HN2new | past | comments | ask | show | jobs | submit | miyuru's commentslogin

In my view, the problem largely comes from the way the Internet has grown. Many of these concepts developed together with the Internet, and IPv4 was the protocol that evolved with them.

I see many ISPs deploying IPv6 but still following the same design principles they used for IPv4. In reality, IPv6 should be treated as a new protocol with different capabilities and assumptions.

For example, dynamic IP addresses are common with IPv4, but with IPv6 every user should ideally receive a stable /64 prefix, with the ability to request additional prefixes through prefix delegation (PD) if needed.

Another example is bring-your-own IP space. This is practically impossible for normal users with IPv4, but IPv6 makes it much more feasible. However, almost no ISPs offer this. It would be great if ISPs allowed technically inclined users to announce their own address space and move it with them when switching providers.


Dynamic v6 is likely a business and billing issue rather than a technical one. They want to sell you the static IP like they do with v4.

You're correct, but the issue is that static IPv6 isn’t even available as an option—at least in my experience with two ISPs in my country. It may be different in other places.

It's also a privacy issue, in fact it's mandatory in some European countries because otherwise you'd be easily tracked by your address, but it's also mandated you can get a static one if you ask.

In my servers I dont have IPv4 at all, just IPv6 only.

On the plus side, it does not waste CPU cycles used to block unwanted IPv4 traffic.


That helps a bit, true.

But not that much, unfortunately. Those same "cYbeRseCUrITy" orgs also ingest SSL transparency logs, resolve A and AAAA for all the names in the cert, then turn around and start scanning those addresses.

In my experience, it only takes a few hours from getting an SSL certificate to junk traffic to start rolling in, even for IPv6-only servers.

Small percentage of that could be attributed directly, based on "BitSightBot", "CMS-Checker", "Netcraft Web Server Survey", "Cortex-Xpans" and similar keywords in user-agent and referer headers. And purely based on timing, there's a lot more of that stuff where scanners try and blend in.


I dont like the Gemini's personality. It acts like it know it all.

Don't all LLMS act like it know it all?

Gemini, doubles down when a mistake is pointed out.

Other usually find the mistake or check new sources to fix the mistake.


I agree, it's definitely attempting to gaslight us all.

I find I need to explain I know what I'm talking about first before it gives me non-patronising answers.

It definitely advertises Google services and I would say I hate it. But it's just reliably available. Neither Claude nor ChatGPT are responding at all today.


Yes, that’s the reason I am holding back too.

If Apple fully supported the Asahi Linux project, I 'll switch in a heartbeat.


Looks like this is IPv6-only pricing, by the way.

$0.60 will be added for the IPv4.


his app has also Google, Apple logins and for first time I have seen, login with meta button.

https://app.wordsunite.us/


> Look at the map, all ocean travel between East Asia and India/Europe basically has to go past Singapore.

Same can be said about Sri Lanka.


Its less funneled although most straight lines will approach the southern tip of India. Singapore is one of 2 possible ways through Indonesia and its the shorter one.


This is what I experienced as well.

these are some ticks I use now.

1. Write a generic prompts about the project and software versions and keep it in the folder. (I think this getting pushed as SKIILS.md now)

2. In the prompt add instructions to add comments on changes, since our main job is to validate and fix any issues, it makes it easier.

3. Find the best model for the specific workflow. For example, these days I find that Gemini Pro is good for HTML UI stuff, while Claude Sonnet is good for python code. (This is why subagents are getting popluar)


Their CDN has a minimum $1 charge.

I was testing IPv6 origin support (they don’t support it), and they billed me $2 for a couple of test requests. I was testing at the end of the month.

With other providers, this would have cost only a few cents.


That sounds concerning but I wouldn't use other providers anyway which can decide to charge me 5-6 figures due to user error or hacked account.


Not to mention their network is over used/congested as well. there are constant IPv4 issues and IPv6 goes down for several days.

One of my client had dedicated servers in contabo and had to move to OVH because of it.


Guidelines | FAQ | Lists | API | Security | Legal | Apply to YC | Contact

Search: