![](/static/253f0d9b/assets/icons/icon-96x96.png)
![](https://lemmy.world/pictrs/image/ca9b0de3-205f-47ca-a620-5fbddb680695.png)
Yeah, as bad as AOSP is for Google EEEing it with Google Play Services, it’s still a lot better and more open than iOS, BlackberryOS, Palm OS, or Hiptop OS.
(Justin)
Tech nerd from Sweden
Yeah, as bad as AOSP is for Google EEEing it with Google Play Services, it’s still a lot better and more open than iOS, BlackberryOS, Palm OS, or Hiptop OS.
I prefer my activity graph in blue.
I’m using IPv6 on Kubernetes and it’s amazing. Every Pod has its own global IP address. There is no NAT and no giant ARP routing table slowing down the other computers on my network. Each of my nodes announces a /112 for itself to my router, allowing it to give addresses to over 65k pods. There is no feasible limit to the amount of IP addresses I could assign to my containers and load balancers, and no routing overhead. I have no need for port forwarding on my router or worrying about dynamic IPs, since I just have a /80 block with no firewall that I assign to my public facing load balancers.
Of course, I only have around 300 pods on my cluster, and realistically, it’s not really possible for there to be over 1 million containers in current kubernetes clusters, due to other limitations. But it is still a huge upgrade in reducing overhead and complexity, and increasing scale.
I haven’t really looked into it, but it doesn’t seem like it.
Heres the documentation about having multiple cidr pools in one cluster with the Cilium network driver, and it seems to imply that each Pod only gets one IP.
https://docs.cilium.io/en/stable/network/concepts/ipam/multi-pool/
There’s something called Multus that I haven’t looked into, but even then it looks like that is for multiple interfaces per Pod, not multiple IPS per interface.
https://github.com/k8snetworkplumbingwg/multus-cni
Containers are just network namespaces on Linux, and all the routing is done in iptables or ebpf, so it’s theoretically possible to have multiple IP addresses, but doesn’t look like anybody has started implementing it. There’s actually a lot of Kubernetes clusters that just use stateful IPv6 NAT for the internal Pod network, unfortunately.
Yeah, I wonder if there’s any proposals to allow for multiple IPV6 addresses in Kubernetes, it would be a much better solution than NAT.
As far as I know, it’s currently not possible. Every container/Pod receives a single IPv4 and/or IPv6 address on creation from the networking driver.
I have static IPs for my Kubernetes nodes, and I actually use DHCPv6 for dynamic dns so I can reach any device with a hostname, even though most of my devices don’t have static IPs.
The issue is those static IPs are tied to my current ISP, preventing me from changing ISPs without deleting my entire Kubernetes cluster.
Hurricane Electric gives me a /48.
Site-local ipv6 would work here as well, true. But then my containers wouldnt have internet access. Kubernetes containers use Ipam with a single subnet, they can’t use SLAAC.
1:1 stateless NAT is useful for static IPs. Since all your addresses are otherwise global, if you need to switch providers or give up your /64, then you’ll need to re-address your static addresses. Instead, you can give your machines static private IPs, and just translate the prefix when going through NAT. It’s a lot less horrible than IPv4 NAT since there’s no connection tracking needed.
This is something I probably should have done setting up my home Kubernetes cluster. My current IPv6 prefix is from Hurricane Electric, and if my ISP ever gives me a real IPv6 prefix, I will have to delete the entire cluster and recreate it with the new prefix.
I mean this is kind of bullshit. There’s a lot of things that run in containers these days, and kubernetes is the best way to run containers. If you can do everything with static js or managed services, more power to you, but as soon as you have multiple services talking to each other, you should be using kubernetes, and you should probably consider message queues.
The best value smartphone on the market is the Fairphone 5. 70 euros per year, amortized over 10 years. Compare with a cheap, slower, but more expensive to repair Samsung A14, which would only last 2 years before the battery starts dying, and cost 85 euros per year over that time.
Ah, right. I was aware of the ability to use S3 for 0.4, but this post made me go check out Asonix’s Forgejo. The fact that you can get rid of sled in 0.5 and go fully stateless/scalable is a game changer.
Awesome that pict-rs has postgres and full s3 support now. Lemmy is getting really scalable!
It’s pretty nice down here.
It’s not Ruud who approves or disapproves of users. It’s Hetzner, his hosting provider. If you have a problem with the restrictions that Hetzner and the movie and music industries are imposing, take it up with them.
Calling fellow users idiots isn’t exactly nice.
Yes, Graphene developers will not port Graphene to any other devices, because they’re insecure. You’ll need a new phone to use GrapheneOS.
It’s possible that your phone is supported by CalyxOS, which has a lot of the same degoogled feature, but a little less compatibility.