Sly Gryphon @sgryphon@qoto.org

@aluaces to make an IPv6 site available to IPv4 you need someone with an IPv4 address to provide a proxy. e.g. my hosting provider, Mythic Beasts, provides that for all customers.

Some content delivery networks (CDNs) also provide IPv4 proxy services. Some CDNs have free tiers, try Cloudflare.

Otherwise you need to pay for a very cheap dual stack server (all it needs do is proxy).

If you don't want general availability, you could also try an IPv6 tunnel broker, that will run an tunnel (over IPv4) to your device, e.g. laptop, allowing it to access IPv6 only resources. Try Hurricane Electric.

Again note that if you are self hosting on IPv4 then you would also be using NAT to the private range. The difference is not NAT (both use it), but whether you have an IPv4 address to use with the NAT.

@aluaces IPv4 usually require NAT anyway.

At least with an IPv6 server there is only one NAT, compared to hosting provider NAT to 10.x range, then virtual machine NAT to 192.168 range, then container NAT to 172.16 range.

An IPv4 private 172.16 k8s pod is as unreachable by an IPv4 client as IPv6. Any solution with IPv4 (even without IPv6) needs NAT.

@aluaces to be more specific, you don't need to set up IPv4 on the IPv6 machine, or your internal network, hence simplifying as you only need one set of configuration, one firewall, etc. (compared to dual stack).

You do however need to have IPv4 access on some other (single) machine to act as an outgoing NAT64 / incoming proxy.

But this is largely the same for IPv4 as you only have private IPv4 addresses so for outgoing need to go through NAT44 and incoming needs to port forward/proxy.

The gateway needs a public IPv4 address in both cases, but the rest of the IPv4 world does not know (can not tell) if your internal network is an IPv4 private range or IPv6.

@freemo @General there are plenty of decent Christmas movies - Die Hard and Lethal Weapon are two that come to mind :-)

@aluaces about 30% of the Internet (>50% in some countries) has IPv6 now.

But yes, for the other 70% for outgoing you need something like NAT64 (but seeing as a lot of outgoing uses NAT44 anyway, not a big difference).

For incoming you need something like a CDN or reverse proxy gateway (an IPv6 hoster may provide this for free). I have some blog entries on the subject: https://sgryphon.gamertheory.net/2021/01/02/ipv6-only-hosting

In my case, it is for me to remote access my services, and I have IPv6 on my mobile provider as well, so I don't really care if other people don't have access (they wouldn't be able to log in anyway).

@freemo @General I watch The Hogfather pretty much every year.

IPv6 is so much better. Have a bunch of different services at home, just add rules to allow what I want through the router firewall, and they can each provision a Let's Encrypt certificate (as they each have a port 80 and port 443, instead of having to share the), and each be accessible from the Internet (without having to set up port forwarding).

@craigmaloney@octodon.social Just play the songs backwards (and if you are lucky you might even get a message from the opposing side).

Strange to see a text you digitised 25 years ago appear scattered around the Internet. Search for "Transcribed to 1's and 0's by Slaegr the Anarch".

@craigmaloney@octodon.social the issue is not the application, e.g. there are many email apps, but using a standardised, and federated, protocol.

Matrix (Element) seems the best available, for security: https://privacytools.io/software/real-time-communication/#im

They also have a big focus on bridges to lots of other platforms, which helps.

i.e. bridge from one platform on one server, through to Matrix, a federated system, then out some completely different server bridged somewhere else.

@fsf many of the tools are also mentioned at https://privacytools.io/software/real-time-communication/#voip

@h4890 sorry, I don't know enough about Mastodon.

My guess if it was a stand alone server it would work fine, to message each other internally, i.e. local messages. The host name in your browser, or certificate details, would not be relevant or need to match if sending from alice@foo.private to bob@foo.private.

Public certificates, etc, would be relevant for federation, e.g. for a message to get from @sgryphon to @h4890 then the qoto.org server needs some way to (securely) connect to the liberdon.com server.

@h4890 not sure if they had email in mind, just aspects are similar, same as any messaging system you need to identify who to send to.

Also similar to ActivityPub / Mastodon / fediverse, an address has a local part and a domain part, with the domain part relying on existing DNS structure.

Not the only way to do addressing / server discovery, but common.

Have a look at some of the peer-to-peer systems, which don't rely on server infrastructure, e.g. Briar and Jami, mentioned on privacytools.io

Found a mirror to match our bedroom, so spent the morning putting it up. #bedroom #mirror