akash_rawal

That advertisement would be interpreted as Node C's advertisement.

The plan is to treat public keys as node's identity and trust mechanism similar to OpenPGP (e.g. include any node key signed by a master key as a cluster member)

Right now, none of the encryption part is done and it is not a priority right now. I need to first implement transitive node detection, actually forward packets between nodes, some way to store and manage routes, and then trust and encryption mechanisms before I'd dare to test this stuff on a real network.

The UI is desktop only for now, I'll make the mobile UI some day.

I didn't know the answer either, but usually you can compose solution from solutions of smaller problems.

solution(0): There are no disks. Nothing to do. solution(n): Let's see if I can use solution(n-1) here. I'll use solution(n-1) to move all but last disk A->B, just need to rename the pins. Then move the largest disk A->C. Then use solution(n-1) to move disks B->C by renaming the pins. There we go, we have a stack based solution running in exponential time.

It's one of the easiest problem in algorithm design, but running the solution by hand would give you a PTSD.

Replacing "Programmers:" with "Program:" is more accurate.

Technically, containers always run in Linux. (Even on windows/OS X; on those platforms docker runs a lightweight Linux VM that then runs your containers.)

And I wasn't even using Docker.

How I lost a Postgres database:

1. Installed Postgres container without configuring a volume
2. Made a mental note that I need to configure a volume
3. After a few days of usage, restarted the container to configure the volume
4. ...
5. Acceptance

You are not alone.

I don't know either, but from what I know, bureaucracy and corruption is often a result of bad organizational structure. Some "designated officer" raises a finger which gets approved by the Secretary who is appointed by the minister who is appointed by the PM who is nominated by the Lok Sabha, and we lose yet another privacy protecting service. I think we should have more direct control in these matters.

For now, if we cannot expect a proper functioning web, they cannot expect stability under their seats. Vote them out.

They never will, we have to vote them out.

Just did some basic testing on broadcast addresses using socat, broadcast is not working at all with /32 addresses. With /24 addresses, broadcast only reaches nodes that share a subnet. Nodes that don't share the subnet aren't reachable by broadcast even when they're reachable via unicast.

Edit1: Did more testing, it seems like broadcast traffic ignores routing tables.

On 192.168.0.2, I am running socat -u udp-recv:8000,reuseaddr - to print UDP messages.

Case 1: add 192.168.0.1/24

# ip addr add 192.168.0.1/24 dev eth0
# # Testing unicast
# socat - udp-sendto:192.168.0.2:8000 <<< "Message"
# # Worked
# socat - udp-sendto:192.168.0.255:8000,broadcast <<< "Message"
# # Worked

Case 2: Same as above but delete 192.168.0.0/24 route

# ip addr add 192.168.0.1/24 dev eth0
# ip route del 192.168.0.0/24 dev eth0
# # Testing unicast
# socat - udp-sendto:192.168.0.2:8000 <<< "Message"
2024/02/13 22:00:23 socat[90844] E sendto(5, 0x5d3cdaa2b000, 8, 0, AF=2 192.168.0.2:8000, 16): Network is unreachable
# # Testing broadcast
# socat - udp-sendto:192.168.0.255:8000,broadcast <<< "Message"
# # Worked

Here is a trick that has been tried and tested over the years: Install another distro, and use that to install Arch. This way, you can rely on an already working linux distro till your Arch install works the way you want.

Hmm... Maybe I should adjust my priorities.