switch to another ISP, it isn't as if ISPs are thin on the ground.
I have a few options, but AFAIK a lot of Americans do not (I do not live in the US). Even for me, since I live in an individual house it would be expensive o have another ISP get its fiber cable to me.
You _can_ allocate networks smaller than a/64, but you can't use SLAAC on such networks. That means you're stuck manually configuring devices or using DHCPv6
That's good to know, though it would mean that if I use Android devices I will have to type in the long v6 IPs even though IPv4 has shorter IPs AND DHCP works with all devices.
Though since I would still need NAT (for keeping the IPs when switching to a backup ISP), I guess that is not such a big problem and AFAIK NAT exists for v6 (though not one-to-many as I understand, so I would need a proxy server to make all outgoing connections look like they are from a single device).
Takes longer to type, though maybe they will start making keyboards with hex numpads.
Also, to me, remembering a number and letter combination is more difficult than just number combination (I guess it's related to the numpad).
Besides, I never had to type external and internal IP at once. It's either the external IP (one, so not difficult to remember) or the internal IP (can be compressed as "the 192 subnet" 1 2)
So, the designers of IPv6 could not conceive that somebody could have less than 2^64 devices and still want to put them in separate networks? Well, I guess IPv4 was divided using classes in the past, but CIDR is great.
So now my ISP will have a say in how many internal networks I have? And this is supposed to be better than IPV4 with NAT?
NAT creates layers of indirection, and NAT makes machines not directly addressable.
Good. What if I want to have machines that are not directly addressable. Also, I may want to redirect the packets to various machines based on where it came from (internal network or outside).
With NAT, you'll end up needing to fumble with your router and open / redirect ports anyway, just to be sure that everything works as it should.
Which I will need to do with IPv6 just the same because I do not want to allow incoming connections by default.
So, how do you change ISPs but keep your IPs? For example in a failover situation.
Currently the company I work for has its own AS and a/23 of IPv4, that can get announced trough one or both ISPs that we use (in case one goes down). If one ISP goes down the traffic goes trough another quite quickly. How do you do this with IPv6?
Well, that results in paying more for the fuel, right? Most likely not as much as a single trip to the dealer with a new car though. My car, for example, has been modified to run on LPG - it uses slightly more of it, but since the LPG costs less than half of what gasoline costs, the car approaches much newer cars in terms of Euros/100km.
If you're willing to put up with all that because you're just such a gearhead, why not just build your own car from the ground up?
I'm not that good with mechanics (can't even weld) , however, I want to keep a single car for a very long time. It is easier to do so with an old car that is easier to repair without going to the "authorized service" - there's a lot of things I can repair myself and any competent mechanic an repair the rest.
The authorized services overcharge by orders of magnitude. Once a "check engine" light came on in my mother's Nissan Primera P12, he dealer told her that the timing chain has to be replaced, but then it would be cheaper to replace the whole engine (~1600EUR). A mechanic (that I sometimes go to) plugged in his PC and said that it's just the crankshaft position sensor that has failed and if the timing chain was loose then the car would rattle like a bag of nails. Cost of repair - 160EUR for the sensor, 16EUR for replacement.
In my experience using a touch screen device while not looking at it is pretty much impossible since I cannot feel a touch "button" like a real button.
Also, I have a lot of tapes already, so I might as well use them...
The sound quality of MD is fine for using in a car or outside. A CD walkman is bigger, which means I would have to carry more (or leave it in the car, but that could attract thieves). CDs themselves are bigger too.
Yes, cassette tapes. I have a lot of them and see no reason not to use them. Copying the music to a digital format would take a lot of time and not really provide any benefits. On the other hand, recording from a record (I have a lot of those too, I also borrow and copy records sometimes) to tape is more convenient than recording to a PC, though MD is pretty convenient too. However, recording a MD I need to manually mark the tracks, while recording to a tape I just need to listen or any problems (I have a couple of three head decks, so I can monitor while recording). This is because a tape "remembers" where it was stopped, but none of my MD recorders can do that if the MD is removed.
Yes, you can still buy blank tapes, most of them are low quality, but some companies still make higher quality cassettes. Also you can buy NOS tapes on ebay and such.
If you really do not think you will ever use your NOS Type 4 tapes, I suggest you try selling them. Some tapes (especially type 4) can go for quite a lot of money.
I do not use an iphone or similar, especially in a car.
To me, a tape or a MD has one big advantage - it can easily be ejected and a new one can be put in. When I am driving, I want to look at the road, not a display on the player. I can easily choose a tape (I can hold it between me and the windshield and read the label without looking away from the road) and put it in the player (without looking).
The tape (or MD) holds enough music to not need replacing very often, but also not too much as to get boring (most of the time, I do not want to listen to 3 albums of the same artist in a row, no matter how much I like the artist).
I also have quite a few tapes already, so tapes are convenient or me (more convenient than recording them to a computer, then creating the mp3 files would be). Tapes are also convenient when recording from an analog source (like a record - I have a lot of them too). When I want to listen to music that I downloaded, then MDs are more convenient (since I can transfer the music from a PC quickly).
The sound quality of FM radio is not that great, especially due to the very high compression. A record, tape or a CD has much higher quality.
However, I like to listen to radio at work - the quality is good enough for background and I do not have to constantly change records or tapes. Also, the compression helps to keep the volume down. I also do not have to constantly decide what to play now - just tune to a station I like and leave it be. Also, when driving short distances, I listen to radio - I grab some tapes or MDs when I am driving further.
My car is German (Mercedes W123). It has much more than 160000km (the exact number is unknown as the speedometer was replaced a couple of times and nobody bothered to set the new odometer to the same number). While the car has problems with rust now (33 years after manufacture), you also have to know that it spent 19 years in my country where road salt is used in winter. A mechanic told me that he has seen 10 year old cars that more rusty than mine. Engine overhaul has not been done (yet) but the engine runs fine and does not burn oil. Even if it has been used for the past 10 years primarily with LPG (a fuel that burns a bit differently than gasoline).
I wonder if a 2015 car will be in as good shape in year 2048. It looks to me that modern cars are much more complex and less robust that they won't last as long.
For somewhat higher fuel consumption and body rust I get the ability to repair most things on my car myself, no need to call a mechanic and wait a few days until he can service my car (for most stuff anyway). Also, since the car is less complex than modern cars, there are less parts to fail.
None of which was available before (and even now it's not that good). On the other hand, you do not need any special equipment to fill a gas tank - a bucket and a funnel is enough. Also, if I run out of gas a few km away from a station, I can go there, buy a small can of gas, bring it back to my car, pour it into the tank and then drive to the station to fill the rest of the tank. Good luck doing that with electricity.
Yes, however, only now electric cars can compete with internal combustion ones on range and power because of battery technology. Take a Tesla car and replace its batteries with lead-acid ones - you will either get less capacity (for the same waight) or more weight (for the same capacity). Now replace the modern motor controller with a rheostat and you will get much lower efficiency.
That car would not be able to compete with internal combustion cars because of the gasoline's much giher energy density. Even if a gasline engine is inefficient, you can have a bigger gas tank. The batteries in a Tesla weigh 540kg and provide 85kWh of energy. Or about the energy that is contained in about 6.6kg of gasoline (about 9.5L). So, for the same weight gasoline has 80 times more energy (even more if you compare it to lead acid batteries). Modern electric cars compensate for that by having much higher efficiency, but that was not the case 150 years ago.
As a last ditch effort audio engineers have been heating up tape in an oven, to backup the audio to disk. This destroys the tape.
That is necessary only for some tapes. Other tapes, even older (I have one from 1951, the tape itself is paper, not acetate or polyester) work fine. The problem is that some companies used an unstable binder to glue the oxide (and the back coating) to the tape. That binder over time absorbs moisture and becomes sticky goo. It takes about 10 years for this to happen, that's why the problem was not noticed earlier. Still, after the problem was notices, the manufacturers changed the binder to another chemical that remains stable.
Baking dries out the binder so the tape works properly for some time, then becomes sticky again.
3: Tapes can be WORM. This way, stuff that needs to be tamper resistant is protected.
I wonder how really tamper resistant are those WORM tapes. I mean, unlike a CD-R or PROM chip where recording of data irreversibly changes the medium, WORM tape is still magnetic tape, right? Is it only the drive firmware that protects it from being overwritten or something more? If someone has access to a modified tape drive, can they change the data on the WORM tape and leave no evidence?
I use ZFS on debian at home and the company I work for uses ZFS on Linux for backups and storage arrays (like for video surveillance). It works nice.
My home storage server array is smaller, however, a tape autochanger is on my wish list (I have a couple of tape drives and I used tapes more in the past, but I want automatic backups and that means I won't be there to swap tapes).
I like the fact that tapes can sit on a shelf for years with no problems and buying another server for backups would be more expensive and less convenient (unless I started swapping drives like tapes). Also, if a hacker wants to destroy the data that is on my tapes, he will have to come to my home to do that.
But if the enterprise drive costs twice as much as a RED or some other lower grade drive, wouldn't I be better off buying two cheaper drives and putting them in a mirror?
Its a failure to read a single bit, which durring a parity rebuild makes a drive as good as useless.
No, it doesn't for two reasons: 1) Nobody should use RAID5 (or equivalent) with drives over 2TB, RAID6 has two drives for parity. Greatly reducing the risk of failure. 2) A single read error during a RAID5 rebuild results in a single bad stripe in the array (if the controller works properly). Sure, you lost some data, but no all of it and you can pull the damaged files from backups (or maybe you get lucky and the bad stripe is in empty space).
Isn't it possible to comply with GPL and still have the restriction on what can run on the hardware?
For example: sign the binaries and put a pre-bootloader (something small you wrote yourself (no need to open the source) put on protected memory of the CPU (no way to read or modify it)) that check the signature and either starts the bootloader (open source) or not.
Or how about a modified version of gcc (not distributed, so no need to provide the source) that inserts the key when compiling, so the source just says "{_PUT_KEY_HERE_}"?
Actually, no. The reason being that anybody drives bad when they are drunk and there are no drunk-licenses that would allow you to drive drunk. So, everybody is equal.
However, repairing a car is not rocket science. A lot of people can do it and in the USSR it was expected the owner of the car to do some work himself (unlike now when there are drivers who do not know how to change a wheel or even check the oil level). While at this moment I do not know how to repair the brakes of my car, I believe I could learn if I needed to, just like I learned how to take a carburetor apart, clean it, lube it (where needed) and put it back together.
Requiring a license to work on brakes (any other parts of the car you want to add to the list?) means that all mechanics would have to get the license, paying the government money (resulting in higher prices), but the license would not automatically mean that the mechanic is any good (he could have bribed somebody). It would also prevent people who know from fixing their own brakes without breaking the law and yet, people who wanted to do it would be able to do it (it's not like it would be possible to easily find out if an unlicensed person worked on the brakes).
So, requiring a brake license would be useless and would serve only to increase the prices. Also, reinforcing the back of my car would help in the cases where the car with bad brakes was not repaired by the owner (or anyone at all, the brakes failed and the owner didn't care).
Slashdot Mirror
switch to another ISP, it isn't as if ISPs are thin on the ground.
I have a few options, but AFAIK a lot of Americans do not (I do not live in the US). Even for me, since I live in an individual house it would be expensive o have another ISP get its fiber cable to me.
You _can_ allocate networks smaller than a /64, but you can't use SLAAC on such networks. That means you're stuck manually configuring devices or using DHCPv6
That's good to know, though it would mean that if I use Android devices I will have to type in the long v6 IPs even though IPv4 has shorter IPs AND DHCP works with all devices.
Though since I would still need NAT (for keeping the IPs when switching to a backup ISP), I guess that is not such a big problem and AFAIK NAT exists for v6 (though not one-to-many as I understand, so I would need a proxy server to make all outgoing connections look like they are from a single device).
I usually use DROP instead of REJECT. Makes port scanners take longer to scan.
Takes longer to type, though maybe they will start making keyboards with hex numpads.
Also, to me, remembering a number and letter combination is more difficult than just number combination (I guess it's related to the numpad).
Besides, I never had to type external and internal IP at once. It's either the external IP (one, so not difficult to remember) or the internal IP (can be compressed as "the 192 subnet" 1 2)
So, the designers of IPv6 could not conceive that somebody could have less than 2^64 devices and still want to put them in separate networks? Well, I guess IPv4 was divided using classes in the past, but CIDR is great.
So now my ISP will have a say in how many internal networks I have? And this is supposed to be better than IPV4 with NAT?
NAT creates layers of indirection, and NAT makes machines not directly addressable.
Good. What if I want to have machines that are not directly addressable. Also, I may want to redirect the packets to various machines based on where it came from (internal network or outside).
With NAT, you'll end up needing to fumble with your router and open / redirect ports anyway, just to be sure that everything works as it should.
Which I will need to do with IPv6 just the same because I do not want to allow incoming connections by default.
So, how do you change ISPs but keep your IPs? For example in a failover situation.
Currently the company I work for has its own AS and a /23 of IPv4, that can get announced trough one or both ISPs that we use (in case one goes down). If one ISP goes down the traffic goes trough another quite quickly. How do you do this with IPv6?
Terrible mileage
Well, that results in paying more for the fuel, right? Most likely not as much as a single trip to the dealer with a new car though.
My car, for example, has been modified to run on LPG - it uses slightly more of it, but since the LPG costs less than half of what gasoline costs, the car approaches much newer cars in terms of Euros/100km.
If you're willing to put up with all that because you're just such a gearhead, why not just build your own car from the ground up?
I'm not that good with mechanics (can't even weld) , however, I want to keep a single car for a very long time. It is easier to do so with an old car that is easier to repair without going to the "authorized service" - there's a lot of things I can repair myself and any competent mechanic an repair the rest.
The authorized services overcharge by orders of magnitude. Once a "check engine" light came on in my mother's Nissan Primera P12, he dealer told her that the timing chain has to be replaced, but then it would be cheaper to replace the whole engine (~1600EUR). A mechanic (that I sometimes go to) plugged in his PC and said that it's just the crankshaft position sensor that has failed and if the timing chain was loose then the car would rattle like a bag of nails. Cost of repair - 160EUR for the sensor, 16EUR for replacement.
I have a 1982 Meredes W123. Great car. Sometimes needs some patching of rust, but the engine works great (and it has been modified to run on LPG).
In my experience using a touch screen device while not looking at it is pretty much impossible since I cannot feel a touch "button" like a real button.
Also, I have a lot of tapes already, so I might as well use them...
The sound quality of MD is fine for using in a car or outside. A CD walkman is bigger, which means I would have to carry more (or leave it in the car, but that could attract thieves). CDs themselves are bigger too.
A CD walkman takes up much more space than a MD walkman which is one of the reasons I bought a MD walkman instead of a CD one.
Yes, cassette tapes. I have a lot of them and see no reason not to use them. Copying the music to a digital format would take a lot of time and not really provide any benefits. On the other hand, recording from a record (I have a lot of those too, I also borrow and copy records sometimes) to tape is more convenient than recording to a PC, though MD is pretty convenient too. However, recording a MD I need to manually mark the tracks, while recording to a tape I just need to listen or any problems (I have a couple of three head decks, so I can monitor while recording). This is because a tape "remembers" where it was stopped, but none of my MD recorders can do that if the MD is removed.
Yes, you can still buy blank tapes, most of them are low quality, but some companies still make higher quality cassettes. Also you can buy NOS tapes on ebay and such.
If you really do not think you will ever use your NOS Type 4 tapes, I suggest you try selling them. Some tapes (especially type 4) can go for quite a lot of money.
I do not use an iphone or similar, especially in a car.
To me, a tape or a MD has one big advantage - it can easily be ejected and a new one can be put in. When I am driving, I want to look at the road, not a display on the player. I can easily choose a tape (I can hold it between me and the windshield and read the label without looking away from the road) and put it in the player (without looking).
The tape (or MD) holds enough music to not need replacing very often, but also not too much as to get boring (most of the time, I do not want to listen to 3 albums of the same artist in a row, no matter how much I like the artist).
I also have quite a few tapes already, so tapes are convenient or me (more convenient than recording them to a computer, then creating the mp3 files would be). Tapes are also convenient when recording from an analog source (like a record - I have a lot of them too). When I want to listen to music that I downloaded, then MDs are more convenient (since I can transfer the music from a PC quickly).
The sound quality of FM radio is not that great, especially due to the very high compression. A record, tape or a CD has much higher quality.
However, I like to listen to radio at work - the quality is good enough for background and I do not have to constantly change records or tapes. Also, the compression helps to keep the volume down. I also do not have to constantly decide what to play now - just tune to a station I like and leave it be. Also, when driving short distances, I listen to radio - I grab some tapes or MDs when I am driving further.
My car is German (Mercedes W123). It has much more than 160000km (the exact number is unknown as the speedometer was replaced a couple of times and nobody bothered to set the new odometer to the same number). While the car has problems with rust now (33 years after manufacture), you also have to know that it spent 19 years in my country where road salt is used in winter. A mechanic told me that he has seen 10 year old cars that more rusty than mine. Engine overhaul has not been done (yet) but the engine runs fine and does not burn oil. Even if it has been used for the past 10 years primarily with LPG (a fuel that burns a bit differently than gasoline).
I wonder if a 2015 car will be in as good shape in year 2048. It looks to me that modern cars are much more complex and less robust that they won't last as long.
For somewhat higher fuel consumption and body rust I get the ability to repair most things on my car myself, no need to call a mechanic and wait a few days until he can service my car (for most stuff anyway). Also, since the car is less complex than modern cars, there are less parts to fail.
Yea. My car has no computers at all, and I like it. They knew how to make good cars in 1982...
None of which was available before (and even now it's not that good). On the other hand, you do not need any special equipment to fill a gas tank - a bucket and a funnel is enough. Also, if I run out of gas a few km away from a station, I can go there, buy a small can of gas, bring it back to my car, pour it into the tank and then drive to the station to fill the rest of the tank. Good luck doing that with electricity.
Yes, however, only now electric cars can compete with internal combustion ones on range and power because of battery technology. Take a Tesla car and replace its batteries with lead-acid ones - you will either get less capacity (for the same waight) or more weight (for the same capacity). Now replace the modern motor controller with a rheostat and you will get much lower efficiency.
That car would not be able to compete with internal combustion cars because of the gasoline's much giher energy density. Even if a gasline engine is inefficient, you can have a bigger gas tank. The batteries in a Tesla weigh 540kg and provide 85kWh of energy. Or about the energy that is contained in about 6.6kg of gasoline (about 9.5L). So, for the same weight gasoline has 80 times more energy (even more if you compare it to lead acid batteries). Modern electric cars compensate for that by having much higher efficiency, but that was not the case 150 years ago.
As a last ditch effort audio engineers have been heating up tape in an oven, to backup the audio to disk. This destroys the tape.
That is necessary only for some tapes. Other tapes, even older (I have one from 1951, the tape itself is paper, not acetate or polyester) work fine. The problem is that some companies used an unstable binder to glue the oxide (and the back coating) to the tape. That binder over time absorbs moisture and becomes sticky goo. It takes about 10 years for this to happen, that's why the problem was not noticed earlier. Still, after the problem was notices, the manufacturers changed the binder to another chemical that remains stable.
Baking dries out the binder so the tape works properly for some time, then becomes sticky again.
3: Tapes can be WORM. This way, stuff that needs to be tamper resistant is protected.
I wonder how really tamper resistant are those WORM tapes. I mean, unlike a CD-R or PROM chip where recording of data irreversibly changes the medium, WORM tape is still magnetic tape, right? Is it only the drive firmware that protects it from being overwritten or something more? If someone has access to a modified tape drive, can they change the data on the WORM tape and leave no evidence?
I use ZFS on debian at home and the company I work for uses ZFS on Linux for backups and storage arrays (like for video surveillance). It works nice.
My home storage server array is smaller, however, a tape autochanger is on my wish list (I have a couple of tape drives and I used tapes more in the past, but I want automatic backups and that means I won't be there to swap tapes).
I like the fact that tapes can sit on a shelf for years with no problems and buying another server for backups would be more expensive and less convenient (unless I started swapping drives like tapes). Also, if a hacker wants to destroy the data that is on my tapes, he will have to come to my home to do that.
But if the enterprise drive costs twice as much as a RED or some other lower grade drive, wouldn't I be better off buying two cheaper drives and putting them in a mirror?
Its a failure to read a single bit, which durring a parity rebuild makes a drive as good as useless.
No, it doesn't for two reasons:
1) Nobody should use RAID5 (or equivalent) with drives over 2TB, RAID6 has two drives for parity. Greatly reducing the risk of failure.
2) A single read error during a RAID5 rebuild results in a single bad stripe in the array (if the controller works properly). Sure, you lost some data, but no all of it and you can pull the damaged files from backups (or maybe you get lucky and the bad stripe is in empty space).
Isn't it possible to comply with GPL and still have the restriction on what can run on the hardware?
For example: sign the binaries and put a pre-bootloader (something small you wrote yourself (no need to open the source) put on protected memory of the CPU (no way to read or modify it)) that check the signature and either starts the bootloader (open source) or not.
Or how about a modified version of gcc (not distributed, so no need to provide the source) that inserts the key when compiling, so the source just says "{_PUT_KEY_HERE_}"?
Actually, no. The reason being that anybody drives bad when they are drunk and there are no drunk-licenses that would allow you to drive drunk. So, everybody is equal.
However, repairing a car is not rocket science. A lot of people can do it and in the USSR it was expected the owner of the car to do some work himself (unlike now when there are drivers who do not know how to change a wheel or even check the oil level). While at this moment I do not know how to repair the brakes of my car, I believe I could learn if I needed to, just like I learned how to take a carburetor apart, clean it, lube it (where needed) and put it back together.
Requiring a license to work on brakes (any other parts of the car you want to add to the list?) means that all mechanics would have to get the license, paying the government money (resulting in higher prices), but the license would not automatically mean that the mechanic is any good (he could have bribed somebody). It would also prevent people who know from fixing their own brakes without breaking the law and yet, people who wanted to do it would be able to do it (it's not like it would be possible to easily find out if an unlicensed person worked on the brakes).
So, requiring a brake license would be useless and would serve only to increase the prices. Also, reinforcing the back of my car would help in the cases where the car with bad brakes was not repaired by the owner (or anyone at all, the brakes failed and the owner didn't care).