[-] [email protected] 1 points 2 weeks ago* (last edited 2 weeks ago)

Honestly, these days I have no idea. When I said "wouldn't recommend" that wasn't an assertion to avoid; just a lack of opinion. Most of my recent experience is with Cloud vendors wherein the problem domain is quite different.

I've had experience with most of the big vendors and they've all had quirks etc. that you just have to deal with. Fundamentally it'll come down to a combination of price, support requirements, and internal competence with the kit. (Don't undermine the last item; it's far better if you can fix problems yourself.)

Personally I'd actually argue that most corporates could get by with a GNU/Linux VM (or two) for most of their routing and firewalling and it would absolutely be good enough; functionally you can do the same and more. That's not to say dedicated machines for the task aren't valuable but I'd say it's the exception rather than rule that you need ASICs and the like.

[-] [email protected] 8 points 2 weeks ago* (last edited 2 weeks ago)

I agree. GeoIP was never a good idea, but here we are. Any ASN could be broken up and routed wherever (and changed) but it's still far too prevalent.

[-] [email protected] 2 points 2 weeks ago

I might be misunderstanding. It's definitely possible to have as many IPv4 aliases on an interface as you want with whatever routing preferences you want. Can you clarify?

I agree with your stance on deployment.

[-] [email protected] 10 points 2 weeks ago

Given how large the address space is, it's super easy to segregate out your networks to the nth degree and apply proper firewall rules.

There's no reason your clients can't have public, world routeable IPs as well as security.

Security via obfuscation isn't security. It's a crutch.

[-] [email protected] 8 points 2 weeks ago

This article is biased to selling you more F5 equipment but is a reasonable summary:

https://www.f5.com/resources/white-papers/the-myth-of-network-address-translation-as-security

Long story short is that NAT is eggshell security and you should be relying on actual firewall rules (I wouldn't recommend F5) instead of the implicit but not very good protections of NAT.

[-] [email protected] 1 points 2 weeks ago* (last edited 2 weeks ago)

I can potentially see that scenario if your transit provider is giving you a dynamic prefix but I've never seen that in practice. The address space is so enormous there is no reason to.

Otherwise with either of RADVD or DHCPv6 the local routers should still be able to handle the traffic.

My home internal network (v6, SLAAC) with all publicly routeable addresses doesn't break if I unplug my modem.

[-] [email protected] 23 points 2 weeks ago

Hurricane Electric have a free tunnel broker that is super simple to set up if you really want to get on the bandwagon.

https://tunnelbroker.net/

Though honestly I'd say the benefits of setting it up aren't really worth the trouble unless you're keen.

[-] [email protected] 3 points 2 weeks ago

IMO they shouldn't have allowed ULA as part of the standard. There's no good reason for it.

[-] [email protected] 10 points 2 weeks ago

It also means you no longer need the kludge that is NAT. Full E2E connectivity is really nice -- though I've found some network admins dislike this idea because they're so used to thinking about it differently or (mistakenly) think it adds to their security.

[-] [email protected] 3 points 1 month ago

Not just cyclists, but yes. The males become very protective of their offspring in breeding season.

A lot of aus cyclists go as far as to tie zip ties on their helmets such that the tails stick out like bird spikes when the right time of year hits.

[-] [email protected] 6 points 2 months ago

I feel like I'm the exact opposite of what this article proposed however the entire thing confuses me.

I'm not rich but relatively well off, and, without doubt in the best financial position of my immediate group of friends.

If I happen to be the one that picks up the bill I often have people chasing me to pay me. I actually think that is a problem because they feel obliged to do the right thing, however I'm unmotivated because I don't care about the outcome -- I don't need the money. This is my fault and I feel poorly for it but the reality is that after I've had a nice evening I don't really care. In terms of the debt: honestly I probably wouldn't bother asking.

The very concept of asking someone for 4 bucks seems abhorrent to me. To be clear, I say this personally; I'm not struggling to pay rent/mortgage/utilities/whatever. If you're in a position where those are concerns then please absolutely follow up.

Chasing a $4 debt won't make you rich, ever. Even if you do it all the time. Anyone well off chasing this kind of cash is deluding themselves.

Generally speaking my friends and I operate over a long term fairness principle. "Bob got the last round, I'll get the next"; they won't be even but our assumption is that it'll balance in the long term. That applies to more than just the pub.

[-] [email protected] 4 points 3 months ago

At the cost of leg room.

view more: next ›

eclipse

joined 1 year ago