Re: Wait a min...
Well yes. Local loop unbundling wasn't such a bad idea after all, was it?
679 posts • joined 11 Jan 2008
Well yes. Local loop unbundling wasn't such a bad idea after all, was it?
That's the point, isn't it? He can't be extradited for the copyright offence, but he could be extradited on a fraud charge. That's a win for Kim since the original extradition request, warrent, police raid, etc were for a non-extraditable offence. So it seems he will now claim that the whole process started by that extradition request is null and void. The alleged fraud would need a whole new process.
The angle is that Brexit --wait for it-- hasn't happened yet. Most of these seem to be jobs that can easily be shed when the economy collapses a few years from now.
Good luck - you will relive the last 20 years of IPv6 history
Routers aren't the problem, they have supported v6 for years. Dual stack ISP backbones are common; tunnel providers will soon be only a memory. You're worrying about problems that were solved ten years ago. The gap today is hosting providers and the like - theregister.co.uk is a good bad example. https://nir.regmedia.co.uk is IPv6, BTW.
For the N'th time, that simply doesn't work.
IPv4 has no provision for any form whatever of address extension. Adding an extra byte, or an extra bit for that matter, will fail on every single IPv4-only computer, router, etc. There is, mathematically, logically, no way round a new version that is necessarily incompatible on the wire. That's why the *only physically possible solution* is a new packet format. That has a lot of implications, most of which are independent of the design details.
IPv6 just works, these days, as far as domestic, cell phone, or small offices are concerned. Yes, there's work to do for larger enterprise networks, hosting providers, and ISPs. No way out of that, but it's part of the price of doing business these days, or should be.
Don't overlook that IBM has gone hard into hot desking in those open plan offices. The last place I worked for them, if everbody showed up, there wouldn't have been nearly enough chairs. Remote working was sold to the management as a money-saver. I wonder how many new tables and chairs, and square metres, they will have to pay for? Or maybe "shoulder-to-shoulder" and "standing room only" are meant to be taken literally?
(Paris, because I feel sure the Hilton chain will benefit from this somehow.)
...the logic that it is possible for the .africa name to be redelegated at a future date. While that is theoretically possible, it demonstrates almost no understanding of how the internet registry market functions.No, I think it demonstrates that the judge doesn't care; if redelegation occurs, it would hand all the registry operator's customers and future revenue to the new one. That would be some future judge's problem.
There is literally nothing that the addition of the .africa name to the internet will do to expand Africans' access to the internet addresses; it is simply a word.Exactly right, which is why all the new Latin script TLDs created by ICANN are sheer stupidity except, of course, for the shysters who skim off the registration fees.
"British bureaucracy isn't going to make their lives any better than the European bureaucracy."
How dare you, sir? British Bureaucracy is the Best in the World. Better than anyone else at insisting on irrelevant details, duplicate information, pointless hoops to be jumped through repeatedly and - when on-line - at swallowing all input yet producing no output, except possibly a notice that your application for whatever it is will be dealt with in not more than seven hundred and twenty three working days. How could things possibly not be better than under the jackbooted heels of the EU?
"Anonymization is hard, which is why need more researches finding potential holes in the process."
Indeed, and there are many fine researchers outside Australia who will be glad to have a bit less competition now. It 's a hilarious example of jobsworths who, only 70 years after the invention of general purpose programmable information processors, and 50 years after the invention of packet switching networks, still don't understand the first thing about them.
When's the impeachment hearing starting?
A bit of phish that I looked at recently traced back to hosts and companies in Samoa, Ukraine and Brazil, although the email address it forged was supposedly in the UK. It's pretty much to be expected that bad actors operate internationally, because it's the best way to obfuscate their true location and make investigation or prosecution difficult. And that's been the case for 30 years to my personal knowledge.
Yes, one batch of know-nothings replaced by another. There was a time when IBM SVPs actually understood technology, not just MBA stuff. Funnily enough, the company had better products and services then, and they had customers.
... the Bill of Rights, etc. etc. Good. But it doesn't change the outcome unless suffcient Tory and Labour MPs defy the whip and block the Article 50 bill in a few days. Hundreds of them know that this is the best thing for the country and that many Leave voters have changed their minds, so the referendum result is now meaningless. The question is whether those MPs have the moral courage required to vote Nay. You can help, by contacting your MP urgently with the message: stop Article 50 at any cost.
Industrial strategy?? Is Harold Wilson back in Downing St? Is the Cabinet taking advice from Jeremy Corbyn? It's never worked in the past and it will never work now.
It's worth mentioning that the logs of carrier-grade NATs must be of immense interest to the three-letter agencies.
"There are even entire countries (with far more than 2^16 clients active at any time) sharing a single IP address."
Yes. And I wonder how many "RESTful" transactions per minute fail half way through as a result. This is a prime example of applying enough thrust and obtaining a flying pig.
Indeed, modern home routers run DHCP(v4), dual-stack DNS and dual-stack routing in one box. And very likely VoIP as well. Enterprise routers usually run a DHCP relay however, with the actual DHCP server centralised. But having each router announce the prefixes it supports is an elegant plus point for IPv6; there really isn't a down side for the operations people, since they have to configure the prefix into the router anyway, it might as well generate its own announcements.
You're right. ISPs should routinely hand out at least a /56. SOHO networks of the future will need that.
"they didn't care at all about compatibility"
I assure you we did. A long co-existence period with no time limit was absolutely fundamental.
"If v6 clients could get v6 information in their v4 DHCP request the whole thing would have been a non-issue. "
Yes, the lack of feature-equivalence between DHCP and DHCPv6 is an issue. I think it will come in time, despite the zealots. The main gap is a small one: getting the next hop router from DHCPv6.
No, getting v6 information via DHCP/v4 is a *bad* idea operationally. v6 operations should not depend on correct v4 operation, nor vice versa. That way you are inviting complex failure modes, and all kinds of difficulty ten years down the road when IPv4 becomes the legacy.
NAT isn't fundamental, except for getting round the shortage of IPv4 addresses. Firewalls are fundamental, and IPv6 has them.
" why the Internet Engineering Task Force decided not to make this next-gen networking protocol backward-compatible?"
For the zillionth time: because it's mathematically and logically impossible to do so.
IPv4 has fixed-length addresses and no provision in the packet for extensibility of the address. So, by definition, an IPv4 protocol stack cannot understand packets with bigger addresses. So, by simple logic, a computer can speak IP4, or IPv6, or both at the same time, but each packet on the wire is one or the other*.
The way we achieve the appearance of backward compatibility is the so called dual stack model - but sadly that means the computer/router/whatever needs separate code paths for the two protocols. For example, DHCP runs over IPv4 and DHCPv6 runs over IPv6 - two different animals. Hence the reported problem, plus the fact that Google in their infinite wisdom have refused to put a DHCPv6 client in Android.
*By the way, apparently this was known before IPv6 was even designed: RFC1671.
It can happen because the people who designed IPv6 fragmentation are human beings and let this one slip by.
People overstate things sometimes. An Internet without packet translation will work better than one with packet translation. And (as I noted a minute ago) IPv6 is designed for situations where IPv4 does badly: stand-alone networks, IoT, and tens of millions of multihomed enterprises.
@Roland: "much earnest discussion about using IP directly over the physical media and thus replacing IEEE 802"
Not that I remember, at least not in the proposals that actually became IPv6. On the contrary, the layer 2/layer 3 separation was considered very fundamental. MPLS came later, but not to eliminate layer 2, rather to fix the mess created by ATM. TRILL came much later.
It's true that the IETF chose not to use the OSI datagram protocol (CLNP) but there was very little dispute about the layered model, which the OSI people got from TCP/IP (and CYCLADES) in the first place.
IPv4 was designed for a small research network; actually it's a miracle it's been stretched to several billion nodes (and all credit to the designers, of course).
IPv6 was designed for *many* billion nodes - it wasn't called IoT then but we knew it was coming. It was also designed for self-configuring small stand-alone networks (the model was Applenet) - hence stateless address autoconfiguration, and link-local addresses for when there is no router and no Internet connection. And by the way, you aren't limited to 2 addresses per interface - you could for example have link-local (for bootstrapping), ULA (unique local address) for intranet use, and a couple of globally reachable addresses from different ISPs. Yes, it's more complicated - because the world is a lot more complicated (thanks to Moore's law) than it was in 1977 when the basics of IPv4 were laid down. Your grandchildren will be grateful.
There's insufficient data to know whether it adds up. If the price of kit in £ went up 15% and the price of cloud storage in £ went up 5%, it might be as the article says. Who knows? (Where's the icon for head-scratching?)
Until the May dictatorship decides to outlaw Tunnelbear, that is.
Sadly, using Tunnelbear from outside the UK condemns one to be geolocated in Slough, the last place I'd choose personally (with apologies to proud residents of Slough).
Of course I dislike this law, but you ask "How can spying on innocent people be legal?" Easily, if the police are trying to solve a crime, and don't yet know who's innocent and who's guilty - that's why people are called "suspects" and are legally inncocent until proved guilty. The problem comes with blanket authority to spy on people who aren't even suspects, especially when that authority isn't just given to police but to, apparently, any number of jobsworths and their outsourced service providers.
"the great Thomas Watson would not have been in favor of that form of pre-judging either."
Both TJ Watson and TJ Watson Jr were strong Democrats and everybody knew it. Jr for example became infamous in 1959 for advocating higher taxes, and he was close to JFK and on good terms with LBJ. I don't think Republican IBMers in those days would have flaunted it.
> working with the elected leader in 1930s Germany
I think you'll find that was a slippery-slope issue. Supplying card sorting equipment to the German government probably felt fine before 1933, just a little bit dubious until 1938, maybe questionable in 1939... but until the end of 1941 the USA was neutral... and knowledge of the Final Solution was very sketchy until 1944.
Not trying to excuse them, but neither was there ever a moment of deciding to help evil.
Anyway - it looks like the employees want to do better this time.
"Any business owner or manager wants to hire the best person for the job, regardless of sex or color of skin."
Maybe, but the actual experimental evidence is that they don't do that; in fact they don't even call people with "black" names for interview. The bias may be unintentional, it may even be strongly denied, but since it's also unconscious, it happens. You suffer from it, I suffer from it, because it's very deeply embedded in most humans.
When "shareholder value" becomes the management's religion, it tends to trump (pun very much intended) company ethics. That's actually the main difference between TJ Watson Jr's IBM and Ginni's IBM.
If I sell an electric toothbrush with defective insulation, I am presumably liable under pretty much any country's consumer protection laws. We don't expect the owner of an electric toothbrush to fix the insulation - we expect the maker or seller to recall it and replace it.
Why should it be different if I sell an Internet toothbrush with defective security? It's actually easier, since no physical recall is needed.
DVRs update themselves - why not toothbrushes?
We don't win by digging in against huge odds and having a bit of a go.Indeed not. That isn't how we survived in 1940, either: we ran out of cash and were saved by being lent the stuff we needed (like food and guns) by the USA. And we only got out of economic dependency on the USA in the 1970s... after we joined the Common Market. I don't think the USA will lend us the stuff we need (like food and iPhones) when we run out of cash in 2020.
Paris, because she's crying for us.
I don't know who this "Dr" Stephen Jones is, or whether he is a medical man or just another PhD, but I do know that he seems to have drunk a very strong cocktail made for him by Farage, Boris, Gove, Davis and the other Brexit liars. What is staggering is that someone who seems to be educated and able to argue coherently can simply ignore the facts that emerge every day to show that (a) the negative economic predictions of the Remain campaign are being reinforced daily [this thread is a good example of that] and (b) that the fantasies about how the UK can remain a successful trading nation by abandoning most of our trading deals overnight are just that - fantasies. It's disgusting that our MPs are so obsessed by party politics that they can't see their clear duty to stop the madness now, which a simple vote of no confidence could do in a moment.
And still we find fantasies in this forum like "Hopefully the pre-existing freedom of movement for UK citizens should still apply after any form of Brexit." No, eat your cake and it turns to s**t.
Those of us who actually tried to make X.25/X.75 work in the 1980s are still very glad that it went away. IP had the advantage of actually working when you plugged it together, and the related feature that anybody could send anything to anybody. It's that feature that allowed the invention of the Web, and that allows DDoS today. It comes with the territory. (The old PTT monopolies knew this very well - it was their main reason for pushing the virtual circuit model, in order to preserve their monopolies and their revenue streams. X.75 was invented precisely to interconnect national monopolies across frontiers.)
There may, for some ISPs, be a strong incentive not to implement BCP38 filtering: they have paying customers who want to send packets with forged source addresses. So the ISP is not generating malicious traffic, but is paid to condone it by doing nothing. Being paid to do nothing is a powerful incentive.
There's also a technical excuse: if you have multi-homed customers, BCP38 might block legitimate traffic. RFC8028 is supposed to help with that for the IPv6 case, but isn't the whole story, and it's hard to fix for IPv4.
> The list struck me as old-fashioned
Exactly right. Exactly the wrong thing to do. Excluding Google and Facebook is no bad thing; they are dinosaurs in training. But where are the smart, dynamic and iconoclastic thinkers? Seems like Trump wants yes-people not fellow iconoclasts.
Big fan of IPv6 here, but what's wrong with IPv4 IPsec Transport Mode? And what about the attendant issues of IPsec and IKEv2 library problems?
Under the unusual make-up of the EPO, it has legal immunity from the laws of the countries in which it operatesThat is absolutely standard for international treaty organisations, which by their nature should not be subject to national laws. Most of them, however, set a standard of 'not worse than the host state law' when it comes to health & safety, employee rights, etc. It doesn't sound as though the EPO is doing that.
On the other hand, Philip Cordery is a socialist so he would be expected to take the employees' side. He's also half-British (not that that counts for much in Europe these days) and represents non-resident citizens. In fact he represents some of the EPO employees directly, since his constituency is "les Français du Benelux".
Much as the discussions on the by-election and the EU as a whole are fascinating, this line in the story struck me:
> Unless the UK waives the two year exit negotiation period...
I've actually read Article 50 and there is no provision for that; there is only provision for extending it if all the other members agree. So all EU laws and regulations in place at the end of the 2 years would apply, if I understand May's idea of a Great Repeal Bill.
But it probably won't happen, if Parliament comes to its senses and blocks Article 50 indefinitely.
No, downvoted for ignorance and confused thinking. It just isn't worth the bother to debunk such rubbish in detail.
> time to upgrade to Linux anyway
Good luck with trying to dual boot Windows 10 and Linux. I tried for a day to get round UEFI problems (on an HP junker, not a LeNovo) and concluded that whatever Win10 had done to the UEFI meant that none of the recipes and tricks for dual boot installation worked: all I could ever boot was bloody Win10, event though Linux Mint had installed perfectly.
Solution: blew away Windows completely on that machine. Worked like a charm.
Sloppy reporting. It isn't CERN that's griping, it's the CERN Staff Association, the nearest thing to a trade union for CERN staff members. They are given space in the weekly bulletin, but CERN itself would never ever say such things about officials of another international organisation.
5 Eyes is bad from the surveillance POV but in terms of ludicrous interpretations of surveillance results, I fear that Trumpland may turn out to be the worst of the five for the next 4 (or, God help us, 8) years. But I do agree that *outside* 5 Eyes would be better. Switzerland comes to mind.
Thank you. I thought it was shite but IANAL. I certainly didn't think it was surprising - after all, one of the advantages of European institutions is that we share resources and costs with many other countries, as well as giving ourselves smoother access to the whole market, and strengthening our position vs, for example, the US behemoth.
My goodness, now I think of it, those arguments work for lots of European institutions, not just the UPC. Maybe it would be a good idea to be a member of all of them? I wonder how we can achieve that - it would be worth billions per year to the country. It would get rid of those queues of thousands of lorries tied up in paperwork in Dover and Folkestone, too. Maybe the Prime Minister Mr Heath has an idea how we could take this idea forward.
Anyway it won't last. Once the overseas investors understand that any operation in the UK that they buy will be unable to trade profitably outside the EU, due to tariffs and other barriers, they will only go for targets that have portable assets such as intellectual property and skilled staff eager to emigrate. I guess ARM fits that pattern. Anything that relies on the UK as a trading nation won't be worth buying at any price. (Unless Parliament soon gathers its courage, stops Brexit, and throws the so-called government out.)
whereas on all earlier Windows the last line is
30 goto Windows 10
YANG isn't a protocol. It's a Data Modeling Language. Big difference.