221–230 of 480 posts
Earlier quoted context omitted.
EU have enough influence to do to IPV6 what it did to USB in iPhones.
It's harder to prove consumer harm with something as abstract as IP addresses, and there's a bunch of other pieces that make this much less unlikely, such as the fact that USBs already become obsolete and need to be replaced, so you're just shifting the replacement cycle.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
You'll need to become a member of one of the regional Internet route registries, like RIPE or ARIN. Then you can buy, say a /24, and transfer it into your RIPE/ARIN account. Now you have your own IPv4 range. And you can start for example start to use it for your own servers. To do so you need to "announce" this new /24 to the internet, using a protocol known as BGP. You can do that yourself, using a router, assuming…
> To do so you need to "announce" this new /24 to the internet, using a protocol known as BGP. You can do that yourself, using a router, assuming you have an Autonomous system number (AS). Is this how BGP hijacking is done?
But good ISPs filter the prefixes their customers can announce to only those they actually own.
Then you have shitty providers that dont do it, and thats how you get BGP hijacking.
And you cant do this just from any connection, fyi.
You will need a datacenter, cloud host or residential ISP that actually allows you to peer with them and announce routes. This isnt a standard thing you get just by being a customer.
Can we go back in time and hit the designers of IPv6 upside the head? The decision not to make IPv6 backwards compatible, the belief that a beautiful new standard could magically replace something already so widespread... "Naive" is an inadequate word. We are still futzing with the transition 3 decades later, with no end in sight. Grrr, grumble...
Earlier quoted context omitted.
This is even better: game.latticeanimal.net. 3600 IN A 1.2.3.4
I don't know a single gamer who rented a domain for private use. In fact, I would argue than the hassle of setting one up is the reason why Hamachi got popular back then. You don't have to bother with knowing any technical stuff, just download a software, share a code and play.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
just checked again on an iphone se, 1st-gen, ios 15.x on t-mobile reseller in germany: actually there is a v4 default route on the wwan-interface that appears to be a p2p link (192/32) probably to a cgnat. besides 127/8, there are a only v6 routes, a lot of them.
how do you check the routing table from the iphone? a jailbreak? some app?
Its an app.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
> Overall we are now much further into the IPv6 migration than djb ever envisioned. That post was written 20 years ago . I would hope that the migration would be more than "much further along", I'd have hoped it had been completed, like a decade ago. > is based on the same fundamental misunderstanding that one somehow can extend IPv4 in a way somehow, but remain compatible with IPv4-only clients I'm not a network eng…
I have yet to read any IPv6 alternative that can theoretically work or is not just IPv6 in disguise (or something that is implemented in IPv6 in a slightly similar fashion). It may sound like a great plan as long as one doesn't look too closely at the details. IPv4 has fixed 32-bit addresses and one cannot cram more than 32-bit of information into a fixed 32-bit field. But one would need to do that for it to be forwa…
I think what annoys people is everything else that changed with it, if DHCP (I know), subnets, NAT if you wanted it, etc. was all just the same, if the model was the same the IPs were just longer now, that they wouldn't really complain.
I'm not even sure it would be necessary to put it in unaddressable v4 block, since it would be too long and a different version anyway. Obviously people have thought about this a lot more than me so know a lot more about it, I'm not naïve about that.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
> Yikes, couldn't disagree with that more. There are a ton of things that ipv6 designers could have done to make the transition much easier. This is a (now quite old) blog post that is my "go to" that explains a lot of the problems with ipv6: https://cr.yp.to/djbdns/ipv6mess.html It's a dumb post, to the point I think it must be a deliberate troll. The parts that are possible don't solve any relevant problems ("my ne…
> It's a dumb post, to the point I think it must be a deliberate troll. Lol, I'd like to send this to DJ Bernstein, let him know that random Internet commenter thinks that one of his most well-known essays "must be a deliberate troll." Glad HN doesn't support emojis, not enough facepalms it the world for this one.
For example his Qmail was conceptually a very well designed email server but the email standards kept evolving and I'm fairly sure at some point he just said "Qmail is feature complete and secure, no more new features and patches". Like, what? It's networked software, that's not how any of this works.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
> Yikes, couldn't disagree with that more. There are a ton of things that ipv6 designers could have done to make the transition much easier. This is a (now quite old) blog post that is my "go to" that explains a lot of the problems with ipv6: https://cr.yp.to/djbdns/ipv6mess.html It's a dumb post, to the point I think it must be a deliberate troll. The parts that are possible don't solve any relevant problems ("my ne…
> It's a dumb post, to the point I think it must be a deliberate troll. Lol, I'd like to send this to DJ Bernstein, let him know that random Internet commenter thinks that one of his most well-known essays "must be a deliberate troll." Glad HN doesn't support emojis, not enough facepalms it the world for this one.