this post was submitted on 08 Aug 2024
498 points (99.0% liked)

Selfhosted

40329 readers
638 users here now

A place to share alternatives to popular online services that can be self-hosted without giving up privacy or locking you into a service you don't control.

Rules:

  1. Be civil: we're here to support and learn from one another. Insults won't be tolerated. Flame wars are frowned upon.

  2. No spam posting.

  3. Posts have to be centered around self-hosting. There are other communities for discussing hardware or home computing. If it's not obvious why your post topic revolves around selfhosting, please include details to make it clear.

  4. Don't duplicate the full text of your blog or github here. Just post the link for folks to click.

  5. Submission headline should match the article title (don’t cherry-pick information from the title to fit your agenda).

  6. No trolling.

Resources:

Any issues on the community? Report it using the report flag.

Questions? DM the mods!

founded 1 year ago
MODERATORS
you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
[–] Wilzax@lemmy.world 34 points 3 months ago (4 children)

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

[–] friend_of_satan@lemmy.world 35 points 3 months ago (2 children)

Try using .com for your internal network and watch the problems arise. Their choice to reserve .internal helps people avoid fqdn collisions.

See also https://traintocode.com/stop-using-test-dot-com/

[–] Wilzax@lemmy.world 1 points 3 months ago (3 children)

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

[–] friend_of_satan@lemmy.world 14 points 3 months ago (1 children)

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.

[–] Wilzax@lemmy.world 5 points 3 months ago

Ah good point. I guess a future-proofed guarantee that the domain will never be used externally would be easier to use than trying to somehow configure my DNS to never update specific addresses.

[–] DarkMetatron@feddit.org 10 points 3 months ago (1 children)

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.

[–] aesthelete@lemmy.world 4 points 3 months ago (2 children)

I agree that this is a good idea, but I wanted to add that if someone owns a domain already, they can also use that internally without issue.

If you own a domain and use Let's Encrypt for a star cert, you can have nice, well secured internal applications on your network with trusted certificates.

[–] witten@lemmy.world 3 points 3 months ago (1 children)

You don't even need a star cert.. The DNS challenge works for that use case as well.

[–] aesthelete@lemmy.world 2 points 3 months ago (1 children)

I agree, if you're putting your internal domain names into the public DNS you do not need a star cert.

[–] emptiestplace@lemmy.ml 1 points 3 months ago (1 children)

No, you don't need to do that.

[–] aesthelete@lemmy.world 2 points 3 months ago

Maybe I'm missing something then, how would you pass a DNS challenge?

[–] DarkMetatron@feddit.org 2 points 3 months ago

That is great when using only RFC 1918 IPv4 addresses in the network, but as soon as IPv6 is added to the mix all those internal only network resources can becomes easy publicly available and announced. Yes, this can be prevented with firewalling but it should be considered.

[–] patrick@lemmy.jackson.dev 2 points 3 months ago

If you just run a personal private network, then yea pick anything because you can change it fairly easily. Companies should try to stick to things that they know won’t change under them just to avoid issues

[–] Voroxpete@sh.itjust.works 20 points 3 months ago (1 children)

Certain domain names are locally routed only. So if you use internal or local as a tld, you can just assign whatever names you want and your computer won't go looking out on the internet for them. This means you and I can both have fileserver.local as an address on our respective network without conflicting. It's the URI equivalent of 192.168.0.0/16.

[–] torkildr@lemmy.world 5 points 3 months ago

Interesting that you should use ".local" as an example, as that one's extra special, aka Multicast DNS

[–] ygpa@lemmy.world 18 points 3 months ago

YouCANN do anything you want?

[–] charonn0@startrek.website 7 points 3 months ago (1 children)

The value of the DNS is that we all use the same one. You can declare independence, but you'd lose out on that value.

the only losers in this situation are people that are squatting on my rightfully pirated domain names!