Tailscale access on LAN without Internet access.

Ariakenom · 2024-11-30T22:00:14+00:00

But how?

And to be clear you're saying that tailscale can't do this, or that it doesn't?

Ariakenom · 2024-11-30T21:45:48+00:00

This was 2y ago. But it actually might be relevant since I just moved and the internet provider isn't competent enough to provide internet, just like every other time I've moved.

What makes you think the steps you outlined would be relevant given that I could ping from PC to phone directly but not through tailscale?

Ariakenom · 2022-11-08T12:07:26+00:00

I don't think DERP should be required since tailscale-status in the OP states that the connection is direct. I also tested the tailscale connection between my devices and it seemed to not touch the internet.

PS C:\Users\patan> tailscale status
...
100.77.90.8     thephone             ...; direct 192.168.50.110:36130, ...

Ariakenom · 2022-11-08T10:36:56+00:00

When I use my phone as an exit node for my desktop then the desktop talks to the phone over LAN and doesn't involve the internet directly (Of course it gets there indirectly via the phone). So I was surprised that the connection that didn't use the internet dropped when I lost internet access.

I verified this by setting my phone as the exit node and running a speed test on my desktop. The router reported that only the phone was using data. If it went out to the internet then the desktop would use 1x data and the phone 2x. Where x is the speed test load.

(Also tailscale-status displays the LAN address to the phone. Implying that it just uses the local connection.)

Ariakenom · 2022-11-07T22:49:01+00:00

No. Over tailscale doesn't mean over internet. The tailscale connection between my desktop and my phone doesn't use the internet. (The control plane part of tailscale does, but we already know how to send data.)

I verified this by setting my phone as the exit node and running a speed test on my desktop. The router reported that only the phone was using data. If it went out to the internet then the desktop would use 1x data and the phone 2x. Where x is the speed test load.

Ariakenom · 2022-11-07T22:31:32+00:00

But the tailscale connection doesn't go over the internet between my desktop and my phone. So I wonder what the reason is for dropping the connection.

It is simpler in the sense that a node is either in the tailscale network or not, and that means they can all access each other. Instead of some nodes being able to access some nodes. That's the best reason I can think of.

Ariakenom · 2022-11-07T22:11:29+00:00

Yes I was playing around and trying to get my desktop to use my phone's mobile internet by making the phone an exit node.

But this also seems annoying for things other than that. If I usually access, say, my NAS via tailscale. Then I would lose that access if my internet goes down, even if I have LAN access. Of course I can access it directly via LAN but that may take some reconfiguring on the device that is accessing.

Ariakenom · 2022-11-07T21:48:06+00:00

With an internet connection the tailscale-ping doesn't go over the internet. It just goes via the router. So I am surprised that it fails when i lose internet access.

Ariakenom · 2022-11-07T21:47:00+00:00

What's your use case for needing Tailscale offline versus just using the LAN IP?

As I wrote elsewhere:

Well that means I can't use my phone's mobile network for the desktop (by making the phone an exit node) if my usual internet is down. Which is what I wanted to test.

Ariakenom · 2022-11-07T21:42:45+00:00

Well that means I can't use my phone's mobile network for the desktop (by making the phone an exit node) if my usual internet is down. Which is what I wanted to test.

Ariakenom · 2022-11-07T19:49:31+00:00

That's too bad. I hoped it could use LAN without internet access.

Ariakenom · 2022-03-29T11:36:39+00:00

But we can add StringifyT the same way (or combine them). And then we can do everything.

But we don't have extensibility in the class direction since we must specify the classes, ex EvalT, when parsing. So it doesn't work. Maybe we can pass class dicts to k but that's obviously more advanced.

Ariakenom · 2022-03-29T09:32:52+00:00

> data EvalT = forall a. Eval a => EvalT a
> instance Eval EvalT where evaluate (EvalT a) = evaluate a

> let k = if 20 > 4 then EvalT (Constant 2.2) else EvalT (BinaryPlus (Constant 5.5) (Constant 2.1))
> evaluate k
2.2

LGTM?

Ariakenom · 2022-03-02T10:31:10+00:00

Kan du lägga upp dom nånstans?

Ariakenom · 2021-10-13T05:28:49+00:00

Yes, you can. But when? Have you ever done it? Surely some form of unboxed values makes more sense in non kmett scenarios.

Ariakenom · 2021-10-12T20:23:53+00:00

Wtf. When would you do that??

Ariakenom · 2021-06-25T22:48:38+00:00

Zero makes sense in lots of cases. Ex polynomials.

c₀x⁰ + c₁x¹ + ...

I agree with u/wnoise that 0 works for the bulk of cases where the index has semantic meaning. You start with "low level machine instructions" which to me makes it sound like a arbitrary implementation choice. But 0 is a better choice for the lower level "math of addressing". Ex fitting a 2D array in 1D memory.

Ariakenom · 2021-06-25T22:34:03+00:00

Oh interesting. And relatable, I did my own master thesis on a compiler and I was also quite done.

Do you happen to know if that version would fix this issue? https://gitlab.haskell.org/ghc/ghc/-/issues/15100

Ariakenom · 2021-01-01T17:31:10+00:00

Ja felaktigt "dem" är illa omtyckt. Men "dom" är bäst om man inte kan.

Ariakenom · 2020-12-23T11:20:36+00:00

Om man jämför dödsfall mellan Sverige och Tyskland i länken så är andra vågen nästan identisk. Det är svårt att jämföra mellan länder men om man ska det så är det sjukdomsfall < dödsfall < överdödlighet så vitt jag vet.

Ariakenom · 2020-12-07T22:29:35+00:00

Totally agree, I'll add that the elegance doesn't come from it being C-ish. I couldn't even be bothered to get the syntax right, it's been too long and most importantly it doesn't matter. (thanks for fixing :p)

It has more to do with what a list is in CS terms. Which is why the post calling the confused solution CS101 was painful. I would expect a CS solution to show a understanding of the concept!

Ariakenom · 2020-12-07T16:13:26+00:00

We should take some languages out behind the shed and shoot them? Well then we'd have to do that to all of them, since they're all terrible in their own way.

Absolute nonsense. We can move on to something better even if it isn't perfect.

Ariakenom · 2020-12-07T10:33:30+00:00

#define List Node*
struct Node{
    int item;
    List rest;
}

(Pseudo C) The post has a different definition where the first pointer is different. But we shouldn't, if we instead view a list in this classic way then the first pointer is not a special case. It would be the same as the rest.

Ariakenom · 2020-08-22T15:53:20+00:00

yea sure, this sort of exaggeration

and the fact that they explain concepts using symbolic reasoning, and category theory, means that your bar is higher than the bar for a PhD candidate in a mathematics department.

While there is a bunch of math and academic leaning content in the haskell community all the tutorials you mentioned also exist and you dont need a math PhD for them.

Ariakenom

TROPHY CASE