called MAC randomisation so people can get multiple address to access the internet with. ’
    The good news is you can turn off MAC randomisation.

    AFAIK IP addresses (even static public ones) are not equivlent to phone numbers. I don’t get a new phone number every time I connect to a new cell tower

    In some parts of the world or before 2000 if you changed mobile providers, say from Vodafone to Telstra you had to get a new number. Since that change number routing has become a nightmare and it makes the BGPv4 table look sane in comparison.

    Even if a static IP is assigned to a device, my understanding is that connecting the device to a new uncontrolled WiFi, especially a router with a NAT, will make it so that people who try to connect to the static IP will simply fail.

    This is a complex one due to NAT in the ipv4 space. NAT exists purely to allow devices to have the same private IPv4 address and hide behind a public v4 address.

    No, MAC addresses are not equivalent phone numbers. 1. Phone numbers have one unique owner, MAC addresses can have many owners because they can be changed at any time to any thing on most laptops. 2. A message can’t be sent directly to a MAC address in the same way as a phone number

    1. MAC do have unique owner blocks. Cisco somewhat owned the 0000.0C block.
    2. Yes you can. That is literally how it works down the TCP/IP stack.

    Yes, IMEI is unique, but my laptop doesn’t have one and even if it did its not the same as an eSim or sim card. We can send a message to an activated Sim, we can’t send a message to an IMEI or serial number

    If your laptop has a regular Sim slot it will have an IMEI. True we can’t send messages via IMEI or serial because those systems were never designed for message routing.

  • SchmidtGenetics@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    7
    ·
    2 months ago
    • No, MAC addresses are not equivalent phone numbers. I can’t edit my phone number for free in 30sec to whatever I want, and I can’t send a message to a MAC address.

    You sure about that?

    • jeffhykin@lemm.eeOP
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      1
      ·
      edit-2
      2 months ago

      Yes I’m sure. Try changing the number to 911. Phone numbers only have one owner, MAC addresses may have many owners.

        • jeffhykin@lemm.eeOP
          link
          fedilink
          arrow-up
          1
          ·
          edit-2
          2 months ago

          The IP doesn’t persist across network hops (cell tower to cell tower) and the MAC address doesnt have one verified owner. A phone number is both verified having one owner and persists across network hops.

          • SchmidtGenetics@lemmy.world
            link
            fedilink
            arrow-up
            8
            ·
            2 months ago

            Static ips persist.

            MAC addresses can be banned

            Phone numbers can’t roam

            Phone numbers aren’t unique (area code)

            Wrong on all fronts.

  • dual_sport_dork@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    5
    ·
    2 months ago

    Notwithstanding the instant privacy nightmare this would create, essentially abolishing online anonymity overnight, this is kinda-sorta what MAC addresses are already. As to why MAC addresses can be spoofed so easily without any real impact on anything, refer to my first statement.

  • JesterIzDead@lemm.ee
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    5
    ·
    2 months ago

    a) what the hell is ipv32?

    b) it’s astounding how many upvotes some of these nonsensical answers have

    • adam_y@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      2
      ·
      2 months ago

      I see you getting downvoted for a correct answer.

      IP addresses are like street addresses. I can live at 10 High Street in London, you can live at 10 High Street in Ohio. Those are not the same address right? Folk confusing public and private ip addresses.

    • jeffhykin@lemm.eeOP
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      1
      ·
      edit-2
      2 months ago
      1. Yeah I was lazy with saying ipv32 just to mean something excessively long. I didnt want to say ipv6, since I kinda think it needs to at least be 64bits (edit: ipv6 is actually 128bits), and really for a public-private key pair it should be larger, so more like 512 to avoid anything like the v4 v6 cacatestrophe again in 20 years with post quantum forms of asymetric key challenges. But I didnt feel like writing all that out.
      2. I’m with you. I knew I’d get people not reading and say “that’s the ip address”, but MAC address? 🤦‍♂️
  • halcyoncmdr@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    4
    ·
    2 months ago

    Phone numbers aren’t exactly unique. It’s really not much different than being assigned a static IP address from your ISP. They’re assigned and if a line is cancelled or you change your number, it goes to a dormant state for a while then is reassigned to someone else.

    Your phone’s IMEI on the other hand is a unique number, similar to a MAC address for network devices. Unlike a MAC though, it is illegal to spoof or clone an IMEI. Infrastructure however wasn’t designed to use the IMEI or MAC as the publicly accessible address, it was designed with a middle translation layer in mind.

    Not 100% sure, my early history is lacking a bit, but I think that was simply because the fundamental network design underlying everything we use predates unique identifiers like MAC addresses existing.

    • jeffhykin@lemm.eeOP
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      1
      ·
      2 months ago

      Solid answer, thanks! You deserve all the upvotes that were, instead, for some reason, given to the guy that just said “I think its a MAC address”

  • slazer2au@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    4
    ·
    2 months ago

    What makes you think all phones have unique numbers? Some have no direct dial numbers.

    As for each device getting a unique IP address this is somewhat in the spec for EUI-64 IPv6 address. Your IP is based on your interfaces MAC address but this becomes a privacy nightmare.

    If the MAC address’s of the wifi chip in your phone is 1122.3344.5566 your IPv6 address at home can be 2001:0db8:0000:00000:1122:33ff:fe44:5566 but when at work your address may be 2001:db8:1000:0000:1122:33ff:fe44:5566. No matter where you connect to the last 4 sections of the address is the same and companies will use that as one of the data points of your digital profile.

    • jeffhykin@lemm.eeOP
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      2
      ·
      edit-2
      2 months ago

      I meant “in the same way that phone numbers are unique to phones (not perfectly unique, some phones have dual Sim, some have no sim, sometimes a Sim changes numbers after contacting the provider, etc)”

      Its just typing all that^ in a title is kinda long.

      EUI-64 IPv6 (and why its not a reality) though is kinda what I’m curious about. But not really because, even under that spec, its still not static like a phone number. I want to know why networks were not created in a way where I can send a message to a laptop regardless of what WiFi its connected to (assuming it is connected and online).

      • slazer2au@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        1
        ·
        2 months ago

        Because it will be an ungodly thing to manage. The national phone databases are already a nightmare to manage. it would be far worse if we had a global one.

  • ulterno@lemmy.kde.social
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    4
    ·
    edit-2
    2 months ago

    its not the same as an eSim or sim card

    I think you have part of your answer.
    Get a laptop with a SIM Card reader, and do what you may.

    The reason it doesn’t work with IP is because, it started out with local networks and was expanded from that. A domain name is similar to a phone number, just that the user has the IP routing information available, whereas in case of phone connection, a probably similar system for routing is all abstracted by cell exchanges.

    P.S. Thanks for the food for thought.

  • BearOfaTime@lemm.ee
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    3
    ·
    edit-2
    2 months ago

    Every land-line phone I’ve had didn’t carry it’s number with it. The number is assigned to a fixed, immovable address. Back then it was part of a physical switching system - in the switching center, shafts would move up and down and rotate to connect one circuit to another. These were circuit-switched networks. (These were eventually replaced by digital switches).

    The only number that’s static on my cell phone is the EID, because it’s necessary with a mobile device connecting to a radio-based network. The system needs to know how to route a connection whenever the phone moves - “which tower is it on” - which is handled by the device registering with the tower, the network then updates it’s database. The phone number with a cell phone is specifically for routing user connections (essentially tells the system what subscriber is associated with a given endpoint - your phone).

    None of this is required for internet connections, as you get connectivity via a router which is the Internet-facing address for other devices to see. Things were established this way initially because there’s no need for an endpoint device to be directly exposed (plus hardware and software capabilities at the time).

    Also, I hope to never see the day when all consumer endpoint devices are directly on the internet. That’s a bad idea in so many ways (and why I argue IPv6 is generally useless for endpoint consumer devices). IP6 is great for plenty of other reasons.

    • jeffhykin@lemm.eeOP
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      1
      ·
      2 months ago

      no need for an endpoint to be directly exposed

      If I were an engineer in the past, trying to send a message back to an endpoint (e.g. a server response) I would’ve reached for everything having a static IP, same as the EID system with phones, instead of the DHCP multi-tier NAT type system with temp addresses.

      I’m all but certain they didnt do it for privacy reasons at the time.

      • BearOfaTime@lemm.ee
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        2
        ·
        edit-2
        2 months ago

        Well, endpoints then were largely mainframe type systems, long before PCs existed, let alone network-capable PCs and http. So it was a different idea than what we have today.

        Before internet, you could connect two physically disparate systems using point-to-point, permanently switched connections (so it always consumed a potential connection even when no data was being transmitted). If you had Point A connected to Point B, you need a third connection to comm with Point C. The idea was, if B already had a connection to C, why not share that bandwidth/connection so A only needed one connection? And then apply a data-switching concept (e.g. Packet switching), instead of circuit-switching.

        We were still using P-to-P connections in the late 90’s because internet capabilites weren’t quite up to what some systems needed for latency, timing, and bandwidth.

        At first, just getting two endpoint mainframes connected was a big deal, and individual user devices wasn’t much of a thought, yet. Most stuff was still mainframe based, so having those connected was sufficient for user communication/data sharing anyway. Since user connectivity wasn’t the main concern - moving data from one system to another was, say an entity has 2 locations, and needs to sync the systems in those two locations. So you either use a circuit-switched P-to-P, with downtime for users when sync is happening, or send physical tapes (magnetic or even punched paper tapes) cross-country to move data, with that data being out-of-sync and requiring manual updates to re-sync.

        Routing was necessary primarily for backbone transit, secondarily for organizations with multiple systems, hence the IP Classful approach.

        DHCP is a local network requirement - ask any Admin about static IP addresses - that’s a nightmare. I don’t even like it at home with a handful of devices.

        NAT is a result of the limited IP address space, not DHCP - there’s simply not enough addresses in 32bits for every local device to have a public IP (nor would you want this), plus having multiple services behind a router using local addressing. Even with static local addresses, you’d need NAT.

        Also, look at the time - if you had a LAN in the late 80’s, it was something like Banyan Vines or Netware IPX (neither of which was routable originally), for local comms between local systems. Any internet/external network requirements were for (again) moving data between disparate locations. The idea that a workstation needed specific internet/non-local access to (what?) really didn’t make sense. It would comm with a local data source (mainframe/IBM 360, etc), and that system would manage retrieving or syncing data from elsewhere. A workstation was largely a dumb terminal before PCs (other than actual “workstations” which is a different animal) .