port forwarding/firewall issues that most people don’t know how to deal with

This sort of thing makes me want to tear my hair out when I hear “Why bother rolling out IPv6 when IPv4 just WORKS!?”

NAT, port forwarding and the problems they cause are seen as expected, just the way the internet works instead of the dirty hacks they actually are. Most people aren’t old enough to remember the time when everything connected to the internet had a routable IPv4 address.

They also wouldn’t allow the new devs to talk to the old devs, so they had to figure out the old codebase for themselves.

You’re not supposed to use fc00::/8, so it’s just the fd00::/8 half that’s the new ULA.

That’s what temporary privacy addresses are for. Clients can just keep generating new addresses in your /64, which is it’s own subnet.

Yeah there is: not breaking all your internal traffic when the wan link goes down and you lose your prefix.

You’d think so, but the logs often contain a ton of noise along with the one line that tells me what the actual issue is.

I know whenever I try to help someone with a Linux issue it’s always an uphill battle to get them to stop guessing what they think the problem might be and show me the logs.

People really don’t want to give you the information you need to help them.

Nobody’s posted the vending machine?

Closed as a duplicate of another issue.

The other issue was closed as off topic.

Filling the paper tray with US Letter sized paper. If you aren’t in the US, you don’t use it and might not even be able to buy any.

That’s a book thing more than a movie thing, IIRC. Hammond was more of an asshole cheapskate in the book.

Old news, it’s been superseded by RFC6214.

Can we get it with five legs, with three on one side and three on the other?

I’m pretty sure that’s code for “understaffed and lots of unpaid overtime”.