5 ms·

> as well: https://github.com/localsend/localsend https://github.com/localsend/localsend > imho https://pairdrop.net/ https://pairdrop.net/ is the best > How is

> as well: https://github.com/localsend/localsend https://github.com/localsend/localsend > imho https://pairdrop.net/ https://pairdrop.net/ is the best > How is this different from webwormhole.io? > My fave is https://snapdrop.net https://snapdrop.net it's so funny how everyone have a favorite. They all use standardized hacks on top of hacks, just because ISP do not want to let you serve content and will fight for NAT, which is their only line of defense from everyone else messing with their precious IGMP multicast hacks so they can subsidize their TV business on your internet bill. it's all so funny. but the best joke is how microsoft and apple both tried to "make things work" in the late 90s (?) with their special zero-conf-by-other-names trainwreak of network protocols. There's no end in sight.

doctorpangloss 2y ago
> NAT, which is their only line of defense from everyone else messing with their precious IGMP multicast hacks so they can subsidize their TV business on your internet bill. What are you trying to say? This is intriguing.
- 1oooqooq 2y ago
  all tv channels are transmitted with the same technology state actors use to redirect traffic from some site to their servers. (multicast) That tech have no authentication or authorization. (IGMP, PIM-SM, whatever) it mostly consist of a switch or router on the edge NOT forwarding UDP to some class D ip, or something, past it. But all the ancillary protocols have hundreds of redirection attacks still available. All that is besides the BGP stuff everyone document by now so it's only used as a last resort. Go read a book on network security published after 2013. If you want to play with it in your home, no need to build a homelab. Your home modem probably have smaller versions of this using uPNP or PCP or something. Not really recalling the consumer version names. But on those you mostly can point ports routed to any device to any other device, started by any device in or out of the network. fun stuff. the reason i don't remember any of the details is because all the perl scripts written in 2000 or so still work just fine.
  - doctorpangloss 2y ago
    I still don't really understand. What is the conspiracy? Concretely, what is it that I believe is "going on," what is "actually" "going on", and how does the "actually" "going on" part harm me or screw me... somehow?
    - 1oooqooq 2y ago
      you are on the detour thread about multicast. The original discussion was about NAT and how ISP will keep everyone needing NAT forever.
      - doctorpangloss 2y ago
        But NAT is needed because people use devices that were not designed to have a WAN interface. I was just interested in your POV, in good faith.
  - rzzzt 2y ago
    NAT-PMP maybe? https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/NAT_Port_Mapping_Protocol https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/NAT_Port_Mapping_Protocol
    - 1oooqooq 2y ago
      that's the apple-flavored-uPnP. it's on the consumer side.
  - kortilla 2y ago
    None of what you talked about has anything to do with NAT. The Internet in general does not route multicast and getting public IPs in no way will get you access to any multicast networks.
    - 1oooqooq 2y ago
      It's all part of the same pile of incompetence. If you move anything from the pile today it all fall down.
martinald 2y ago
Who uses multicast for TV these days? I'm also unsure what this has to do with NAT. The reason they use CG-NAT is because there is a complete shortage of IPv4 addresses.
- 1oooqooq 2y ago
  > Who uses multicast for TV these days you'd be surprised. Every resolution bump it gets back in fashion. And the infra is always left behind. And there's only a shortage of ipv4 because ISPs drag their feet on ipv6. It's circular. They even talk about IPv6 nat, lol. For user safety now, i think. remember when DSL didn't allow you to open listening ports? you had to buy "business DSL" for 10x more?
  - martinald 2y ago
    But linear TV viewing is shrinking all the time. I'm sure some people do use it, but I really don't understand what it has to do with NAT?
  - KennyBlanken 2y ago
    There is no shortage of IPv4 address space. There is a problem with the government and private entities hoarding address space they don't need. Amazon alone is sitting on billions of IPv4 addresses. They've snarfed up /10's, /8's, and partial /8's: https://toonk.io/aws-and-their-billions-in-ipv4-addresses/index.html https://toonk.io/aws-and-their-billions-in-ipv4-addresses/in... Every single man woman and child in the US could get three unique IPv4 addresses each and Amazon would still have billions left over. And then recently the DoD transferred 175M IPv4 addresses to a shell corporation in Florida nobody has ever heard of, an then that shell corp announced the largest # of IPv4 addresses in the world: https://arstechnica.com/information-technology/2021/04/pentagon-explains-odd-transfer-of-175-million-ip-addresses-to-obscure-company/ https://arstechnica.com/information-technology/2021/04/penta... The whole "IPv4 space is exhausted" is a load of shit to get people to feel guilty about having a class C and downsizing while Amazon, Google, and Microsoft snarf up more and more IPv4 space. It's exactly like "turn off your lights when you leave the room to reduce your carbon footprint" while a billionaire flies over you in his private jet in a 20 minute flight to the beach because he didn't want to sit in traffic. All this could have been avoided if a)address space could not be sold or "leased" but had to be returned to APIC b)rules regarding a minimum percentage of your existing address space being announced/routable with actual devices at the other end...before more space will be allocated to you.
bongodongobob 2y ago
Your middle paragraph is word salad.
mihaaly 2y ago
I have Apple products at home for almost two decades, computer and phone and tablet generations, and I was satisfied in the beginning with the 'just works' kind of attitude that actually worked then, but then came this AirDrop and it almost never worked, still almost never works. Unpredictable which devices in which direction can send files to each other, yes, I have phone<>computer config that works in one direction but not in the other. I do not want to figure out why is this so, I just want to use it. I tell this to prevent the predictably arriving helpful suggestions and explanations, I don't care. Does not work and that's it, I do not rely on that. Doing it some old reliable way instead.
- codetrotter 2y ago
  > suggestions and explanations, I don't care Ok. But for anyone else struggling with it, check the settings for AirDrop, which one of the following are your devices configured to use: - Receiving off - Contacts Only - Everyone for 10 Minutes I usually am not able to receive even from people supposedly in my contacts, even though mine is set to Contacts Only. But I don't mind that. I AirDrop about two or three times per month with others. I take my device and their device and I flip receiver to "Everyone for 10 Minutes". Then I AirDrop the photos or files I want to and have no problem. Try this.
  - deleted 2y ago
    [deleted]
  - mihaaly 2y ago
    Always 'Everyone', everywhere, while trying. Then off. (Also trying other choices out of desperation briefly. I was anticipating OS version, hardware and other exotic remote troubleshooting and explanation attempts actualy, not a flick of the choice available right in front of you...)
deleted 2y ago
[deleted]

doctorpangloss 2y ago

> NAT, which is their only line of defense from everyone else messing with their precious IGMP multicast hacks so they can subsidize their TV business on your internet bill. What are you trying to say? This is intriguing.

1oooqooq 2y ago
all tv channels are transmitted with the same technology state actors use to redirect traffic from some site to their servers. (multicast) That tech have no authentication or authorization. (IGMP, PIM-SM, whatever) it mostly consist of a switch or router on the edge NOT forwarding UDP to some class D ip, or something, past it. But all the ancillary protocols have hundreds of redirection attacks still available. All that is besides the BGP stuff everyone document by now so it's only used as a last resort. Go read a book on network security published after 2013. If you want to play with it in your home, no need to build a homelab. Your home modem probably have smaller versions of this using uPNP or PCP or something. Not really recalling the consumer version names. But on those you mostly can point ports routed to any device to any other device, started by any device in or out of the network. fun stuff. the reason i don't remember any of the details is because all the perl scripts written in 2000 or so still work just fine.
- doctorpangloss 2y ago
  I still don't really understand. What is the conspiracy? Concretely, what is it that I believe is "going on," what is "actually" "going on", and how does the "actually" "going on" part harm me or screw me... somehow?
  - 1oooqooq 2y ago
    you are on the detour thread about multicast. The original discussion was about NAT and how ISP will keep everyone needing NAT forever.
    - doctorpangloss 2y ago
      But NAT is needed because people use devices that were not designed to have a WAN interface. I was just interested in your POV, in good faith.
- rzzzt 2y ago
  NAT-PMP maybe? https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/NAT_Port_Mapping_Protocol https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/NAT_Port_Mapping_Protocol
  - 1oooqooq 2y ago
    that's the apple-flavored-uPnP. it's on the consumer side.
- kortilla 2y ago
  None of what you talked about has anything to do with NAT. The Internet in general does not route multicast and getting public IPs in no way will get you access to any multicast networks.
  - 1oooqooq 2y ago
    It's all part of the same pile of incompetence. If you move anything from the pile today it all fall down.

martinald 2y ago

Who uses multicast for TV these days? I'm also unsure what this has to do with NAT. The reason they use CG-NAT is because there is a complete shortage of IPv4 addresses.

1oooqooq 2y ago
> Who uses multicast for TV these days you'd be surprised. Every resolution bump it gets back in fashion. And the infra is always left behind. And there's only a shortage of ipv4 because ISPs drag their feet on ipv6. It's circular. They even talk about IPv6 nat, lol. For user safety now, i think. remember when DSL didn't allow you to open listening ports? you had to buy "business DSL" for 10x more?
- martinald 2y ago
  But linear TV viewing is shrinking all the time. I'm sure some people do use it, but I really don't understand what it has to do with NAT?
- KennyBlanken 2y ago
  There is no shortage of IPv4 address space. There is a problem with the government and private entities hoarding address space they don't need. Amazon alone is sitting on billions of IPv4 addresses. They've snarfed up /10's, /8's, and partial /8's: https://toonk.io/aws-and-their-billions-in-ipv4-addresses/index.html https://toonk.io/aws-and-their-billions-in-ipv4-addresses/in... Every single man woman and child in the US could get three unique IPv4 addresses each and Amazon would still have billions left over. And then recently the DoD transferred 175M IPv4 addresses to a shell corporation in Florida nobody has ever heard of, an then that shell corp announced the largest # of IPv4 addresses in the world: https://arstechnica.com/information-technology/2021/04/pentagon-explains-odd-transfer-of-175-million-ip-addresses-to-obscure-company/ https://arstechnica.com/information-technology/2021/04/penta... The whole "IPv4 space is exhausted" is a load of shit to get people to feel guilty about having a class C and downsizing while Amazon, Google, and Microsoft snarf up more and more IPv4 space. It's exactly like "turn off your lights when you leave the room to reduce your carbon footprint" while a billionaire flies over you in his private jet in a 20 minute flight to the beach because he didn't want to sit in traffic. All this could have been avoided if a)address space could not be sold or "leased" but had to be returned to APIC b)rules regarding a minimum percentage of your existing address space being announced/routable with actual devices at the other end...before more space will be allocated to you.

bongodongobob 2y ago

Your middle paragraph is word salad.

mihaaly 2y ago

I have Apple products at home for almost two decades, computer and phone and tablet generations, and I was satisfied in the beginning with the 'just works' kind of attitude that actually worked then, but then came this AirDrop and it almost never worked, still almost never works. Unpredictable which devices in which direction can send files to each other, yes, I have phone<>computer config that works in one direction but not in the other. I do not want to figure out why is this so, I just want to use it. I tell this to prevent the predictably arriving helpful suggestions and explanations, I don't care. Does not work and that's it, I do not rely on that. Doing it some old reliable way instead.

codetrotter 2y ago
> suggestions and explanations, I don't care Ok. But for anyone else struggling with it, check the settings for AirDrop, which one of the following are your devices configured to use: - Receiving off - Contacts Only - Everyone for 10 Minutes I usually am not able to receive even from people supposedly in my contacts, even though mine is set to Contacts Only. But I don't mind that. I AirDrop about two or three times per month with others. I take my device and their device and I flip receiver to "Everyone for 10 Minutes". Then I AirDrop the photos or files I want to and have no problem. Try this.
- deleted 2y ago
  [deleted]
- mihaaly 2y ago
  Always 'Everyone', everywhere, while trying. Then off. (Also trying other choices out of desperation briefly. I was anticipating OS version, hardware and other exotic remote troubleshooting and explanation attempts actualy, not a flick of the choice available right in front of you...)

deleted 2y ago

[deleted]