Oddbean new post about | logout
▲ ▼
nostrdev | 9 months ago (raw) | root | parent | reply | flag +2 
 I don't think so, unless we're talking about a Nostr oriented VPN, because you would need an IP that can be reached by other clients. 
Or a protocol like Holepunch's Hypercore.
▲ ▼
gsovereignty | 9 months ago (raw) | root | parent | reply | flag +3 
 IPv6 which the advanced countries are now using on their cell networks gives every phone a public IP.
▲ ▼
dimi | 9 months ago (raw) | root | parent | reply | flag +2 
 IPv6 suuuuuuuuuuucks 🖕🖕🖕
▲ ▼
IngwiePhoenix | 9 months ago (raw) | root | parent | reply | flag 
 YYYYYYYYYEEEEEEEEEEEEESSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSS it does it does it does it does omfg it fkn does X.X

127.0.0.1 is home.
::1is cancer e.e

nostr:note1gd7kalkjf6wsqwehhtzzj4lweukf052dt25ru8af3xrf4yjl2r0snxxqnl
▲ ▼
Custom Designed | 9 months ago (raw) | root | parent | reply | flag 
 What problem do you have with it?  What ISP or VPN?
▲ ▼
dimi | 9 months ago (raw) | root | parent | reply | flag +1 
 Administering it 🤢
▲ ▼
Custom Designed | 9 months ago (raw) | root | parent | reply | flag 
 Clearnet IPv6 is a whole lot simpler than IP4 IMO.  Right off the bat, there is no NAT nonsense.   The only annoyance I've had is that too many devices (like network enabled printers) only support /64 subnets.

The IPv6 mesh is even simpler.  The only thing you might configure are some remote peers (LAN peers are automatic).
▲ ▼
Custom Designed | 9 months ago (raw) | root | parent | reply | flag +5 
 Big Tech will never fully support IPv6 - IPv4 forces consumers to use centralized services.

I recommend IPv6 mesh VPNs like Cjdns, Yggdrasil, Pinecone.  Every device gets a permanent cryptographically authenticated IPv6 that is also mobile.   A SIP client can use the raw IP in the contact list - no need for telco, DNS, or TLS.

Where IPv6 is supported, the mobile IPv6 protocol (easily self hosted) lets an IPv6 on your net be anywhere that support clearnet (normie) IPv6.
▲ ▼
Cyber Seagull | 9 months ago (raw) | root | parent | reply | flag 
 Neat, i should look into it more. Probably won't get adopted until painfully late , like https.
▲ ▼
wyhtbbdt | 9 months ago (raw) | root | parent | reply | flag 
 Interesting. I was always under the impression it was the other way around. That linking a public IP directly to a device was potentially a privacy problem and that it was more private to access the Internet through a NAT.
▲ ▼
wyhtbbdt | 9 months ago (raw) | root | parent | reply | flag 
 Ok forget it I didn't read the whole thing
▲ ▼
Custom Designed | 9 months ago (raw) | root | parent | reply | flag +1 
 For clearnet IPv6, that could be an issue.  But just as with IPv4 - use a VPN if you want to obscure your IP.  The Linux IP6 stack will listen on a stable IP, but make outgoing connections on a random one that changes periodically.   So at least that obscures which machine on the LAN is making to connection.
▲ ▼
wyhtbbdt | 9 months ago (raw) | root | parent | reply | flag 
 Got it thanks
▲ ▼
dimi | 9 months ago (raw) | root | parent | reply | flag 
 Don’t use inferior solutions
¯\_(ツ)_/¯