2 ms·

I don’t have any idea how they got the ip, it could certainly have been making outbound connections, though. I think it had NTP, although I might have pointed i

I don’t have any idea how they got the ip, it could certainly have been making outbound connections, though. I think it had NTP, although I might have pointed it at a local server we had for that.

vaylian 9mo ago
Another possible explanation is that the IP was not random enough. For example: network_prefix::1
eqvinox 9mo ago
> I don’t have any idea how they got the ip, You might've been using DHCPv6 assigning sequential addresses starting at 1? Remember: friends don't let friends use DHCPv6[*]. Help out, uninstall DHCPv6 today. [*] in IA_NA mode (address assignment). PD and stateless info-only are fine.
- commandersaki 9mo ago
  More useless crap to remember for a useless protocol.
- basilikum 9mo ago
  What's so bad about DHCPv6?
  - eqvinox 9mo ago
    In IA_NA mode, you're at the mercy of the DHCPv6 server for any kind of address privacy. And good luck getting a second address if you want to run a CLAT for 464. You don't want this in a home network. As for servers, you mostly won't want it either, considering (a) you might rather configure things statically, and (b) it's easier to just deal out whole /64s per server, especially since that gives space for VMs. So where's the niche for DHCPv6? Maybe assigning addresses for telco or OOB equipment… idk. And just to be clear: DHCPv6 information-only ("stateless") and DHCPv6 prefix delegation modes are perfectly fine. It's the individual address assignment (IA_NA) mode that should just never have been invented.