this post was submitted on 16 Aug 2024
38 points (100.0% liked)
chat
8193 readers
177 users here now
Chat is a text only community for casual conversation, please keep shitposting to the absolute minimum. This is intended to be a separate space from c/chapotraphouse or the daily megathread. Chat does this by being a long-form community where topics will remain from day to day unlike the megathread, and it is distinct from c/chapotraphouse in that we ask you to engage in this community in a genuine way. Please keep shitposting, bits, and irony to a minimum.
As with all communities posts need to abide by the code of conduct, additionally moderators will remove any posts or comments deemed to be inappropriate.
Thank you and happy chatting!
founded 3 years ago
MODERATORS
you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
view the rest of the comments
Adding IPv6 would cost them money. Probably a relatively small amount of money, but still money. They get nothing from that investment. As long as they have IPv4 addresses to assign to their customers, there's basically no demand for IPv6 addresses. NAT and UPnP work fine for just about everyone. I think the only way we see serious IPv6 adoption in North America and Europe is government mandates.
It's not working fine for me!
I need a static address and they quoted me $200/mo for an IPv4 one.
Does ddns or ngrok type solutions not work?
DDNS doesn't work behind CGNAT. Never heard of ngrok; google says it might work. I'm trying to do something with WireGuard.
they're using cgnat and turning off ipv6? what the hell..
INORITE!
Cloudflare tunnel (aka a reverse proxy, like ngrok) will also likely work for your mystery project, and it’s free. VPN is more secure, but as always, it's a trade-off between the security of a vpn and the convinence of a reverse proxy that's available on the open internet.
A reverse proxy like nginx?
Basically, I want to move files between my NAS (behind CGNAT) and webserver and rsync isn't cutting it. I think WireGuard will be best, then I can use my existing NFS and Kerberos infrastructure.
Do you need a static IP or could you get away with using dynamic DNS like duckdns? I think wireguard allows you to use a hostname instead of IP address. The wireguard peers would have static private IPs in the VPN address space. I had a much simpler setup than you, but this is what I was doing before tailscale.
A dynamic IP would work; I just need an IP that is unique to my router and isn't shared by a dozen other households---I don't know what the term for that is.
There is a way to make it work with WireGuard using something called MASQUERADE, I'm learning.
Mine told me I can have gigabit fiber, or static IP on 50mb/s copper, but not both, because something something piracy.
Just torrent a bunch and I think they give you a static address so that they can potentially suenyou later.
My IP hasn't changed in years.
Mine told me I can have gigabit fiber, or static IP on 50mb/s copper, but not both, because something something piracy.
Mine told me I can have gigabit fiber, or static IP on 50mb/s copper, but not both, because something something piracy.
Damn that's crazy. My ISP only charges me £4/mo for static ipv4 addresses.
Does ddns or ngrok type solutions not work?