IPv4 has DHCP. Is there something in the way of applying a similar solution to IPv6?

That in itself is implemented a few different ways, and each one is more useful dependent on your use-case, but these also have very little to do with how your ISP hands out the IP to your modem. When you get an IP handed out to your modem by your ISP, it’s often not being handed out by DHCP but an entirely different technology purpose built for whatever medium (cable/DSL/fiber) is actually going into your modem, so knowing their implementation is still important. Things work a little differently at enterprise-level. Although you’re not wrong that eventually there could be routers with auto-configuration based on which type of IPv6 network the router detects, there just currently aren’t any that I know of.

But if you’re interested in the modern equivalents of DHCP you should look into SLAAC vs. DHCPv6 which are similar but oh so very different.

Thanks for holding us back, champ.

I guess fuck stateful packet inspection as a tool or anything.

NAT isn’t a security measure you know that right?

Further, there’s often not clear documentation from your ISP which of the ways they have it set up!

It’s like the opposite of Dr. House’s “It’s never Lupus.”

“It’s always DNS.”

I feel like we really need to speed up the embrace of IPv6 to solve this kind of issue. DNS is helpful to humans sure but a lot of these outages are triggered by services not being able to reach one another because they’re hard-coded to a DNS to avoid shifting IPs due to things like NAT.

It feels like we could do an end-run around a lot of this by having a failover to an IPv6 address that is associated with the DNS entry if the DNS fails. Kind of like you generally have multiple DNS servers in sequence in case one of not-responsive, what if, at the service-level we stopped relying on DNS so much and instead used the benefits of IPv6 to not have services fail when DNS does? DNS should be for humans not for computers especially not in a world where IPv6 exists.

(someone who is more familiar with the ins-and-outs of IPv6 is welcome to tell me if and why I am wrong in thinking this)

Not enough Biggowron

“Hey, I need a transfer to 172.20.100.93.”

“I’m sorry sir, there’s no route to that host.”

They can never escape the normie-ness since Arnold Rimmer was the prototype.

Immich is a more touchy beast because it includes a mobile app and the mobile app and the docker container need to generally be either the same version, or within a few versions of one another. There was a while where I forgot to update the server for a while and the mobile app kept being updated on my phone and stopped backing up photos because it could no longer communicate with the server.

I don’t expose services to the outside world either, but I still enjoy keeping things up to date. Gives me something to do.

In the docker folder with the docker-compose.yml of whatever docker container you want to upgrade:

docker compose pull && docker compose up -d

As others have said, for large groups of containers it’s helpful to use Watchtower.

Immich in particular warns to backup your database before an upgrade. Also be on the lookout for breaking changes which require you to alter your docker-compose.yml file before an upgrade.

Oh and after upgrades to remove any dangling images which sometimes take up a lot of space:

docker image prune

Also if you want services to be interoperable, learn about docker networking now not later and remember for static IPs you must create a user defined bridge.

Janeway and not giving a fuck about the consent of the governed. Name a better duo.

Seriously I wanna see what this magazine says about them.

This was the same year they released Experiment Zero and the same year Joel Hodgson would join them on stage to sing the lyrics when they covered the Mystery Science Theater 3000 theme song

" is your friend

One format to rule them all, One format to find them, One format to bring them all, and in the darkness bind them; In the Land of the Bay Area where the shadows lie.

Maybe if web pages weren’t also loading like 25mb of javascript it wouldn’t be such a big deal to load 5mb of uncompressed images.

Also, they regularly try to sidestep the W3C web standards commission or use their market position to influence W3C standards to push for their own standards over competing standards. I feel this point cannot be understated that their attempts to dictate web standards to their benefit directly undermines user choice and truly free standards that aren’t open to undue influence from one company with market dominance.

Google literally has a long history of promoting open formats to eventually close those open formats and make them less open.

GoogleTalk originally supported XMPP and then XMPP support was dropped when they changed it to “Google Hangouts.”

Android was originally open source and still largely is, but now they’re not publishing the device information for Pixel devices, putting actually open operating systems like LineageOS and GraphiteOS in the position of having to reverse engineer drivers to be able to move forward.

Chrome was originally a lot more open as well, but as Google gained market share dominance with their web browser, they made it slowly more and more closed off with only Chromium being really open, and they also used that market position to start to push their own solutions as web standards (what they’ve done with WEBP, actually) instead of having community input from the W3C.

Everyone: “Stop using stuff made by Google that they make with intent of owning the web!”

Also everyone: “Don’t you understand why WEBP is the best format??”

JPG-XL crying in the corner.

…and her name is Deanna.