welterde

6 ms·

1.
by welterde 9mo ago
This is already a thing in IPv6 pretty much. You can write applications IPv6-only and support IPv4 via IPv4-mapped addresses (::ffff:1.2.3.4 for the IPv4 1.2.3.4). The host still needs to be dualstacked for that to work though. In case the
2.
by welterde 9mo ago
The problem is that IPv4 has no provisions to be forward-compatible with anything with a larger address space. Thus whatever replacement you can think of will have the same problems as IPv6.
3.
by welterde 1y ago
For applications that were written with X11 in mind it works much much better than that. One example was the controlling a telescope. The computers in the control room were thin clients pretty much and displayed various windows from various
4.
by welterde 2y ago
> For SSH forwarding you could have SSH ask the X server for a new socket for forwarding purposes - so remote clients can't snoop on local clients. SSH pretty much already does this. Per default (using -X) X11 forwarding is in untru
5.
by welterde 2y ago
Some aspects of the client isolation are used by default when doing X11 forwarding via SSH. A remote keylogger will not work for instance.
6.
by welterde 2y ago
IPv6 clients (or in theory any kind of IPv4 successor) can reach IPv4 servers via some kind of translation layer (for example NAT64) - so IPv6 is backwards-compatible with IPv4 in that direction. The inverse direction (IPv4 client to IPv6 s
7.
by welterde 2y ago
Reliability is certainly one aspect where dedicated tracks helps a lot, but is not the only solution (see for example Switzerland). For Germany the issue is the overall too large utilization of the network and the large backlog of required
8.
by welterde 2y ago
That has very little to do with the ICE train itself though, which can do above 320 km/h just fine in regular service (on international connections though, since in Germany the global train speed limit is 300 km/h I believe). Whil
9.
by welterde 2y ago
If I read the datasheet correctly you still need an inductor and some passive components externally. The only thing that is not needed is an external switch mode power supply chip.
10.
by welterde 2y ago
The X11 primary selection buffer is an even better variant of that though. It allows single-shot copy&paste (meaning only one application can grab it) from the password manager to the target application and it tells the password manager
11.
by welterde 2y ago
Nothing preventing you from writing a X11 server in something else either (and people have done so!). But fact is, most wayland compositors right now are either pure C or C++ (and I think the rest uses at least wlroots?). Many X11 window ma
12.
by welterde 2y ago
It is only one old C codebase however (or a couple if one counts the *BSD semi-forks separately) instead of many different fresh c codebases (one per compositor with some shared code between some of them to be fair). I don't buy that t
13.
by welterde 2y ago
X11 does have various ways to restrict access (one of which ssh does use for instance) and some more advanced security extensions. But as far as I can tell there has never been that much motivation to widely deploy any of it.
14.
by welterde 2y ago
Maybe the problem was with your specific setup or applications? Because at the observatory it worked flawlessly. Between the local data reduction machine (beefy server) and the desktop computer in my office the same. And I used that setup f
15.
by welterde 2y ago
That's perfectly possible with X11 to attach via VNC to an existing session. But what X11 over (local) network does way better than either RDP or VNC is to run individual applications remotely while having them seamlessly integrate wit
16.
by welterde 2y ago
That is not true. There are extensions to the X11 server that can resolve many of the security issues, but almost no one cares enough to use them. If you are doing X11 forwarding via SSH it defaults to a more restricted configuration that o
17.
by welterde 2y ago
Not sure having shared memory and socket open to N fresh and under active feature development c codebases is that much more conducive to security? (N since while many compositors use wlroots there is still enough rope to hang yourself). To
18.
by welterde 2y ago
There seems to be XACE/XSELinux, which seemingly exists in the mainline Xorg distro now. I wonder how the experience is with that? In practice I think it doesn't see any adoption, since most people don't run with SELinux or e
19.
by welterde 2y ago
Only for IPv4 destinations however, where there is no other way. For IPv6 destinations it's just native connectivity with no NAT.
20.
by welterde 2y ago
What do you mean it has never been tried? That's how a lot of mobile providers and home internet providers operate today. My provider in Germany was already using DS-Lite (native IPv6 and IPv4 is tunneled over IPv6 to CGNAT gateway) mo
21.
by welterde 2y ago
That 22k limit is only for the small business rule, which allows the choice of not collecting VAT on sales (but on the flip side cannot deduct it on purchases). Up to a yearly revenue of 0.6M one can also use a simplified profit calculation
22.
by welterde 2y ago
There are 2M sole proprietorships in Germany and around 0.4M partnership type companies (Personengesellschaft; GbR, etc.) and aside from the aspect of trying to appear like a large corporation while actually being a small start-up, they are
23.
by welterde 2y ago
The relevant part is that they moved from another city to Munich, which means that certain company taxes would be paid in Munich instead of Unterschleißheim (the city where the HQ was located previously). This means a increase of tax revenu
24.
by welterde 3y ago
Because it gets repeated on every thread on IPv6. IPv6 is perfectly backwards-compatible with IPv4 (you can run an IPv6-only host and still access hosts from the IPv4-internet). The issue however is that IPv4 is not forwards compatible. IPv
25.
by welterde 3y ago
Windows actually used to have 6to4 setup by default in the past. There is no need to manually configure anything since the 6to4 have a globally unique anycast address and the ipv6 space is just derived from the own IP address. Of course NAT
26.
by welterde 3y ago
I have read all of it and I don't agree with you. But lets roll with your interpretation. Adding the address to the server is the easiest part of the whole process. Upgrading the software is probably the biggest hurdle with people just
27.
by welterde 3y ago
I understood djbs article differently then you. What else could he have meant with "In other words: The current IPv6 specifications don't allow public IPv6 addresses to send packets to public IPv4 addresses. They also don't a
28.
by welterde 3y ago
I don't think that plan is feasible at all. The incentives for vendors to implement it are just not there, since the customer is not actually going to use the expanded address-space feature at all for at least a decade, so why bother i
29.
by welterde 3y ago
No it was not. My claim was that the network address part (the first 64-bit) can be separated into <network>:<site-id>:<vlan>.. etc.
30.
by welterde 3y ago
You more or less just reinvented a more complicated variant of 6to4/6rd, which is one of the IPv6 transition technologies.

More ›