61–70 of 138 posts
Earlier quoted context omitted.
This is an improvement --- it was dumb of SCTP to try to claim a top-level IP protocol for this --- but only marginally, since lots of firewalls won't pass traffic on random UDP ports either.
Private ones usually do. (outgoing)
> When a protocol can’t evolve because deployments ‘freeze’ its extensibility points, we say it has ossified. TCP itself is a severe example of ossification; so many middleboxes do so many things to TCP — whether it’s blocking packets with TCP options that aren’t recognized, or ‘optimizing’ congestion control. > It’s necessary to prevent ossification, to ensure that protocols can evolve to meet the needs of the Inter…
It's so normalized I figured there wasn't a whole lot I could do about it, until I noticed Nine sync'ing my Exchange inbox from scratch for something like 3MB. Then I noticed Telegram had used 3MB for a month's regular use, while Hangouts had used 10MB for five minutes of use.
Despite living in the first world, I'm kind of excited for Android's Building for Billions. There's so much flagrant waste of traffic today, assuming as you say that you have a big fat broadband pipe, with no thought to tightly metered, high latency, or degraded connections.
(I switched to an inexpensive mobile plan with 500MB, you see)
Earlier quoted context omitted.
While everything you state here is correct, and is clearly of serious concern, my view is that the general public doesn't really have the capacity to fight both of these battles at once. Right now, I'm convinced we need Google's help to make it harder for governments and ISPs to censor and prioritize. After that, we'll deal with Google.
Corporations and governments are not two entities you can divide for conquering.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
What features are missing that should be implemented?
Not the OP, but omitting support for SRV records in HTTP/2 was a terrible missed opportunity, as I’ve written about here before: https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=8404788 https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=8550133 I quote myself: “ It really is no surprise that Google is not interested in this, since Google does not suffer from any of those problems which using SRV records for HTTP would solve. It’s only users w…
Earlier quoted context omitted.
> sell us out to big corporations by not implementing proper features in protocols like HTTP/2 so we can get tracked What are you referring to here?
Authentication mostly. The lack of which is the major reason why the majority of us are still typing passwords into boxes in the browser and send them over the Internet in contradiction to best practices. Doing away with that would potentially solve a lot of problems, like phishing, but also replace cookies. Meaning it would be much harder to track users across the Internet threatening not only the revenue of major p…
Earlier quoted context omitted.
That seems superior anyway - you could keep blocking domains even when you're on the go.
Can I? On Android, apps now can decide if they want to accept user-installed CAs, or not. So if an app is hostile (say, all the Google apps), then I have no way to intercept their traffic anymore.
And you can put your CA into the system CA store if you have root. (You can make an Android image, so technically the requirement is unlocked - unlockable - bootloader.)
Earlier quoted context omitted.
Almost positively that answer is Google. Notice they are behind multiple of the new protocols here (HTTP/2 and QUIC), and are used as an example how bundling DOH with an existing major player can prevent blocking DNS. Google is effectively the actual determiner of Internet standards. As the article notes, Google implemented QUIC on their servers and their browsers, and therefore, 7% of Internet traffic is already QUI…
While everything you state here is correct, and is clearly of serious concern, my view is that the general public doesn't really have the capacity to fight both of these battles at once. Right now, I'm convinced we need Google's help to make it harder for governments and ISPs to censor and prioritize. After that, we'll deal with Google.
We can talk about network neutrality whatever we want - but these companies have built technological capabilities to have "little bit bigger share".
So, probably after some time it is too late to deal with Google:)
Earlier quoted context omitted.
Can I? On Android, apps now can decide if they want to accept user-installed CAs, or not. So if an app is hostile (say, all the Google apps), then I have no way to intercept their traffic anymore.
You can decide to install the app or not. And you can put your CA into the system CA store if you have root. (You can make an Android image, so technically the requirement is unlocked - unlockable - bootloader.)
Apps can and will refuse to run in that situation.
Modifying /system will make every SafetyNet check fail, as result Netflix, Snapchat, Google Play Movies, and most banking apps will refuse to run.
I can decide to install the app or not? How do I go about replacing Google's system apps with my own, without preventing above mentioned apps from running? I can't. And I can't buy reasonable devices withou Google Android, due to the non-compete clause in the OEM contracts.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
"Still" seems a bit disingenuous when considering the current trajectory IPv6 adoption is on. [0] Yah it's happening slowly, but it does seem to be pushing ahead. [0] https://www.google.com/intl/en/ipv6/statistics.html
How is that disingenuous? I don't think it matters what the curve looks like when it spans 10 years and ends up at 20%. There were implementations released 10 years previous to the graph's start. I wasn't implying it would never happen, just that even for something that's inevitable like IPv6, adoption is glacial.
I dove into the world of curve fitting (wee!) and my prediction[1] for 95% IPv6 adoption is around the year 2025: https://imgur.com/a/LyBJn (fitted to the logistic curve[2], x=0 is basically 2010, y is percent adoption)
[1] Which you should completely trust because I've been doing this for all of 20 minutes!
[2] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Logistic_function#In_economics...