Some dingbat that occasionally builds neat stuff without breaking others. The person running this public-but-not-promoted instance because reasons.

  • 0 Posts
  • 249 Comments
Joined 7 months ago
cake
Cake day: September 26th, 2024

help-circle






  • Was the prior drive set in some kind of raid set or just individuals, and what are the old drive capacity vs new?

    I guess it depends a lot on what your doing with the server. If it’s pure data store I would just boot off a USB and give yourself all the data space since it’s quite likely all running in ram anyhow.

    If you run apps out of it and need the M2 for swap and rapid cache storage the fastest would likely be make a 2 drive zpool, copy a single to it, and repeat as needed until you have it all copied over, then add the 3rd to the zpool




  • Wikipedia though has a strong reputation for being well cited and due in large part to the huge user base glaring inaccuracies get corrected quickly. I saw a study at one point comparing them to a traditional encyclopedia and they had of course faster shifting errors, but on average where pretty on par for accuracy.

    A federated system where I or any other knucklehead could put up an instance isn’t going to have that ‘checked by 1000 eyes’ factor going so much, or if it did ever get to that point then they’ve likely become the defacto ‘real’ federated encyclopedia and the others inherently suspect.

    All in all It’s a neat idea, but sounds like it’d be rife with chaotic discord. As a general thing if something is on the standard Wikipedia I can be pretty sure it’s reasonably accurate without having to research who posted it, and I can torrent a copy of the whole thing as I just recently found out.


  • Generally yeah, the same could be said for Lemmy and their communities. The challenge is when you have federated systems like this you have to largely take it as good faith that instance owners will keep reasonably updated software and good practices so you don’t end up with a pile of spam edits.

    With communal wiki type systems as a whole you end up with the question of credibility. Some people would cite only well researched and validated studies, and some people whole heatedly believe that a religious text was written by divine hand and this must be true. How do you reconcile those two without giving weight to things that are patently nonsense, aka you must teach the gospel of the flying spaghetti monster to be fair to all?








  • What you might call a stateful NAT is really a 1-1 NAT, anything going out picks up an IP and anything retuned to that IP is routed back to the single address behind the NAT. Most home users a many to one source nat so their internal devices pick up a routable IP and multiple connections to a given dest are tracked by a source port map to route return traffic to the appropriate internal host.

    Basically yes to what you said, but a port forward technically is a route map inbound to a mapped IP. You could have an ACL or firewall rule to control access to the NAT but in itself the forward isn’t a true firewall allow.

    Same basic result but if you trace a packet into a router without a port forward it’ll be dropped before egress rather than being truly blocked. I think where some of the contention lies is that routing between private nets you have something like:

    0.0.0.0/0 > 192.168.1.1 10.0.0.0/8 > 192.168.2.1

    The more specific route would send everything for 10.x to the .2 route and it would be relayed as the routing tables dictate from that device. So a NAT in that case isn’t a filter.

    From a routable address to non-route 1918 address as most would have from outside in though you can’t make that jump without a map (forward) into the local subnet.

    So maybe more appropriate to say a NAT ‘can’ act as a firewall, but only by virtue of losing the route rather than blocking it.


  • NAT in the sense used when people talk about at home is a source nat, or as we like to call it in the office space a hide address, everyone going to the adjacent net appears to be the same source IP and the system maintains a table of connections to correlate return traffic to.

    The other direction though, if you where on that upstream net and tried to target traffic towards the SNAT address above the router has no idea where to send it to unless there’s a map to designate where incoming connections need to be sent on the other side of the NAT so it ends up being dropped. I suppose in theory it could try and send it to everyone in the local side net, but if you get multiple responses everything is going to get hosed up.

    So from the perspective of session state initiation it can act as a firewall since without route maps it only will work from one side.