That said, their are ISPs that do native v6, so you can just switch to one of them (I have a native v6 connection from EntaNet).
I probably could, but I really like my current 200/200/80/80 FTTH connection for ~29EUR/month.
Well now, that rather depends on what software you're talking about. Web browsers generally don't support it. SIP UAs almost universally do, as do XMPP UAs. MTAs tend to rely on MX records instead, but they are simply an ungenericised record along the same lines.
So, there probably would be no way to make ftp://example.com and http://example.com/ be on different machines without people having problems accessing one of those two services (since both can be accessed by a web browser). Yep, much more usable than NAT.
Also, as anyone involved in security will tell you, obscurity provides very limited security - if your security relies on obscuring your network structure then you're screwed already; and if it doesn't then there is no problem with revealing it.
However, multi layer security is better than single layer. One of those layers is hiding the network structure. If someone does break in somehow, it will be harder for them to access the information because they will have to find out what's connected to what first, instead of knowing not only that, but all of the IP addresses of all of the machines in the network.
Just like there is no reason for the power company to know what and how many devices I am using (as long as the total power consumption is less that the maximum capacity of the cable), I think that there is no reason for anyone outside my network to know what and how many devices are in it, as long as the packets coming out of it are like they expect. Really, why should someone outside the network know that the HTTP and FTP services run on different machines?
With NAT I can: 1. Load balance two ISPs without their cooperation (or knowledge that I am doing it). 1a. Set up a backup connection so that it is used when the primary is down. No need to reconfigure anything, well, other than the router NATing to a different IP and sending the packets out of a different interface. Without NAT, all computers in the network would have to have 3 different IPs (ISP1, ISP2, LAN) and a way of detecting when the connection fails, so they know which source IP to put in the packets. With NAT, they send the packets as usual and it's the router's job to select a working connection. 2. Have transparent proxies (well, at least for HTTP). Packet going for example.com:90 gets DNATed to proxy:8080. 3. Confuse a server so that two computers appear as one - for logging, access control or whatever. 4. Move services between machines as I wish and only have to update the router, which, unlike DNS (with or without the SRV RRs, which are not supported my a lot of software), is instantaneous.
Most of them are probably v6-only by choice, in an attempt to persuade people to have v6 working.
It would therefore seem sensible for you to get a dual stack system working *before* you find a service that isn't available on IPv4, which is sure to happen sooner or later.
Yes, but I'll wait for my ISP to offer v6.
This is what SRV RRs are for.
1. Is it actually supported by software that most people use be default? 2. If so, we can use NAT and nonstandard ports to extend the IPv4 effective address count.
Anyway, NAT can be used for more than just that, though I have already said that and got responses etc before. I also dislike having my network structure be visible for anyone who can see the IPs. As it is now, I use a single IP but I may have 1 or many computers arranged in one or many subnets and so on. Speaking of subnets - IIRC something about IPv6 not supporting subnets smaller than/64 - that's really nice - if I want to actually have two subnets I would have to beg my ISP to give me another/64 instead of slipping the/64 that I have.
Simple - you will make a virus that runs on Android or iPad. apple probably won't accept it to their store, but it will still run on my jailbroken iPad (I assume Android OS is not locked, so I do not need to jailbreak it).
Now, of course, Android being a version of Linux, the virus will most likely not be able to break the OS for other users (that is, nobody), it will only be able to read/write my own files (some of them may contain personal info) and so on, all in all, much better than breaking the system.
Or, maybe the fact that a malicious program will be able to access my files is much worse so that I then stop caring if it also broke the OS too.
OTOH, with windows (desktop (x86) Windows) I will be able to run all apps (including the ones I wrote myself) that I already have on my main Windows (x86) PC and my Windows (x86) laptop. I will also be able to connect to my home VPN (Windows based). Why should the tablet be different?
This is why, if I ever buy a tablet, I'll look for one that is x86 and runs Windows. Then, the tablet will be a slower, but smaller and lighter replacement for my laptop, just like my laptop is slower, but much lighter than my desktop PC. I still can do almost everything (except playing new games of course) on my laptop and, in turn, I could do almost everything on the tablet without the need to look for compatible programs that run on the whatever OS that the tablet has (for example, let's say that I wrote a program myself in Delphi - how am I going to make it run on an iPad or an Android tablet?).
Where I live, the maximum speed limit is 130km/h and people are still speeding. Most of them only a little bit, but some would pass me almost as if I was standing (while actually going at 120-130). And no matter how narrow a road is, everyone is going at speed limit+10km/h.
However, lower speed limits, combined with big fines for speeding (and frequent police or traffic cameras) do have an effect on those who think that they can control the car perfectly while going at 200km/h but actually can't do it. They (some of them, anyway) will decide that while they can drive fast no worse than any F1 driver the stupid speed limits would mean that they would have to pay a lot for the privilege, so they might play it safe (for their wallet), drive only 10km/h above the limit and waste their high speed driving skills.
This does reduce the number of accidents because otherwise those people would have gone faster and possible cause an accident.
Higher speeds usually mean that the car is harder to control and the driver has to react more quickly.
Also, as you said, speed increases the severity of accidents when they do happen. So, if a wheel detaches from a car (could happen at any speed, but more likely at higher speeds), the accident will be worse if the speed is higher.
I would add that the people who risk fined to arriving at the destination a few minutes early (going at 140km/h instead of 130km/h you will arrive at the destination that is 300km away about 10 minutes earlier - 2h8m vs 2h18m but you may be stopped and fined, not much though, unless you were going at 141) will do so no matter the speed limit. If you increased the limit to 150, they would drive at 160 if their cars managed to reach that speed.
Don't forget drunk drivers too - a drunk driver has impaired reaction times, so at higher speeds an accident is more likely and if it happens it will be more severe.
And if they raise the limit, everyone would still be speeding.
This was one of the justifications why the default speed limit in cities (in my country) was reduced from 60km/h to 50km/h. "When it was 60, everybody is going at 70, so now everybody will be going at 60".
I noticed that those who like to drive fast (but do not want to pay a big fine) usually go at 10km/h over the limit no matter the limit (since for whatever reason fines depend on absolute difference, not a relative one) because the fines for 10km/h over are not very big.
but nuclear power, when you have an accident, it stays with you for centuries. that's the big problem with nuclear power
That's part of it, but the other part is the casualties. Nuclear stays for a long time but, say, a big dam failure can kill more people, even if the land soon becomes inhabitable again. Coal releases a lot of harmful materials (and radiation) in normal operation.
We need a way of generating a lot of power, and nuclear is the best of what we currently have. Though maybe we should build the power plants away from big cities and (more importantly) from areas where earthquakes and tsunamis happen.
If not nuclear, then what do you suggest we use to generate 4.6GW of power (the power capacity of Fukushima Daiichi)?
I was replying to the port that said that it was impossible to sell a/28 and a way of encapsulation was needed if you wanted to sell it, comparing to the phone networks where at first phone numbers were tied to the location and later you could sell them.
As for the devices - for some, NAT helps and we will ave to move to IPv6 eventually. For now, I can reach most websites with IPv4 and I still have my external IP and see no need to have more than one external IP. And NAT is not available for IPv6 yet, so no fun tricks too - I (for example) would have to have two services running on the same machine if I wanted both of them accessible trough the same host name and want logs to show the IPs of the clients.
As phone networks changed from Strowger switches to digital and then to packet switching, the end lines remained the same - I can use an old phone with the modern network.
So, do whatever you want inside the network, as long as that network delivers an IPv4 packet to the intended destination so that I can still use an old device with your new network.
In my city, if you live in a flat (as opposed to individual house) , you can get 3-4 different ISPs (the telephone company, the cable TV company, some other ISPs) not counting wireless (cell phone or WiMAX).
If I was capped at 250GB/month (~0.7mbps) I would probably intentionally limit my sped to something like 1-2mbps and set it to maximum at the end of the month if I still had some of that cap left.
Thankfully I have an unlimited connection - speed fluctuates, but i can leave it at full all the time. There is too much competition for the wired ISPs to impose caps.
OK, let's stop using nuclear power and replace all nuclear power plants with coal power plants. After all, coal does not release any materials that could be bad for health. Even if it does, they are much less (taking the amounts into consideration) bad for health.
When I play a game, I like to be able to see and recognize things easily. For example, compare Half Life (the first one) to Wolfenstein 3D. Wolf3D gives me a headache after a bit of playing, probably because the graphics are too pixelated it is difficult to see, even though the game is quite simple and it is possible to recognize things (mainly because there are only a few types of objects and they look quite differently), or maybe it is because the areas look almost the same. OTOH, Half Life does not run on a 286.
While Minecraft is a good game, I like it better with the HD texture pack. If someone made a game that was like Minecraft but with high quality graphics (textures and models), I'd probably switch to that game.
Of course, good graphics do not mean that the game will be good, but if the game has good graphics I am willing to tolerate a worse game, while if the game does not have good graphics, it should be a very good game in other areas for me to play it.
Also, good 2D is better than crappy 3D (since good 2D means I can see things better than with crappy 3D), so if you want your game to run on a 286, you probably should stick to 2D.
It's the same as with movies. 1080p does not make a bad movie good, but it makes a good movie better. Also, VCD or lower resolution (VHS is OK, if the actual quality is close to the best that VHS offers) makes me want to not watch the movie (even though it's good), since it becomes difficult to see and recognize things, so my requirements for the very low resolution movie are much higher than for a movie in 720p or more.
Well, that was available for a subset of people in the Matrix. For example, during the first movie, most of the people were in the Matrix and nobody offered the pill to them, so they would not be able to tell if they were in the Matrix, therefore just because nobody offered the pill (yet) is no evidence against the Matrix. Also, the pill is probably some kind of a exploit and the color is just for identification, so just because you swallowed a red piece of plastic and nothing happened does not mean that you are in reality.
Also, how do they know that the Matrix is only one layer and the "real world" is actually real? If I was designing such a system I would put a few layers of it so that anyone who managed to escape one of them would not attempt to escape the other (believing to be in reality), but if some do manage to escape more than one layer, they will never be sure that they are in reality.
How do you ever disprove that we are in the Matrix? Or that the Earth is full of invisible (and otherwise undetectable) aliens who are monitoring us? Or better, how do you disprove another religion? That is, how come your religion is right and every other religion is wrong?
Well, when I wanted to build a new PC, I wanted to continue to use my 15kRPM hard drive, that meant having SCSI. As SCSI over PCI 32bit/33MHz is a bit slow, I wanted a board with an integrated SCSI or at least a PCI-X slot so I could use my adapter at full speed. Also, the board had to have at least 2 PCI slots for my sound card and TV tuner. The board also had to have a PCIe x16 slot for a gaming video card. Adding a requirement for an integrated VGA would mean that the board would be too expensive or non-existant.
In time I'll accumulate a collection of PCIe video cards, just like with ISA, PCI and AGP cards so it will no longer be a problem until the next video card slot.
My next PC will most likely have to have dual port SCSI too, so I can continue to use my 15kRPM hard drives, CD drive over SCSI (so DRM systems make less fuss about virtual CDs) and MO drive. But now there are PCIe adapters.
I am younger and did not have a 486 PC with VLB. But didn't 486 and Socket7 use the same memory (72pin SIMM just in different quantities) at least initially? I have a few motherboards that can use DIMM, but they also have SIMM slots.
You could have kept the hard drive/CD drive from you old PC. New motherboards still have IDE connectors (then again, maybe current boards no longer do, last time I bought a motherboard was a few years ago).
But yea, that sort of "upgrade" pretty much means that you can just build a new PC and use your old one as a server or give it to someone who does not have a PC.
Slashdot Mirror
That said, their are ISPs that do native v6, so you can just switch to one of them (I have a native v6 connection from EntaNet).
I probably could, but I really like my current 200/200/80/80 FTTH connection for ~29EUR/month.
Well now, that rather depends on what software you're talking about. Web browsers generally don't support it. SIP UAs almost universally do, as do XMPP UAs. MTAs tend to rely on MX records instead, but they are simply an ungenericised record along the same lines.
So, there probably would be no way to make ftp://example.com and http://example.com/ be on different machines without people having problems accessing one of those two services (since both can be accessed by a web browser).
Yep, much more usable than NAT.
Also, as anyone involved in security will tell you, obscurity provides very limited security - if your security relies on obscuring your network structure then you're screwed already; and if it doesn't then there is no problem with revealing it.
However, multi layer security is better than single layer. One of those layers is hiding the network structure. If someone does break in somehow, it will be harder for them to access the information because they will have to find out what's connected to what first, instead of knowing not only that, but all of the IP addresses of all of the machines in the network.
Just like there is no reason for the power company to know what and how many devices I am using (as long as the total power consumption is less that the maximum capacity of the cable), I think that there is no reason for anyone outside my network to know what and how many devices are in it, as long as the packets coming out of it are like they expect. Really, why should someone outside the network know that the HTTP and FTP services run on different machines?
With NAT I can:
1. Load balance two ISPs without their cooperation (or knowledge that I am doing it).
1a. Set up a backup connection so that it is used when the primary is down. No need to reconfigure anything, well, other than the router NATing to a different IP and sending the packets out of a different interface. Without NAT, all computers in the network would have to have 3 different IPs (ISP1, ISP2, LAN) and a way of detecting when the connection fails, so they know which source IP to put in the packets. With NAT, they send the packets as usual and it's the router's job to select a working connection.
2. Have transparent proxies (well, at least for HTTP). Packet going for example.com:90 gets DNATed to proxy:8080.
3. Confuse a server so that two computers appear as one - for logging, access control or whatever.
4. Move services between machines as I wish and only have to update the router, which, unlike DNS (with or without the SRV RRs, which are not supported my a lot of software), is instantaneous.
there are already v6-only sites
Most of them are probably v6-only by choice, in an attempt to persuade people to have v6 working.
It would therefore seem sensible for you to get a dual stack system working *before* you find a service that isn't available on IPv4, which is sure to happen sooner or later.
Yes, but I'll wait for my ISP to offer v6.
This is what SRV RRs are for.
1. Is it actually supported by software that most people use be default?
2. If so, we can use NAT and nonstandard ports to extend the IPv4 effective address count.
Anyway, NAT can be used for more than just that, though I have already said that and got responses etc before. I also dislike having my network structure be visible for anyone who can see the IPs. As it is now, I use a single IP but I may have 1 or many computers arranged in one or many subnets and so on. Speaking of subnets - IIRC something about IPv6 not supporting subnets smaller than /64 - that's really nice - if I want to actually have two subnets I would have to beg my ISP to give me another /64 instead of slipping the /64 that I have.
Simple - you will make a virus that runs on Android or iPad. apple probably won't accept it to their store, but it will still run on my jailbroken iPad (I assume Android OS is not locked, so I do not need to jailbreak it).
Now, of course, Android being a version of Linux, the virus will most likely not be able to break the OS for other users (that is, nobody), it will only be able to read/write my own files (some of them may contain personal info) and so on, all in all, much better than breaking the system.
Or, maybe the fact that a malicious program will be able to access my files is much worse so that I then stop caring if it also broke the OS too.
OTOH, with windows (desktop (x86) Windows) I will be able to run all apps (including the ones I wrote myself) that I already have on my main Windows (x86) PC and my Windows (x86) laptop. I will also be able to connect to my home VPN (Windows based). Why should the tablet be different?
This is why, if I ever buy a tablet, I'll look for one that is x86 and runs Windows. Then, the tablet will be a slower, but smaller and lighter replacement for my laptop, just like my laptop is slower, but much lighter than my desktop PC. I still can do almost everything (except playing new games of course) on my laptop and, in turn, I could do almost everything on the tablet without the need to look for compatible programs that run on the whatever OS that the tablet has (for example, let's say that I wrote a program myself in Delphi - how am I going to make it run on an iPad or an Android tablet?).
Where I live, the maximum speed limit is 130km/h and people are still speeding. Most of them only a little bit, but some would pass me almost as if I was standing (while actually going at 120-130). And no matter how narrow a road is, everyone is going at speed limit+10km/h.
That's interesting. What are the speed limits there? 160km/h 180?
However, lower speed limits, combined with big fines for speeding (and frequent police or traffic cameras) do have an effect on those who think that they can control the car perfectly while going at 200km/h but actually can't do it. They (some of them, anyway) will decide that while they can drive fast no worse than any F1 driver the stupid speed limits would mean that they would have to pay a lot for the privilege, so they might play it safe (for their wallet), drive only 10km/h above the limit and waste their high speed driving skills.
This does reduce the number of accidents because otherwise those people would have gone faster and possible cause an accident.
Higher speeds usually mean that the car is harder to control and the driver has to react more quickly.
Also, as you said, speed increases the severity of accidents when they do happen. So, if a wheel detaches from a car (could happen at any speed, but more likely at higher speeds), the accident will be worse if the speed is higher.
I would add that the people who risk fined to arriving at the destination a few minutes early (going at 140km/h instead of 130km/h you will arrive at the destination that is 300km away about 10 minutes earlier - 2h8m vs 2h18m but you may be stopped and fined, not much though, unless you were going at 141) will do so no matter the speed limit. If you increased the limit to 150, they would drive at 160 if their cars managed to reach that speed.
Don't forget drunk drivers too - a drunk driver has impaired reaction times, so at higher speeds an accident is more likely and if it happens it will be more severe.
And if they raise the limit, everyone would still be speeding.
This was one of the justifications why the default speed limit in cities (in my country) was reduced from 60km/h to 50km/h. "When it was 60, everybody is going at 70, so now everybody will be going at 60".
I noticed that those who like to drive fast (but do not want to pay a big fine) usually go at 10km/h over the limit no matter the limit (since for whatever reason fines depend on absolute difference, not a relative one) because the fines for 10km/h over are not very big.
but nuclear power, when you have an accident, it stays with you for centuries. that's the big problem with nuclear power
That's part of it, but the other part is the casualties. Nuclear stays for a long time but, say, a big dam failure can kill more people, even if the land soon becomes inhabitable again. Coal releases a lot of harmful materials (and radiation) in normal operation.
We need a way of generating a lot of power, and nuclear is the best of what we currently have. Though maybe we should build the power plants away from big cities and (more importantly) from areas where earthquakes and tsunamis happen.
If not nuclear, then what do you suggest we use to generate 4.6GW of power (the power capacity of Fukushima Daiichi)?
I was replying to the port that said that it was impossible to sell a /28 and a way of encapsulation was needed if you wanted to sell it, comparing to the phone networks where at first phone numbers were tied to the location and later you could sell them.
As for the devices - for some, NAT helps and we will ave to move to IPv6 eventually. For now, I can reach most websites with IPv4 and I still have my external IP and see no need to have more than one external IP. And NAT is not available for IPv6 yet, so no fun tricks too - I (for example) would have to have two services running on the same machine if I wanted both of them accessible trough the same host name and want logs to show the IPs of the clients.
As phone networks changed from Strowger switches to digital and then to packet switching, the end lines remained the same - I can use an old phone with the modern network.
So, do whatever you want inside the network, as long as that network delivers an IPv4 packet to the intended destination so that I can still use an old device with your new network.
SP3 still has IE6. You can update IE to a newer version but you can also keep IE6.
In my city, if you live in a flat (as opposed to individual house) , you can get 3-4 different ISPs (the telephone company, the cable TV company, some other ISPs) not counting wireless (cell phone or WiMAX).
SSD vs mechanical media:
I prefer mechanical media because a problem with the reading device (for example, overvoltage) has less chance to affect the data.
If I was capped at 250GB/month (~0.7mbps) I would probably intentionally limit my sped to something like 1-2mbps and set it to maximum at the end of the month if I still had some of that cap left.
Thankfully I have an unlimited connection - speed fluctuates, but i can leave it at full all the time. There is too much competition for the wired ISPs to impose caps.
OK, let's stop using nuclear power and replace all nuclear power plants with coal power plants. After all, coal does not release any materials that could be bad for health. Even if it does, they are much less (taking the amounts into consideration) bad for health.
Graphics mean NOTHING
They mean something, well at least to me.
When I play a game, I like to be able to see and recognize things easily. For example, compare Half Life (the first one) to Wolfenstein 3D. Wolf3D gives me a headache after a bit of playing, probably because the graphics are too pixelated it is difficult to see, even though the game is quite simple and it is possible to recognize things (mainly because there are only a few types of objects and they look quite differently), or maybe it is because the areas look almost the same. OTOH, Half Life does not run on a 286.
While Minecraft is a good game, I like it better with the HD texture pack. If someone made a game that was like Minecraft but with high quality graphics (textures and models), I'd probably switch to that game.
Of course, good graphics do not mean that the game will be good, but if the game has good graphics I am willing to tolerate a worse game, while if the game does not have good graphics, it should be a very good game in other areas for me to play it.
Also, good 2D is better than crappy 3D (since good 2D means I can see things better than with crappy 3D), so if you want your game to run on a 286, you probably should stick to 2D.
It's the same as with movies. 1080p does not make a bad movie good, but it makes a good movie better. Also, VCD or lower resolution (VHS is OK, if the actual quality is close to the best that VHS offers) makes me want to not watch the movie (even though it's good), since it becomes difficult to see and recognize things, so my requirements for the very low resolution movie are much higher than for a movie in 720p or more.
Well, that was available for a subset of people in the Matrix. For example, during the first movie, most of the people were in the Matrix and nobody offered the pill to them, so they would not be able to tell if they were in the Matrix, therefore just because nobody offered the pill (yet) is no evidence against the Matrix. Also, the pill is probably some kind of a exploit and the color is just for identification, so just because you swallowed a red piece of plastic and nothing happened does not mean that you are in reality.
Also, how do they know that the Matrix is only one layer and the "real world" is actually real? If I was designing such a system I would put a few layers of it so that anyone who managed to escape one of them would not attempt to escape the other (believing to be in reality), but if some do manage to escape more than one layer, they will never be sure that they are in reality.
How do you ever disprove that we are in the Matrix? Or that the Earth is full of invisible (and otherwise undetectable) aliens who are monitoring us?
Or better, how do you disprove another religion? That is, how come your religion is right and every other religion is wrong?
Disproving things is difficult.
Well, when I wanted to build a new PC, I wanted to continue to use my 15kRPM hard drive, that meant having SCSI. As SCSI over PCI 32bit/33MHz is a bit slow, I wanted a board with an integrated SCSI or at least a PCI-X slot so I could use my adapter at full speed. Also, the board had to have at least 2 PCI slots for my sound card and TV tuner. The board also had to have a PCIe x16 slot for a gaming video card. Adding a requirement for an integrated VGA would mean that the board would be too expensive or non-existant.
In time I'll accumulate a collection of PCIe video cards, just like with ISA, PCI and AGP cards so it will no longer be a problem until the next video card slot.
My next PC will most likely have to have dual port SCSI too, so I can continue to use my 15kRPM hard drives, CD drive over SCSI (so DRM systems make less fuss about virtual CDs) and MO drive. But now there are PCIe adapters.
So, which forum allows me to embed Javascript in my posts and then run it?
I am younger and did not have a 486 PC with VLB.
But didn't 486 and Socket7 use the same memory (72pin SIMM just in different quantities) at least initially? I have a few motherboards that can use DIMM, but they also have SIMM slots.
You could have kept the hard drive/CD drive from you old PC. New motherboards still have IDE connectors (then again, maybe current boards no longer do, last time I bought a motherboard was a few years ago).
But yea, that sort of "upgrade" pretty much means that you can just build a new PC and use your old one as a server or give it to someone who does not have a PC.
Tyan Thunder K8WE
2xPCIe x16
1xPCI
2xPCI-X 100MHz
1xPCI-X 133MHz