this post was submitted on 24 Jun 2024
688 points (97.9% liked)

Programmer Humor

32483 readers
531 users here now

Post funny things about programming here! (Or just rant about your favourite programming language.)

Rules:

founded 5 years ago
MODERATORS
you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
[–] eclipse@lemmy.world 2 points 4 months ago (1 children)

I might be misunderstanding. It's definitely possible to have as many IPv4 aliases on an interface as you want with whatever routing preferences you want. Can you clarify?

I agree with your stance on deployment.

[–] nonentity@sh.itjust.works 3 points 4 months ago

Configuring multiple v4 addresses on an interface is a kludge, typically only used on hosts which apply inter-network routing logic. It’s an explicit, primary function of the standard v6 specifications.

With v4, you would use either RFC1918 and NAT, or plumb a public address to the host.

With v6 you should use a ULA and an address with a public prefix, and selectively open ports/services to on appropriate address.

An example is the file sharing and administration daemons on my NAS are only bound to its ULA. I don’t need to worry whether it will accidentally be exposed publicly through fat fingering my firewall config, because it will never route beyond my gateway.