• Decronym@lemmy.decronym.xyzB
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    1
    ·
    edit-2
    2 months ago

    Acronyms, initialisms, abbreviations, contractions, and other phrases which expand to something larger, that I’ve seen in this thread:

    Fewer Letters More Letters
    CA (SSL) Certificate Authority
    DNS Domain Name Service/System
    HTTP Hypertext Transfer Protocol, the Web
    HTTPS HTTP over SSL
    IP Internet Protocol
    SSL Secure Sockets Layer, for transparent encryption
    TLS Transport Layer Security, supersedes SSL
    VPN Virtual Private Network

    6 acronyms in this thread; the most compressed thread commented on today has 6 acronyms.

    [Thread #910 for this sub, first seen 8th Aug 2024, 09:05] [FAQ] [Full list] [Contact] [Source code]

  • Wilzax@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    1
    ·
    3 months ago

    Why do I care what ICANN says I can do on my own network? It’s my network, I do what I want.

      • Wilzax@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        0
        ·
        3 months ago

        Well as long as the TLD isn’t used by anyone it should work internally regardless of what ICANN says, especially if I add it to etc/hosts

        • Magiilaro@feddit.org
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          1
          ·
          3 months ago

          German router and network products company AVM learned the hard way that this is a bad idea. They use fritz.box for their router interface page and it was great until tld .box became publicly available and somebody registered fritz.box.

          Having a reserved local/internal only tld is really great to prevent such issues.

        • friend_of_satan@lemmy.world
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          1
          ·
          3 months ago

          Sure, you can do whatever you want. You could even use non-rfc1918 addresses and nobody can stop you. It’s just not always a great idea for your own network’s functionality and security. You can use an unregistered TLD if you want, but it’s worth knowing that when people and companies did that in the past, and the TLD was later registered, things didn’t turn out well for them. You wouldn’t expect .foo to be a TLD, right? And it wasn’t, until it was.

    • xcjs@programming.dev
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      0
      ·
      3 months ago

      I was using .local, but it ran into too many conflicts with an mDNS service I host and vice versa. I switched to .lan, but I’m certainly not going to switch to .internal unless another conflict surfaces.

      I’ve also developed a host-monitoring solution that uses mDNS, so I’m not about to break my own software. 😅

    • dhtseany@lemmy.ml
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      0
      arrow-down
      1
      ·
      3 months ago

      I still haven’t heard a convincing argument to not use .local and I see no reason to stop.

      • SirEDCaLot@lemmy.today
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        1
        ·
        3 months ago

        Mainly conflicts with mDNS. However it’s shitty IMHO that the mDNS spec snarfed a domain already in widespread use, should have used .mDNS or similar.

        • xcjs@programming.dev
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          0
          ·
          3 months ago

          That I agree with. Microsoft drafted the recommendation to use it for local networks, and Apple ignored it or co-opted it for mDNS.

    • 🩷 eva 🩷@mastodon.bsd.cafe
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      1
      ·
      3 months ago

      @solrize @thehatfox get a free wildcard cert for your domain and use it just like any other. nothing new, nothing different. I have those running on LAN-only hosts behind a firewall and NAT with no port punching or UpNP or any ingress possible.

      if you don’t want to run a private CA with automated cert distribution (also simple with ansible or a few tens of LOC in shell or python), the LetsEncrypt is trivial and costs nothing – still requires one to load the cert and key onto a server though, which is 2/3 of the work vs private CA cert management.

    • lemmyvore@feddit.nl
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      0
      ·
      3 months ago

      If you mean properly signed certificates (as opposed to self-signed) you’ll need a domain name, and you’ll need your LAN DNS server to resolve a made-up subdomain like lan.domain.com. With that you can get a wildcard Let’s Encrypt certificate for *.lan.domain.com and all your https://whatever.lan.domain.com URLs will work normally in any browser (for as long as you’re on the LAN).

      • solrize@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        0
        ·
        3 months ago

        Right, main point of my comment is that .internal is harder to use that it immediately sounds. I don’t even know how to install a new CA root into Android Firefox. Maybe there is a way to do it, but it is pretty limited compared to the desktop version.

        • cereals@lemmy.ml
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          1
          ·
          3 months ago

          You can’t install a root CA in Firefox for android.

          You have to install the cert in android and set Firefox to use the android truststore.

          You have to go in Firefox settings>about Firefox and tap the Firefox logo for a few times. You then have a hidden menu where you can set Firefox to not use its internal trust store.

          You then have to live with a permanent warning in androids quick setting that your traffic might be captured because of the root ca you installed.

          It does work, but it sucks.