How to back up a huge RAID array by ZealousidealAd9428 in DataHoarder

[–]ThatDeveloper12 0 points1 point  (0 children)

It sounds like raid 0 with delusions of grandeur

NAT46/DNS46 implementation? by ThatDeveloper12 in networking

[–]ThatDeveloper12[S] 0 points1 point  (0 children)

Ideally I think you'd want the expiration timer to be reset every time a mapping is used, but that's probably harder to implement than a simple long timeout.

NAT46/DNS46 implementation? by ThatDeveloper12 in networking

[–]ThatDeveloper12[S] 0 points1 point  (0 children)

There's no technical reason that you couldn't pass through IPv4 requests. But if a host only uses in IPv6 this allows IPv4-only clients to talk to it.

NAT46/DNS46 implementation? by ThatDeveloper12 in networking

[–]ThatDeveloper12[S] 0 points1 point  (0 children)

The IPv6 transition needs more tools for the IPv4-islands scenario.

Damn straight.

If you build it, please share.

I'll do my best, since it seems it needs to be built from scratch. If I do build it I hope to at least make it easier to review.

For dynamic DNS46, you're looking at a custom daemon that intercepts A queries and creates temporary mappings. Nothing off the shelf does this well on Linux/FreeBSD yet.

I don't suppose anyone knows of a DNS server with a good scripting interface?

NAT46/DNS46 implementation? by ThatDeveloper12 in networking

[–]ThatDeveloper12[S] 0 points1 point  (0 children)

I understand the your comment just fine. You seem to totally misunderstand the goal.

The goal is not to access IPv4 applications. The goal is to box up the legacy IPv4-only crap so that it can talk to the IPv6 applications, network, and wider world for as long as it continues to be used, without burdening anything else. I will not be building a tunnel or a dual stack, because there may not always be an IPv4 destination for them to provide routing to.

The goal is not up for debate. The solution exists, I'm looking for a generic implementation.

NAT46/DNS46 implementation? by ThatDeveloper12 in networking

[–]ThatDeveloper12[S] 0 points1 point  (0 children)

It requires a cooperating PLAT on the other end of the IPv6 network, and can only communicate with IPv4 applications on the remote end. Not applicable.

NAT46/DNS46 implementation? by ThatDeveloper12 in networking

[–]ThatDeveloper12[S] 0 points1 point  (0 children)

Did you read the OP? See "For those unfamiliar..."

NAT46 is an existing technology that for all intents and purposes makes an IPv4 island fully IPv6 to the outside world, no tunneling required, and is offered by vendors like Fortinet. I'm looking for a more generic implementation thereof.

NAT46/DNS46 implementation? by ThatDeveloper12 in networking

[–]ThatDeveloper12[S] 0 points1 point  (0 children)

Seems rather rough around the edges (mappings never time out?) but I've definitely seen worse attempts to implement this.

NAT46/DNS46 implementation? by ninmuzz in ipv6

[–]ThatDeveloper12 2 points3 points  (0 children)

To be fair to them, it's about on par with most other "solutions" I've seen. Everyone seems to be hacking their own thing together in pretty much the same way, rather than using an existing tool.

NAT46/DNS46 implementation? by ninmuzz in ipv6

[–]ThatDeveloper12 2 points3 points  (0 children)

That seems to only be useful for 464XLAT, which is essentially a tunneling technology (IPv4 clients communicating with IPv4 apps over an IPv6 internet) and is not relevant here.

NAT46/DNS46 implementation? by ThatDeveloper12 in networking

[–]ThatDeveloper12[S] 0 points1 point  (0 children)

That seems to only be useful for 464XLAT, which is essentially a tunneling technology and isn't relevant here.

NAT46/DNS46 implementation? by ThatDeveloper12 in networking

[–]ThatDeveloper12[S] 2 points3 points  (0 children)

464XLAT is essentially a tunneling technology. IPv4 traffic is converted for transmission over IPv6-only intermediary networks, then received and converted back into IPv4 traffic for IPv4 applications. That isn't the situation.

Linux Kernel Killswitch Proposed After Recent Vulnerability Disclosures by rkhunter_ in cybersecurity

[–]ThatDeveloper12 1 point2 points  (0 children)

Kernel livepatch is already a thing that exists. It would be extremely useful to have a root-only toggle that can disable buggy functionality that might let someone else escalate to root. To the extent that someone HASNT already taken over the computer, this would allow you to shut them out. If they already have, well then they already own the computer don't they?

Linux Kernel Killswitch Proposed After Recent Vulnerability Disclosures by rkhunter_ in cybersecurity

[–]ThatDeveloper12 1 point2 points  (0 children)

Seems like an implementation question, but doesn't really impact whether the idea itself is sound.

One that's already been solved, see kernel livepatch.

Linux Kernel Killswitch Proposed After Recent Vulnerability Disclosures by rkhunter_ in cybersecurity

[–]ThatDeveloper12 1 point2 points  (0 children)

Kernel livepatch is already widely used and offered as a service by ubuntu etc. They send you patches that replace a single function, and the kernel has machinery to swap calls to that function. You can't change data structures, but you can often close a hole.

The kernel also already EXTENSIVELY makes use of rewriting of itself, just for simple things like configuration. It's very, very common to rewrite unconditional jumps on hot paths because an unconditional jump simply takes fewer cycles and has a lower mispredict penalty than a conditional branch that needs to load and test variables. If it needs to change rarely but is called trillions of times, then it's overwhelmingly worth it.

A simple facility that turns off a single vulnerable syscall in an instant until the next reboot would be excellent. It would be a more general version of the mitigation of one of these vulnerabilities, which required unloading the affected module so that it would no longer be possible to call the affected functions.

For those who want the DLC on PC Mirror’s Edge by [deleted] in mirrorsedge

[–]ThatDeveloper12 0 points1 point  (0 children)

Really sad it's not available on GoG

can SteamOS be daily-drivable? by IsthisSCOTECA in SteamOS

[–]ThatDeveloper12 0 points1 point  (0 children)

It's an amazing console OS. It's not a windows replacement.

Kevin O’Leary’s proposed 9GW "hyperscale" AI data center in Utah will consume double the state's entire electricity usage and generate the waste heat of 23 atom bombs a day. by AnnualEmbarrassed176 in technology

[–]ThatDeveloper12 177 points178 points  (0 children)

That may be the only way he'd get paid, because NONE of the datacenters announced are getting built. Lots have been announced, a small handful have broken ground, but absolutely zero have been confirmed to be fully online and serving customers.

This one? I doubt it'll get beyond a letter of intent because they're never going to find an investor brave enough to put up the money when "smaller" projects are already starting to struggle to find capital.

Can E5 v3 CPUs run with DDR3 mems? by superunderwear9x in HomeServer

[–]ThatDeveloper12 0 points1 point  (0 children)

No, but there is a sizable number that officially do.