Re: [Bulk] Re: [Bulk] Re: [gentoo-user] /etc/hosts include file?

On Tue, 12 Mar 2013 13:29:38 +0200 Alan McKinnon wrote: > >> We should be pounding away on the fact that we're running out of > >> IP > >> > addresses... period... end of story. If people ask about NAT, > >> > then mention that the undersupply will be so bad that even NAT > >> > won't help.

Re: [Bulk] Re: [gentoo-user] /etc/hosts include file?

On 12/03/2013 04:02, Michael Mol wrote: >> We should be pounding away on the fact that we're running out of IP >> > addresses... period... end of story. If people ask about NAT, then >> > mention that the undersupply will be so bad that even NAT won't >> > help. > In my presentations, I've stop

Re: [Bulk] Re: [gentoo-user] /etc/hosts include file?

On 03/11/2013 07:09 PM, Kevin Chadwick wrote: >> No, there was simply no useful result that came up. Incidentally, >> both links you provide *did* come up...but I dismissed them >> because I couldn't imagine anyone using them as a reference except >> in trying to deride Henning Brauer. >> >>> >>

Re: [Bulk] Re: [gentoo-user] /etc/hosts include file?

On Mon, Mar 11, 2013 at 11:39:35PM +, Kevin Chadwick wrote > > Don't waste time and effort on it. Put your > > effort into pounding away on a simple issue that people do understand... > > we're running out of IP addresses. > > We have run out of unallocated ones, there are still loads of unus

Re: [Bulk] Re: [gentoo-user] /etc/hosts include file?

On 03/11/2013 06:34 PM, Kevin Chadwick wrote: >> On 03/09/2013 07:53 AM, Kevin Chadwick wrote: "There is no reason to believe that IPv6 will result in an increased use of IPsec." Bull. The biggest barrier to IPsec use has been NAT! If an intermediate router has to rewrit

Re: [Bulk] Re: [gentoo-user] /etc/hosts include file?

On 03/11/2013 06:45 PM, Walter Dnes wrote: > On Mon, Mar 11, 2013 at 10:22:39AM +0200, Alan McKinnon wrote > >> You are being over-simplistic. >> >> Lack of IPv4 address space *caused* NAT to happen, the two are >> inextricably intertwined. > > Agreed. But we shouldn't be pointing out that NAT

Re: [Bulk] Re: [Bulk] Re: [gentoo-user] /etc/hosts include file?

On 12/03/2013 01:31, Kevin Chadwick wrote: NAT behind a home router is bad, too. For IPv4, it's only necessary because there aren't enough IPv4 addresses to let everyone have a unique one. >>> >>> The best real reason for moving to IPV6 is address space (or lack >>> thereof, in t

Re: [Bulk] Re: [gentoo-user] /etc/hosts include file?

On 12/03/2013 00:45, Walter Dnes wrote: >> NAT is the context of an IPv6 discussion is *very* relevant, it's >> > one of the points you have to raise to illustrate what bits inside >> > people's heads needs to be identified and changed. >> > >> > Until you change the content of people's heads, IPv

Re: [Bulk] Re: [Bulk] Re: [gentoo-user] /etc/hosts include file?

> >> NAT behind a home router is bad, too. For IPv4, it's only necessary > >> because there aren't enough IPv4 addresses to let everyone have a unique > >> one. > > > > The best real reason for moving to IPV6 is address space (or lack > > thereof, in the case of IPV4). The people who are trul

Re: [Bulk] Re: [gentoo-user] /etc/hosts include file?

> No, there was simply no useful result that came up. Incidentally, both > links you provide *did* come up...but I dismissed them because I > couldn't imagine anyone using them as a reference except in trying to > deride Henning Brauer. > > > > > http://marc.info/?l=openbsd-misc&m=129666298029771

Re: [Bulk] Re: [gentoo-user] /etc/hosts include file?

> On 03/09/2013 07:53 AM, Kevin Chadwick wrote: > >> "There is no reason to believe that IPv6 will result in an > >> increased use of IPsec." > >> > >> Bull. The biggest barrier to IPsec use has been NAT! If an > >> intermediate router has to rewrite the packet to change the > >> apparent sourc

Re: [Bulk] Re: [gentoo-user] /etc/hosts include file?

> Don't waste time and effort on it. Put your > effort into pounding away on a simple issue that people do understand... > we're running out of IP addresses. We have run out of unallocated ones, there are still loads of unused ones and even more due to global NAT, and even some being released. I

Re: [Bulk] Re: [gentoo-user] /etc/hosts include file?

On Mon, Mar 11, 2013 at 10:22:39AM +0200, Alan McKinnon wrote > You are being over-simplistic. > > Lack of IPv4 address space *caused* NAT to happen, the two are > inextricably intertwined. Agreed. But we shouldn't be pointing out that NAT has partially solved the problem, and giving people f

Re: [Bulk] Re: [gentoo-user] /etc/hosts include file?

On 11/03/2013 06:00, Walter Dnes wrote: > On Sun, Mar 10, 2013 at 05:07:25PM -0400, Michael Mol wrote > >> NAT behind a home router is bad, too. For IPv4, it's only necessary >> because there aren't enough IPv4 addresses to let everyone have a unique >> one. > > The best real reason for moving

Re: [Bulk] Re: [gentoo-user] /etc/hosts include file?

On 03/11/2013 12:00 AM, Walter Dnes wrote: > On Sun, Mar 10, 2013 at 05:07:25PM -0400, Michael Mol wrote > >> NAT behind a home router is bad, too. For IPv4, it's only necessary >> because there aren't enough IPv4 addresses to let everyone have a unique >> one. > > The best real reason for movi

Re: [Bulk] Re: [gentoo-user] /etc/hosts include file?

On Sun, Mar 10, 2013 at 05:07:25PM -0400, Michael Mol wrote > NAT behind a home router is bad, too. For IPv4, it's only necessary > because there aren't enough IPv4 addresses to let everyone have a unique > one. The best real reason for moving to IPV6 is address space (or lack thereof, in the c

Re: [Bulk] Re: [gentoo-user] /etc/hosts include file?

On 03/10/2013 09:56 PM, Michael Orlitzky wrote: > On 03/10/2013 06:00 PM, Michael Mol wrote: >>> >>> It's been ages since I looked at that link and longer addresses >>> would certainly be needed anyway but certainly with DNSSEC again >>> concocted by costly unthoughtful and unengaging groups who

Re: [Bulk] Re: [gentoo-user] /etc/hosts include file?

-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE- Hash: SHA1 On 03/10/2013 06:00 PM, Michael Mol wrote: >> >> It's been ages since I looked at that link and longer addresses >> would certainly be needed anyway but certainly with DNSSEC again >> concocted by costly unthoughtful and unengaging groups who chose

Re: [Bulk] Re: [gentoo-user] /etc/hosts include file?

On 03/10/2013 05:43 PM, Alan McKinnon wrote: > On 10/03/2013 23:07, Michael Mol wrote: >>> All those examples you give are much like a bunch of home machines sitting behind a NAT gateway onto the internet. That's actually OK and I reckon that is the intended use of NAT. >> I want to poin

Re: [Bulk] Re: [gentoo-user] /etc/hosts include file?

On 03/09/2013 07:53 AM, Kevin Chadwick wrote: >> "There is no reason to believe that IPv6 will result in an >> increased use of IPsec." >> >> Bull. The biggest barrier to IPsec use has been NAT! If an >> intermediate router has to rewrite the packet to change the >> apparent source and/or desti

Re: [Bulk] Re: [gentoo-user] /etc/hosts include file?

On 10/03/2013 23:07, Michael Mol wrote: >> All those examples you give are much like a bunch of home machines >> > sitting behind a NAT gateway onto the internet. That's actually OK >> > and I reckon that is the intended use of NAT. > I want to point out that that's only true if the home network h

Re: [Bulk] Re: [gentoo-user] /etc/hosts include file?

On 03/09/2013 07:53 AM, Kevin Chadwick wrote: >>> >>> Lookup ipvshit >>> >>> I'll give you a hint. >>> >>> The guy who wrote most of the pf firewall that MAC OSX now uses as well >>> as QNX, the latest version originating from OpenBSD and being far better >>> than iptables has bought up lots of ipv

Re: [Bulk] Re: [gentoo-user] /etc/hosts include file?

On 03/09/2013 11:59 PM, Michael Orlitzky wrote: > On 03/09/2013 08:42 PM, Walter Dnes wrote: >> On Fri, Mar 08, 2013 at 07:41:13PM -0500, Michael Mol wrote >> >>> The trouble with NAT is that it destroys peer-to-peer protocols. The >>> first was FTP in Active mode. >> >> In its day, it was OK. N

Re: [Bulk] Re: [gentoo-user] /etc/hosts include file?

On 03/10/2013 12:19 AM, Alan McKinnon wrote: > On 10/03/2013 03:42, Walter Dnes wrote: >> On Fri, Mar 08, 2013 at 07:41:13PM -0500, Michael Mol wrote >> >>> The trouble with NAT is that it destroys peer-to-peer protocols. >>> The first was FTP in Active mode. >> >> In its day, it was OK. Nowaday

Re: [Bulk] Re: [gentoo-user] /etc/hosts include file?

On 10/03/2013 03:42, Walter Dnes wrote: > On Fri, Mar 08, 2013 at 07:41:13PM -0500, Michael Mol wrote > >> The trouble with NAT is that it destroys peer-to-peer protocols. The >> first was FTP in Active mode. > > In its day, it was OK. Nowadays, we use passive mode. What's the > problem? > >

Re: [Bulk] Re: [gentoo-user] /etc/hosts include file?

On 03/09/2013 08:42 PM, Walter Dnes wrote: > On Fri, Mar 08, 2013 at 07:41:13PM -0500, Michael Mol wrote > >> The trouble with NAT is that it destroys peer-to-peer protocols. The >> first was FTP in Active mode. > > In its day, it was OK. Nowadays, we use passive mode. What's the > problem? >

Re: [Bulk] Re: [gentoo-user] /etc/hosts include file?

On Fri, Mar 08, 2013 at 07:41:13PM -0500, Michael Mol wrote > The trouble with NAT is that it destroys peer-to-peer protocols. The > first was FTP in Active mode. In its day, it was OK. Nowadays, we use passive mode. What's the problem? > SIP has been heavily damaged as well. Anyone who's u

Re: [Bulk] Re: [gentoo-user] /etc/hosts include file?

> > > > Lookup ipvshit > > > > I'll give you a hint. > > > > The guy who wrote most of the pf firewall that MAC OSX now uses as well > > as QNX, the latest version originating from OpenBSD and being far better > > than iptables has bought up lots of ipv4 just to stay away from ipvshit. > > >

Re: [Bulk] Re: [gentoo-user] /etc/hosts include file?

> "There is no reason to believe that IPv6 will result in an increased use > of IPsec." > > Bull. The biggest barrier to IPsec use has been NAT! If an intermediate > router has to rewrite the packet to change the apparent source and/or > destination addresses, then the cryptographic signature will

Re: [Bulk] Re: [gentoo-user] /etc/hosts include file?

On 03/08/2013 07:50 PM, Kevin Chadwick wrote: >> Unfortunately, your logic is flawed. >> >> Where would you put the additional bits of address? >> >> That would involve rewriting the IP Header. >> > > Your assumption that I do not know that is flawed. I did a review of > ipv6 before it was release

Re: [Bulk] Re: [gentoo-user] /etc/hosts include file?

On 03/08/2013 07:45 PM, Kevin Chadwick wrote: >>> What would have been best, could have been done years ago and >>> not cost lots of money and even more in security breaches and >>> what I meant by ipv5 and would still be better to switch to even >>> today with everyone being happy to switch to it

Re: [Bulk] Re: [gentoo-user] /etc/hosts include file?

> Unfortunately, your logic is flawed. > > Where would you put the additional bits of address? > > That would involve rewriting the IP Header. > Your assumption that I do not know that is flawed. I did a review of ipv6 before it was released and determined ipv4 to be superior then. That was bef

Re: [Bulk] Re: [gentoo-user] /etc/hosts include file?

> > What would have been best, could have been done years ago and not cost > > lots of money and even more in security breaches and what I meant by > > ipv5 and would still be better to switch to even today with everyone > > being happy to switch to it is simply ipv4 with more bits for address > >

Re: [Bulk] Re: [gentoo-user] /etc/hosts include file?

On 03/08/2013 07:13 PM, Walter Dnes wrote: > On Fri, Mar 08, 2013 at 09:49:23PM +, Kevin Chadwick wrote > >> What would have been best, could have been done years ago and not cost >> lots of money and even more in security breaches and what I meant by >> ipv5 and would still be better to switc

Re: [Bulk] Re: [gentoo-user] /etc/hosts include file?

On Fri, Mar 08, 2013 at 09:49:23PM +, Kevin Chadwick wrote > What would have been best, could have been done years ago and not cost > lots of money and even more in security breaches and what I meant by > ipv5 and would still be better to switch to even today with everyone > being happy to swi

Re: [Bulk] Re: [gentoo-user] /etc/hosts include file?

On Mar 9, 2013 4:51 AM, "Kevin Chadwick" wrote: > > > >> 1. The craziness of trying to conserve IPv4 space > > >> 2. NAT. Finally, a good solid techical reason to make NAT just go away > > >> and stay away. Permanently. Forever. > > > > > > It's a great shame that isn't all it fixed (ipv5), then y

Re: [Bulk] Re: [gentoo-user] /etc/hosts include file?

> >> 1. The craziness of trying to conserve IPv4 space > >> 2. NAT. Finally, a good solid techical reason to make NAT just go away > >> and stay away. Permanently. Forever. > > > > It's a great shame that isn't all it fixed (ipv5), then your job > > wouldn't have been so hard and there wouldn't

Re: [Bulk] Re: [gentoo-user] /etc/hosts include file?

On 03/08/2013 02:50 PM, Kevin Chadwick wrote: >> 1. The craziness of trying to conserve IPv4 space >> 2. NAT. Finally, a good solid techical reason to make NAT just go away >> and stay away. Permanently. Forever. > > It's a great shame that isn't all it fixed (ipv5), then your job > wouldn't have

Re: [Bulk] Re: [gentoo-user] /etc/hosts include file?

> 1. The craziness of trying to conserve IPv4 space > 2. NAT. Finally, a good solid techical reason to make NAT just go away > and stay away. Permanently. Forever. It's a great shame that isn't all it fixed (ipv5), then your job wouldn't have been so hard and there wouldn't be any reason for many

Re: [gentoo-user] /etc/hosts include file?

Am 08.03.2013 01:29, schrieb Michael Mol: > On 03/07/2013 05:24 PM, Alan McKinnon wrote: >> Anyone know if there's a way to get /etc/hosts to support the notion of >> an include file? I did my homework and found nothing, maybe someone else >> knows more. >> >> I really do need this, I have an app t

Re: [gentoo-user] /etc/hosts include file?

On 08/03/2013 15:40, Michael Mol wrote: >> IPv6 is wonderfully easy to use client-side and reasonably easy to plug >> > into an existing network (the routers mostly know what to do already). >> > The fun starts when you need to write an app that tracks and does range >> > allocations at ISP scale,

Re: [gentoo-user] /etc/hosts include file?

On 03/08/2013 03:32 AM, Alan McKinnon wrote: > On 08/03/2013 02:29, Michael Mol wrote: >> On 03/07/2013 05:24 PM, Alan McKinnon wrote: >>> Anyone know if there's a way to get /etc/hosts to support the notion of >>> an include file? I did my homework and found nothing, maybe someone else >>> knows m

Re: [gentoo-user] /etc/hosts include file?

On 08/03/2013 02:29, Michael Mol wrote: > On 03/07/2013 05:24 PM, Alan McKinnon wrote: >> Anyone know if there's a way to get /etc/hosts to support the notion of >> an include file? I did my homework and found nothing, maybe someone else >> knows more. >> >> I really do need this, I have an app tha

Re: [gentoo-user] /etc/hosts include file?

On 08/03/2013 06:30, Pandu Poluan wrote: > > On Mar 8, 2013 5:27 AM, "Alan McKinnon" > wrote: >> >> Anyone know if there's a way to get /etc/hosts to support the notion of >> an include file? I did my homework and found nothing, maybe someone else >> knows more. >>

Re: [gentoo-user] /etc/hosts include file?

On Mar 8, 2013 5:27 AM, "Alan McKinnon" wrote: > > Anyone know if there's a way to get /etc/hosts to support the notion of > an include file? I did my homework and found nothing, maybe someone else > knows more. > > I really do need this, I have an app that discovers things on the > network and kn

Re: [gentoo-user] /etc/hosts include file?

On 03/07/2013 05:24 PM, Alan McKinnon wrote: > Anyone know if there's a way to get /etc/hosts to support the notion of > an include file? I did my homework and found nothing, maybe someone else > knows more. > > I really do need this, I have an app that discovers things on the > network and knows

Re: [gentoo-user] /etc/hosts include file?

On Mar 7, 2013 5:28 PM, "Alan McKinnon" wrote: > > Anyone know if there's a way to get /etc/hosts to support the notion of > an include file? I did my homework and found nothing, maybe someone else > knows more. > > I really do need this, I have an app that discovers things on the > network and kn

[gentoo-user] /etc/hosts include file?

Anyone know if there's a way to get /etc/hosts to support the notion of an include file? I did my homework and found nothing, maybe someone else knows more. I really do need this, I have an app that discovers things on the network and knows their address. This makes it's automated way into DNS but