4 ms·

Calling a route table "access control" is not useful. It's not access control, it's literally in the name, it is about navigation of the network via routes. A

by rswail 3y ago

Calling a route table "access control" is not useful. It's not access control, it's literally in the name, it is about navigation of the network via routes. As for your comment about the "pocket protector committee" that's just ad hominem attacks on the people that keep the internet running. Saying that NDP is more complicated than ARP/RARP etc because it has a different name is, again, attacking actual needs because it's more complicated than the protocol it replaces. A network ACL is access control (it's in the name), L2 VLANs may be used for network separation, but they're also used for switches to be able to not have to broadcast packets across all their ports. If you want to downplay the different requirements that the different forms of resource management require as "access control", then all you're doing is removing all meaning from the term "access control" in the first place.

hgopolis 3y ago
I design motherboards for network devices; I keep the internet going. Routes are inaccessible without access to them. The underlying machine states to check for access to a route is algorithmically similar to the other checking for user access. It’s unfortunate so many are allowed to work in IT with cliff notes level awareness of how technology works. The layers of indirection you work with are the knobs and buttons people like me choose. You merely obfuscate with vacuous jargon to serve your career goals.
- rswail 3y ago
  Well aren't you just the genius holding the internet together. Of course the underlying algos are similar, because they are table matching and they are also doing either min or max matching depending on the requirements. They're also sorted for most efficient access. Does that make sorting somehow part of access control? btw, these days, most of the "internet" is expressed either in programmable hardware or in software. Some of those algorithms may be expressed in raw hardware. I work with a guy that makes gzip operate in hardware at 10G speeds, I'm aware of the requirements of networking. I'm also aware of the OSI layers and how they sort of but not quite map to L1-4 of modern networks, which only have those names because of OSI. So don't insult people here because you do some low level network design.

by rswail 3y ago

hgopolis 3y ago

I design motherboards for network devices; I keep the internet going. Routes are inaccessible without access to them. The underlying machine states to check for access to a route is algorithmically similar to the other checking for user access. It’s unfortunate so many are allowed to work in IT with cliff notes level awareness of how technology works. The layers of indirection you work with are the knobs and buttons people like me choose. You merely obfuscate with vacuous jargon to serve your career goals.

rswail 3y ago
Well aren't you just the genius holding the internet together. Of course the underlying algos are similar, because they are table matching and they are also doing either min or max matching depending on the requirements. They're also sorted for most efficient access. Does that make sorting somehow part of access control? btw, these days, most of the "internet" is expressed either in programmable hardware or in software. Some of those algorithms may be expressed in raw hardware. I work with a guy that makes gzip operate in hardware at 10G speeds, I'm aware of the requirements of networking. I'm also aware of the OSI layers and how they sort of but not quite map to L1-4 of modern networks, which only have those names because of OSI. So don't insult people here because you do some low level network design.