[HN Gopher] Iran Goes Into IPv6 Blackout
___________________________________________________________________
Iran Goes Into IPv6 Blackout
Author : honeycrispy
Score : 346 points
Date : 2026-01-08 16:11 UTC (6 hours ago)
(HTM) web link (radar.cloudflare.com)
(TXT) w3m dump (radar.cloudflare.com)
| dgrin91 wrote:
| Seems like v4s zeroed out for a tiny bit too, but even now they
| are substantially lower than normal. Odd behavior, I don't know
| if its a precursor to an attack or some infra issue
| hvenev wrote:
| For IPv4 the graph does not start at zero, but at around 45K.
| syncsynchalt wrote:
| Correct, click the "Min/Max scale" toggle to get a zero-based
| graph that shows the v4 reduction in context.
| reactordev wrote:
| Considering the recent events going on, it's definitely sus.
| Weryj wrote:
| Probably more likely a internet blackout to counter the
| protests.
| miadabrin wrote:
| for context: There is a call to action from an opposition
| leader for people to join the protests today. They normally
| cutoff internet infrastructure on purpose in these cases so
| people cannot communicate
| Nicook wrote:
| Yeah I am suprised everyone thinks this is necessarily
| internal. Could equally be related to IL/USA incoming
| aggression.
|
| I'd at least keep an open mind for a while.
| bawolff wrote:
| An attack would probably undermine the protests. From a
| strategy perspective, probably the last thing Israel/USA want
| to do is give the Iranian regime a common enemy to rally
| around in the midst of a protest that might plausibly over
| throw the Iranian regime.
| keybored wrote:
| > From a strategy perspective, probably the last thing
| Israel/USA want to do is give the Iranian regime a common
| enemy to rally around in the midst of a protest that might
| plausibly over throw the Iranian regime.
|
| They attacked Iran a little while ago. But now they are
| playing it cool like a cucumber?
| bawolff wrote:
| There wasn't really any sort of plausible protest
| movement going on at the time, and the strikes did result
| in an upswell of regime support in the short term.
|
| It was advantagous for them to strike when they did, so
| they did. Its much less advantageous in this moment, so
| it seems less likely they will now. Or at least not
| overtly.
|
| > But now they are playing it cool like a cucumber?
|
| Well yes. Countries tend to do things they think will
| make them more powerful. Sometimes that means blowing
| shit up, but that is not always the right play.
| ronsor wrote:
| No competent network engineer wants to work in Iran, so
| government doesn't know how to block v6 properly. End result:
| just get rid of it entirely!
| umanwizard wrote:
| Why would they want to block IPv6 specifically?
| tguvot wrote:
| (going with recent ipv6 discussion) they probably failed to
| make it work properly and decided that it's easier to block
| it
| umanwizard wrote:
| Is this an attempt at a joke, or do you actually seriously
| believe a country capable of enriching uranium isn't
| capable of hiring competent network engineers?
| tguvot wrote:
| i'll leave it as exercise to a reader
| bigyabai wrote:
| Reading through their comment history, it doesn't seem
| like a good-faith comment. Not sure what they thought HN
| stood to gain from their contribution here.
| tguvot wrote:
| Reading through their comment history, it doesn't seem
| like a good-faith comment. Not sure what they thought HN
| stood to gain from their contribution here.
| bigyabai wrote:
| Case in point.
| cogman10 wrote:
| IDK for sure, but might be harder to maintain, monitor, and
| block.
|
| One characteristic of v4 is it's somewhat reasonable to do a
| straight forward block on a range of addresses to shut down
| access. This is still somewhat possible with v6, but harder
| as there's simply a much larger portion of ip addresses that
| can be all over the place. It's theoretically a lot easier
| for anyone that wants to bypass a simple filter to grab a new
| public IP address.
| sva_ wrote:
| Additionally to the much larger IP space, you also have
| larger headers and additionally extension headers which
| make deep packet inspection computationally much more
| expensive if you consider the scale
| iso1631 wrote:
| n ipv4 /32 is roughly equivalent to an ipv6 /56 or /64
|
| You'd typically block an AS - i.e. every IP originating
| from AS12345. That's just as easy on v6 as v4.
| toast0 wrote:
| Otoh, ipv6 address assignment tends to be much more
| contiguous. My (small) residential ISP has one v6 prefix
| but several v4 prefixes. If you block the whole prefix for
| services you don't like, it's far less prefixes for v6.
|
| But, it is a new skill, and you can turn off v6 at small
| cost if you're already ok with heavily restricting v4.
| miyuru wrote:
| >One characteristic of v4 is it's somewhat reasonable to do
| a straight forward block on a range of addresses to shut
| down access. This is still somewhat possible with v6, but
| harder as there's simply a much larger portion of ip
| addresses that can be all over the place. It's
| theoretically a lot easier for anyone that wants to bypass
| a simple filter to grab a new public IP address.
|
| no its not, its easier to block IPv6 ranges than IPv4 ones.
|
| if someone want be block my ISP, they only need a single
| /32 rule with v6.
| davidw wrote:
| There are some pretty big protests happening right now: https
| ://bsky.app/profile/chadbourn.bsky.social/post/3mbvphn4...
| umanwizard wrote:
| That doesn't explain why they would want to block IPv6
| _specifically_ , and not also block IPv4.
| marcosdumay wrote:
| The OP's comment is that they can censor IPv4 when they
| want, but they don't know how to censor IPv6. So they
| block it entirely.
| helloaltalt wrote:
| Thanks this really explains the situation.
| observationist wrote:
| A lot of the Starlink and other contraband uplinks are
| using ipv6, allowing connectivity for people the regime
| doesn't want to have contact with the rest of the world.
| They don't want the revolution broadcast or popularized.
| umanwizard wrote:
| I wouldn't think blocking terrestrial IPv6 links would
| have anything to do with blocking Starlink.
| syncsynchalt wrote:
| It could be as simple as their surveillance / censorship
| tools not fully supporting IPv6.
| stackskipton wrote:
| It's much more difficult to block.
|
| A lot of anti censorship organizations have trouble getting
| more IPv4 /24 for cost reasons or moving it around to
| different AS since they would go offline.
|
| With IPv6, you can get IPv6 /40 from ARIN/RIPE no problem.
| You slice that up into /48 and just start bouncing it all
| over the place. When one /48 goes down, you move everything
| to another /48, switch providers if required and continue.
|
| EDIT: They also tend to get multiple blocks as well for when
| ISP figures out to root /40.
| jcalvinowens wrote:
| > It's much more difficult to block.
|
| No it isn't. Nobody is blocking ranges as they roll in,
| they're blocking whole ASNs at once. That's just as trivial
| with v6 as v4, actually v6 can be simpler because ISPs tend
| to have fewer large blocks in v6land.
| stackskipton wrote:
| There are plenty of providers that when you BYOIP, they
| will broadcast out of their ASN, I know Azure does,
| Google appears to, no clue on AWS. Plenty of colo
| providers including $LastCompanyProvider will fold your
| IP block under their ASN as well. That's how it worked at
| last job.
|
| Sure, Iran government may just decide to block that
| specific ASN but if it's they want to remain somewhat on
| the internet, they are stuck with "Smack entire broad
| ASNs and lose large chucks of internet" or "Block
| specific IP spaces."
| coretx wrote:
| Because v6 IPs are cheap, expendable and routing it over
| encrypted tunnels does not look suspicious. Anyone can buy a
| block and with little help announce them from multiple
| locations including home, mobile, uni wifi, and route further
| from there.
| coffeemug wrote:
| Two counterintuitive/surprising lessons I've come to
| appreciate:
|
| 1.Talent pools in nation states are extraordinarily deep-- much
| deeper than they appear. Countries can suffer from brain drain
| for decades (or centuries!) but when conditions call for it,
| superbly talented people somehow manifest.
|
| 2. The correlation between talent and conscience is weak.
| Nation states always manage to find superbly talented people to
| work on problems many of us would recoil from.
| f1shy wrote:
| This is so much true! Indeed you can find absolutely
| everywhere absolutely incredible brilliant people in any area
| you want. The reason for the 1st and 3rd world is that is
| difficult to come by enough people and then coordinate them:
| is about critical mass and alignment.
|
| About 2. also 100% true: intelligence/knowledge is totally
| independent of any other trait.
| coffeemug wrote:
| Right-- talent isn't that useful in a vacuum. You need
| economic and legal infrastructure that talented people can
| plug into to be productive. That infrastructure (a) takes a
| very long time to build and (b) depends on cultural norms
| that take a long time to evolve and don't find fertile
| ground everywhere.
| SilentM68 wrote:
| I tend to agree with most of what you said regarding all
| governments and countries. What may not be widely known is
| that some authoritarian regimes have been accused by
| expatriates of identifying and indoctrinating intellectually
| gifted children into their state-sponsored organizations for
| use by these entities for unmentionable purposes. Of course,
| it's next to impossible to find written documentation, with
| specific details since detailed evidence in such states are
| understandably hard to retrieve. Most of these accounts
| arrive through word of mouth.
| chrneu wrote:
| >What may not be widely known is that some authoritarian
| regimes have been accused by expatriates of identifying and
| indoctrinating intellectually gifted children into their
| state-sponsored organizations
|
| Literally every country does this. It's just perspective
| whether an individual thinks it's okay or not.
|
| If you're on the side doing the indoctrination, you
| probably agree with it, or are indoctrinated yourself. We
| all are to some degree.
| keybored wrote:
| Counter-intuitive? The primary motivation for fretting about
| Brain Drain (whether it is true or not is secondary) is
| because the people who fret about it are educated
| professionals, precisely the people who are prone to build
| their identity around the idea that society thrives and
| succumbs based on their own existence.
|
| The same people who have unironically latched onto the idea
| of Meritocracy. A concept/idea that was literally conceived
| as a parody.
| giancarlostoro wrote:
| Stuxnet v2? Speculation I know, but wow, IPv4 came back up, but
| IPv6 is completely out, looks like 48 million devices? Compared
| to IPv4's 47 thousand (wow that's insane).
|
| Looking at IPv6 its not 0 exactly, looks like probably
| censorship, only some devices allowed online? Some other comment
| mentioned there's calls to protest again today.
| dogma1138 wrote:
| No, it is the Iranian government shutting down the internet.
| zdragnar wrote:
| They are almost certainly attempting to shut down
| communications due to the ongoing anti government protests.
| anthk wrote:
| Teredo/Miredo would work on top of IPV4.
| cimi_ wrote:
| Not specific to this IPv6 event, but I was wondering what happens
| to public services during these Internet shutdowns?
|
| Does everything stop or it's mostly business as usual minus some
| things?
|
| I would imagine hospitals, tax offices etc need the internet to
| work?
| falaki wrote:
| In recent years they have been trying to build a nation-wide
| Intranet that can function while international gateways are
| blocked. It is not perfect and every time they block the
| Internet, many issues happen but for the most port critical
| network services (such as payments) continue to function.
| throwaway894345 wrote:
| Seems like it would be an easy target for the government (or
| really anyone) to DOS, right? Presumably there's no good way
| for the nation-wide intranet to exclude government actors?
| I'm just thinking out loud; I'm glad to hear something is
| being done and I wish the Iranian people the best.
| ceejayoz wrote:
| Ironically, their long history of shutoff and censorship
| probably mean they're more resilient to stuff like this.
| thaack wrote:
| Matt Lakeman's recent "Notes on Afghanistan" actually covers
| this as he first-hand experienced a similar situation in
| Afghanistan where the Taliban had shut off the internet:
|
| "The internet was out. Everywhere. Across the entire country.
| No cell data, no wifi, no phone service, and as far as I could
| tell, there are no landlines in Afghanistan [...] But now the
| blackout was total. Our waiter was complaining to my guide that
| he couldn't contact his mother in a western province. I saw
| other people in the crowded restaurant fiddling with their
| phones and looking annoyed. I asked my guide what he thought
| was going on. He shrugged."
|
| "Without internet and phones, people can't talk to loved ones,
| businesses can't function, trade can't function, and even
| government offices can't function. Only the Taliban with their
| well-established network of short-wave radios can function. But
| still, if the internet remains off long enough in Afghanistan,
| the country's economy and society may very well collapse.
| Afghans couldn't get money from banks. Soon enough, would food
| stop being delivered to cities?"
|
| https://mattlakeman.org/2026/01/05/notes-on-afghanistan/#
| macleginn wrote:
| Russia has been systematically shutting down the Internet for a
| long time now, to disrupt Ukrainian drones. The effects were
| very painful intially, especially re payment systems; people
| were encouraged to withdraw and carry cash. Now they are
| shifting more and more towards a "whitelisting" approach where
| a handful of services continue to function while everything
| else is turned off. As usual in Russia, people complain but
| adapt.
| falaki wrote:
| Fortunately, the government cannot enforce complete blackout
| because thousands of startlink terminals are active inside the
| country. They have been complaining about it [1] to no avail.
| Using these terminals activists and journalists continue to
| upload videos of demonstrations to social media which has enabled
| analyses that show demonstrations are very wide spread [2] and
| continue to grow.
|
| [1]
| https://www.itu.int/en/ITU-R/conferences/RRB/Pages/Starlink....
|
| [2] https://www.bbc.com/news/articles/cre28d2j2zxo
| tuhgdetzhh wrote:
| Isn't it possible to jam the starlink receiver?
| adrianpike wrote:
| Yes, with the caveat that you'll need decent line of sight to
| it.
| falaki wrote:
| I hear after the Ukraine war, Starlink became very good at
| thwarting jamming. I am confident the Iranians are not as
| sophisticated as the Russians in than front.
| ReptileMan wrote:
| The Russians are themselves heavy users of starlink.
| null_deref wrote:
| Can you provide a source for this claim?
| esseph wrote:
| Start here:
|
| https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Starlink_in_the_Russian-
| Ukrain...
|
| Scroll down to Russian use.
|
| Starlink receivers have been found in use in drones by
| both sides in the war.
|
| There's a lot of Open Source intel on this.
| iammjm wrote:
| Here, have a video of the russian cavalry with a Starlink
| attached to a horse. Yes, you have read that right. 2026
| btw. https://www.reddit.com/r/UkraineWarVideoReport/comme
| nts/1q7i... Also: https://www.telegraph.co.uk/world-
| news/2026/01/08/russia-sat...
| TiredOfLife wrote:
| Just the latest one
|
| https://x.com/bayraktar_1love/status/2009240533944947050
| nfriedly wrote:
| Not the person you asked, but here's a couple of sources
| that back that claim:
|
| https://www.newsweek.com/russia-starlink-ukraine-gur-
| elon-mu...
|
| https://kyivindependent.com/nearly-half-of-usaid-
| starlink-te...
|
| Also, as I understand it, a big part of the reason USAID
| was fed "into the woodchipper" was because they were
| investigating SpaceX over Russian use of Starlink - see
| https://gizmodo.com/elon-musks-enemy-usaid-was-
| investigating...
| EthanHeilman wrote:
| Yes, but it is more difficult than jamming a typical radio
| antenna because the starlink uses a directed beam rather than
| a omnidirectional radio broadcast. This either requires
| enormous amounts of power, targeting the satellite itself
| with a directed radio beam, or getting between the satellite
| and the ground station by bouncing a signal off the
| ionosphere.
|
| The above is for jamming directed beams in general. It is
| likely that starlink has a number of other jamming
| countermeasures.
| edoceo wrote:
| Multibeam too, right?
| almosthere wrote:
| my thoughts as well.
| pc86 wrote:
| What is the point of this comment?
| ktm5j wrote:
| What's the point of yours?
| weregiraffe wrote:
| >targeting the satellite itself with a directed radio beam
|
| And good luck targeting enough Starlink satellites...
| H8crilA wrote:
| Just to add more details.
|
| Beamforming is essentially yet another way to achieve gain,
| just like one does with a directional antenna. The Starlink
| terminal achieves a gain of roughly 33 dB, which means it
| talks (and also listens) in the peak direction at power
| levels that are around 2000x higher than what one would
| achieve with isotropic antennas. 2000x sounds like a lot,
| but it is actually not impossible to reach. Consumer
| electronics sends at most a few Watts of RF power, but
| serious jammers of the type used by militaries can run
| kilowatts. If you consider the peak power used for brief
| moments of time then you can get as high as megawatts - the
| famous AWACS aircraft briefly flash half a continent at
| somewhere around 1 MW, with average TX power of ~single
| digit kilowatt.
| spacemule wrote:
| Bouncing signals off of the ionosphere is most definitely
| not an option here. The bandwidth of the signals that
| Starlink needs in order to provide service are far wider
| than the range of frequencies that bounce off any layer of
| the ionosphere. If you could get a 10GHz signal to bounce
| off of the F layer, you'd have a lot of very excited
| amateur radio operators who would start using that instead
| of the moon as their reflector.
| inglor_cz wrote:
| Possible, yes, but the Iranian government almost certainly
| isn't capable of doing so, much less across the entire
| country.
|
| Even Russians don't seem to be able to jam Starlink on the
| Ukrainian battlefields.
|
| China, maybe.
| scoofy wrote:
| Huge idiot here with an honest question: with starlink,
| could a rogue actor just point a bunch of high-powered
| lasers at the satellites and brick them?
| Yizahi wrote:
| Cheaper to launch a barrel of metal trash to the Starlink
| orbits. Or a few barrels. Iran has rockets for that.
| throwaway894345 wrote:
| I've got to think it's easy to find starlink receivers--I
| know they use a directed beam but they must give off a bunch
| of lateral noise, right? Or does Starlink use the same
| frequency bands as other common equipment such that it would
| be difficult to distinguish starlink signals from others? If
| the government was motivated they could surely start finding
| these receivers, right?
| BenjiWiebe wrote:
| Well the better your beam is directed, the less lateral
| noise there is.
|
| A simple 3 element yagi has <1% of the power to the sides.
| It has more of the power straight behind it, but still 1%
| or so of the main lobe.
| throwaway894345 wrote:
| Is 1% still quite a lot louder than other things in the
| same band?
| everfrustrated wrote:
| From what I read, the Russians were targeting Starlink
| terminals based on the built-in wifi access point not the
| Starlink frequencies.
| Noaidi wrote:
| Destroy the satellites? I mean all that have to do is screw
| up the trajectory of some of the satellites to cause
| exponential collisions...
| bhhaskin wrote:
| Iran does not have that capability. But that would also be
| an act of war.
| Noaidi wrote:
| No, it wouldn't be an act of war, it would be "a military
| operation".
| octoberfranklin wrote:
| Flinging spacejunk pollution into orbit is extremely
| simple if you have rockets.
|
| Iran has lots of rockets.
|
| Iran also has basically zero of their own satellites in
| orbit that they care about.
|
| Spacejunk is a highly asymmetric tactic.
| yehoshuapw wrote:
| they do have satellites. I'm less sure about how much
| they care about them - but they are not cheap
| octoberfranklin wrote:
| That's my point. They have so few that sacrificing them
| would be irrelevant.
| some_bird wrote:
| Ah yes, Kessler's space shredder, something to be feared by
| all satellites!
|
| It appears that we are very close to an unstoppable runaway
| process of collisions in space. On one hand, nice that we
| prevent rich guys from running away to other planets after
| ruining this one. On the other hand, a lot of services
| require GPS, it would be chaos if that were to disappear...
| octoberfranklin wrote:
| GPS is in geosynchronous orbit, insanely far from the
| Earth's surface.
|
| You can't get chain-reaction collisions to happen at such
| an outrageously high orbit. That amount of mass you'd
| have to put into orbit is just insane. It's like trying
| to crash the moon.
| wat10000 wrote:
| Nitpick, GPS is about halfway to geosync. Your point
| stands.
| Noaidi wrote:
| Ahahaahhaaa.... People are downvoting this! Ahahaaaahha!
|
| Scared cause it's true? Ahhahaa no idea!
| GaggiX wrote:
| They are almost completely inaccessible to the average Iranian.
| A friend of mine who has come a long way to fight Iranian
| censorship told me that they essentially don't exist.
| burkaman wrote:
| There are ~100,000 users, about 0.1% of the population:
| https://www.newsweek.com/starlink-usage-iran-skyrockets-
| brea...
|
| Compare that to the number of cell phone users which is very
| close to 100%. All estimates of the number of mobile
| subscribers or number of mobile phone numbers are greater
| than the total population.
| helloaltalt wrote:
| How are there so many users, see my other comment but i
| will ask here as well but starlink's american company and
| sanctioned iran so how do the details really work?
|
| And how do starlink recievers enter the country in the
| first place?
|
| This is good that there is still a way to get censorship
| resistance even after all this perhaps joining it with
| other protocols which can work via bluetooth,wifi etc. and
| are more secure connecting to something like this, a secure
| internet access point could be developed but I don't know
| too much about it.
| petre wrote:
| Black market. We had satellite dishes in Eastern Europe
| during communism. Bribe some people, shell out some
| insane amounts of cash and it can be done.
| helloaltalt wrote:
| If black market's the only reason that
| activism/journalism/outside contact is even possible in
| the country
|
| It doesn't seem much of a plan (very sadly, I wish there
| was) which could be uncensored that much, some other
| comment pointed this point too but if black market's the
| case, then they would just hide whoever is using this
|
| They would also most likely be very less in amount,
| journalists etc.
|
| But the average person, they are stuck without proper
| internet
|
| I thought that there are materials which can build
| starlink and the only thing then you need is just
| subscription or something
|
| It's just sad to see that black market is the only way.
| petre wrote:
| Stop worrying. You don't have to liberate everyone. The
| Iranian regime will screw itself up by attacking Israel.
|
| It's usually smuggled parts if they're small enough.
| Someone outside of the country usually makes the
| subscription and they get paid somehow.
| inglor_cz wrote:
| As someone who grew up in late Communist Czechoslovakia,
| you underestimate the black market. Its capabilities were
| only comparable to the Secret Police itself (StB in our
| case).
|
| People in unfree conditions are crafty. Same with
| information. Suppressed information spreads using
| underground channels quite quickly.
|
| For example, we knew almost immediately that there was
| some nuclear disaster in Ukraine even though the official
| channels didn't say anything for days.
| scottyah wrote:
| As long as starlink isn't forced to geofence an area,
| anyone can buy a terminal anywhere and smuggle it in as
| any other drug or contraband. The mini's are about the
| same size as a laptop
| syncsynchalt wrote:
| Tools to evade state surveillance and censorship are
| explicitly exempted from US sanctions against Iran.
|
| https://www.reuters.com/world/us-expands-sanctions-
| exception...
| torginus wrote:
| Possibly the number of users is even larger, if people can
| share a terminal. Wifi 802.11s Mesh with Batman routing
| scales very well to huge sizes.
| helloaltalt wrote:
| They must be smuggled inside the country and the dictatorship
| can say anything they want and charge if they get caught so
| they must be very few in numbers
|
| I don't know too much about starlink but is there a way that
| someone can pay for other person's usage and then build a
| starlink receiver or something from spare parts or like easy
| accesible parts from the world?
|
| Because how would people get starlink device. I dont know the
| mecanism of startlink though or how it works
| falaki wrote:
| Yes, there are NGOs and organizations that sponsor these
| and pay for them. Here is an example: https://www.forbes.co
| m/sites/cyrusfarivar/2024/12/18/inside-...
| helloaltalt wrote:
| Forbes asking me to pay
|
| Elevate Your Journey Invest in your success with
| unlimited access to trusted, in-depth journalism for less
| than $1/week. Become a member today to continue.
|
| here's an web.archive.org link if anyone's interested
| which works
|
| https://web.archive.org/web/20250301050041/https://www.fo
| rbe...
|
| Edit: WTF forbes still gives me a popup even in archive,
| strange, but its less restrictive overall in the web
| archive version so I am able to still copy and read the
| version
| shellwizard wrote:
| No problem using uBO and FF
| pantalaimon wrote:
| > is there a way that someone can pay for other person's
| usage and then build a starlink receiver or something from
| spare parts or like easy accesible parts from the world?
|
| Starlink uses a pretty sophisticated phased array antenna,
| so not something you can easily build in your garage.
| maxall4 wrote:
| Starlink receivers are actually very complicated. They make
| use of a bunch of high-end FPGAs and a bunch of other
| expensive and uncommon components. See this teardown:
| https://youtu.be/h6MfM8EFkGg?si=m-sN6UW4nh8_HzPR.
| torginus wrote:
| I wonder how easy is it to get contraband into the country.
| The country's huge, and with the current govt not being the
| most popular or financially well off, I guess there are
| quite a few border officers willing to make some extra
| money.
| BurningFrog wrote:
| Those who have one surely keep that fact secret.
| tguvot wrote:
| in 2019 internet shutdown happened just before crackdown on
| protests
| bawolff wrote:
| Probably the goal of the blackouts is to hinder organizing on
| social media, discord, whatsapp, etc, not to prevent news
| getting out.
| themafia wrote:
| > social media which has enabled analyses
|
| Social media is such a narrow lens that I would be cautious
| accepting that analysis at face value.
| estimator7292 wrote:
| > Using these terminals activists and journalists continue to
| upload videos of demonstrations to an S3 bucket, which has
| enabled analyses that show demonstrations are very wide
| spread
|
| Does that make you feel better?
| themafia wrote:
| If you want a sober and thorough analysis then using a
| single source is a bad idea. This does not involve
| feelings, in fact, quite the opposite.
|
| If you want my feelings, then yes, I do think it's chilling
| that people can satisfy themselves that a few select videos
| from a foreign area is enough intelligence to make a
| decision about war.
|
| If you've never had the pleasure of working in a war zone
| after the troops have left then I think you should ponder
| the consequences of your analysis a little more deeply.
| TechSquidTV wrote:
| Government enacted shut down due to protests. I'd like to hear
| more about how they actually do this.
| https://www.cbsnews.com/news/iran-cutting-internet-amid-dead...
| immibis wrote:
| Most likely they just go to the head of the ISP (I bet there's
| only one) and say turn the internet off or else.
| mywittyname wrote:
| You assume threats need to be made.
|
| One doesn't get to be the head of a business in a country
| like Iran without being a True Believer.
| ReptileMan wrote:
| I doubt there are many true believers. Most of the top
| brass are probably driven from sf interest. But loyalty is
| beyond doubt. At least until the regime is winning
| BurningFrog wrote:
| It's enough to be a True Obeyer.
| helloaltalt wrote:
| Iran is kind of like russia thinking about it.
|
| Russia's trying to censor some shit too by having outside
| ipv4 or something (dont know what its called) blocked and
| basically made a large intranet
|
| But people could still buy vps and make it work somehow
|
| So iran and russia are similar in that sense and this
| kinda puts things more into balance but I am sure that %
| of true believers/doing for self interest might vary or
| something
| thesdev wrote:
| Yep, everything connecting to the Internet goes through the
| TIC.
|
| https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Telecommunication_Infrastructu.
| ..
| breppp wrote:
| Ministry of Information is a name with a certain feel
| zamadatix wrote:
| I probably spent far too much time looking into why
| they'd set themselves up with that kind of name... but it
| just nerd sniped me too hard to pass up.
|
| Translation tools claim (I don't know enough to verify) a
| literal translation is "Ministry of Communications and
| Information Technology". I.e. they handle telecoms & IT,
| or "communications technology and information technology"
| if fully expanded.
|
| But why bother switching it around to "Ministry of
| Information and Communications Technology" then?
| Apparently because that's what the order we call it in
| English https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Information_and_com
| munications... which surprised me because I didn't even
| know that was a term and I've only ever worked in the IT
| and telecoms jobs - WHTMA (We Have Too Many Acronyms).
| deepriverfish wrote:
| they don't need to say the or else part since they control
| the whole country including the ISP.
| RealityVoid wrote:
| You might then enjoy this story that was on the front page a
| couple of days ago:
|
| https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=46505352
| WhereIsTheTruth wrote:
| > Government enacted shut down due to protests
|
| Not just protests, it's to prevent foreign interference (like
| CIA) from fueling civil unrest and spreading AI deepfakes, as
| seen in Myanmar and Brazil
|
| https://www.amnesty.org/en/latest/news/2022/09/myanmar-faceb...
| daedrdev wrote:
| Wow its so nice this excuse just happens to shut down the
| internet when an astronomically unpopular regime faces vast
| protests after years of economic and political mismanagement
| aprilthird2021 wrote:
| Internet shut downs are really common in authoritarian
| countries. India used to shut the Internet down in Kashmir
| every other day, and in random states for random reasons
| some as seemingly trivial as high school students taking
| their board exams
| ithkuil wrote:
| Apparently a lot of people in the west too are assuming
| that these protests are fueled by the west. At least that's
| the most likely explanation for why so many left leaning
| youth are not supporting Iranians while supporting
| Palestine. Apparently the fight is not about freedom but
| about (perceived) whiteness vs non-whiteness
| irusensei wrote:
| These people treat geopolitics as if they are watching an
| avengers movie.
| logicchains wrote:
| >Apparently the fight is not about freedom but about
| (perceived) whiteness vs non-whiteness
|
| But the Iranians are white. The name Iran is literally
| derived from "Aryan".
| ithkuil wrote:
| Yeah of course none of this makes sense. And yet it all
| has real world consequences. It's all incredibly
| partisan. If one just manages to take a step back and
| watch this dynamic from outside it all seems so weird:
| the islamist Iran backs Hamas, Hamas are Palestinians,
| Palestinians are victimized by Jews, Jews have money,
| capitalists have money, america is capitalist, america is
| imperialist, ergo .... Islamist Iran is against
| capitalist imperialism. The protests are against islamist
| Iran ergo they are against the fight against capitalist
| imperialism and thus they don't deserve solidarity, or
| something like this.
|
| I would really love to hear from somebody who is not
| supporting the Iran protests to honestly tell me if I
| misrepresented their position and in which way
| Aloisius wrote:
| I believe that was the point they were making.
|
| While I don't think they're right that Iran is ignored
| because Iranian protesters and the Iranian government are
| both perceived as white by Americans (or both non-white,
| depending on the person), it's undeniable that they use
| the perceived non-whiteness of Palestinians and perceived
| whiteness of Israelis as rhetorical ammunition.
|
| This rhetorical device is a rather effective as Americans
| have a tendency to view everything through their own lens
| of "race"/color so casting the conflict as white people
| oppressing non-white people _because_ they are non-white
| is a powerful argument that is easily understood by
| Americans.
|
| That said, personally, I think Iran is ignored more
| because Palestine is sucking all the air out of the room
| than anything else, especially with all the graphic
| videos/photos. Sudan on the other hand... there's really
| no excuse for ignoring that.
| shigawire wrote:
| >Personally, I think Iran is ignored more because
| Palestine is sucking all the air out of the room than
| anything else, especially with all the graphic
| videos/photos.
|
| >Sudan on the other hand... there's really no excuse for
| ignoring that.
|
| Palestine has the focus because America tax dollars most
| directly fuel the conflict and it is the most one-sided.
|
| Iran is an internal conflict and Sudan is a civil war -
| neither of which are as directly funded by the US. Also
| neither has a perceived clear solution. In the case of
| Israel, the US should have significant leverage that it
| does not have in those other conflicts.
| graemep wrote:
| Aryan does not equal white.
|
| Definitions of race are very culturally dependent. A few
| decades ago South Asians were regarded as caucasian (I
| have an American encyclopedia published in the 1950s that
| says so), a century earlier so were some East Africans
| (Somalis IIRC). The current western definition of white
| does not include them.
|
| Similarly the current American definition of black
| includes people most of the rest of the world would not
| consider black - we sometimes have to be told that some
| people identify as "black" (what Americans call passing
| as white).
| FilosofumRex wrote:
| No, they're just better educated about Iran than are you.
|
| Iran provides substantial food, fuel, education and
| healthcare subsidies to the average citizen and has a
| very effective state bureaucracy which functions
| independent of political appointees. Pensioners' checks
| are issued regularly and social services are delivered by
| charitable "Bonyads", which are run by local mosques,
| which don't report to any government ministries.
| perching_aix wrote:
| I gave this a skim and a keyword search. Note that I'm not
| familiar with the matter.
|
| The article claims that the Rohingya genocide in Myanmar that
| kicked off in 2017 has been substantively fueled by Facebook
| propaganda efforts, with strong links to _Myanmar 's own
| "security forces" (military)_.
|
| > it's to prevent foreign interference (like CIA) from
| fueling civil unrest and spreading AI deepfakes, as seen in
| Myanmar and Brazil
|
| In contrast then, you seem to allege that it was actually a
| foreign interference campaign by the CIA? Or am I
| misunderstanding what you're proposing?
|
| Because if I'm not, I fail to see how what you linked
| supports that at all. Even your mention of deepfakes seems
| very questionable, as those haven't been a thing until late
| 2017, by which point this cleansing effort was already long
| underway. I further see that the US has formally condemned
| these events, although of course that does not rule out
| involvement.
| WhereIsTheTruth wrote:
| CIA and Amnesty's claims aside, focus on how social media
| fuels civil unrest, the real concern is foreign
| interference, Iran has been a target for a very long time
|
| The US wants a regime change, that's a fact, Trump has been
| very vocal on the matter, and the NSA has the tools to do
| what ever it pleases on the internet (e.g., PRISM)
| perching_aix wrote:
| People can focus on a lot of things and make any
| arbitrary narrative emerge. My problem is exactly that I
| do not find this angle compelling so far, especially in
| light of the to-me-obvious alternative.
|
| You started off by listing a bunch of things that did not
| pass my smell test (and you have now walked back on),
| then followed it up by what's essentially a scattershot
| of vague gesturings. Why would I focus on what you tell
| me to? Not only is any of these not compelling, I do not
| find you a reliable narrator so far at all.
| bawolff wrote:
| You know what else fuels unrest - potentially not having
| basic needs met by society. There is a major economic
| crisis in Iran. There is an impending water crisis.
|
| Social media is a new thing, but protests are old. People
| protested in despotic regimes prior to social media, and
| the triggering factors were basically the same as what is
| happening in Iran right now.
| breppp wrote:
| or alternatively to shutdown information flowing out just
| before the killing begins
|
| https://www.amnesty.org/en/latest/press-
| release/2020/11/iran...
| bawolff wrote:
| Pretty sure the CIA is perfectly capable of doing that
| without the internet.
|
| If anything its easier to spread rumours without the internet
| to let people compare notes
| averysmallbird wrote:
| There's no single mechanism. Iran's internet is diverse at the
| edge, and bottlenecked at the international gateway.
|
| Censorship, throttling, and (presumably) surveillance occurs at
| both layers. In some cases, also the region matters (Sistan and
| Baluchistan for example have experienced extended blackouts).
| In part that heterogeneity is because they still ideally want
| to keep businesses or VIPs online to mitigate the economic loss
| or logistical issues.
|
| Consequently, the actual means of blocking tends to be on an
| ISP basis: some will simply drop packets, some will have left
| certain endpoints open, some will leave international DNS open,
| etc etc. All that changes when activists notice, exploit the
| opening, and then the ISP finds out. And then sometimes the TIC
| (the gateway) will impose blanket limitations or throttling.
|
| My impression is that Iranian intelligence cares less about
| means than effectiveness, and ISP operators want to keep their
| license, livelihoods and lives, so they figure out how to meet
| the mandate. Given that this is something like the fourth
| blackout in recent years, they've gotten enough practice that
| there's few options out (that aren't Starlink).
| helloaltalt wrote:
| > Consequently, the actual means of blocking tends to be on
| an ISP basis: some will simply drop packets, some will have
| left certain endpoints open, some will leave international
| DNS open, etc etc. All that changes when activists notice,
| exploit the opening, and then the ISP finds out. And then
| sometimes the TIC (the gateway) will impose blanket
| limitations or throttling.
|
| Your international dns is interesting post, can dns over
| https still work like cloudflare's 1.1.1.1 (I don't think cf
| would work but still) or any other service?
|
| Is there any iranian person in here hackernews who can test
| if international dns query works?
|
| There are ways to send some very important data (although
| small so a little limited but I think in current time if it
| can help 1% it helps) that I saw that we can program dns to
| send each other arbitrary data as well
|
| In fact there is a tool which can in fact run dns queries and
| create a sort of finger like protocol on it called dns.toys
| https://www.dns.toys/
|
| Which can basically have some cli application like experience
| on top of dns and there msut be dns tools for communications
| as well.
| itintheory wrote:
| The term you're looking for is "dns tunneling".
| uyzstvqs wrote:
| Can't wait for a certain dictator to get a cellmate, so that our
| Persian and Kurdish friends can have freedom, including free
| unrestricted internet access.
|
| And for fellow HN users from there, here's some great stuff:
| https://yggdrasil-network.github.io/ https://bitchat.free/
| huragok wrote:
| MbS? MbZ?
| throwaway894345 wrote:
| I'm also curious about LoRA / sneakernet applications. Have
| those been widely used in cases of censorship?
| anakaine wrote:
| Lora is fine if you want to send a very short message. Its
| not useful for much else.
|
| Its also not a prevalent technology compared to
| general.internet/mobile phone.
|
| Organising resistance with it is the pipe dream of those who
| play with chips and antennas, but its not something thats
| going to happen when crowds and mobs form up in a situation
| like this. Not least because the hardware is not accessible
| to your average citizen.
| throwaway894345 wrote:
| Yeah, that makes sense. I've curious if there are
| sneakernet things for communicating messages between
| passing mobile devices? Something that uses exist hardware
| and is actually used in practice.
| wiml wrote:
| There are things like Briar, Scuttlebutt, Berty, Serval,
| probably more I don't know of.
| itintheory wrote:
| There are real-world examples of non-internet networks
| being created in authoritarian regimes. One example I've
| read about is in Cuba [1] but I presume there are others.
|
| [1] https://restofworld.org/2020/the-life-and-death-of-
| snet-hava...
| sigmonsays wrote:
| how does Yggdrasil work if ipv6 is dead?
| rnhmjoj wrote:
| Yggdrasil uses exclusively IPv6 for routing on its own
| overlay network, but not on the Internet. See
| https://yggdrasil-network.github.io/faq.html#does-
| yggdrasil-...
| croes wrote:
| Like when the US removed Saddam?
|
| How did that wirk out?
|
| You need more of a plan than just get rid of a dictator.
| swat535 wrote:
| Iran can end up in a much more dire state. It can end up
| another Syria / Libya.. or worse another aggressive group
| like Taliban can take hold of the central government.
|
| I also fear that the looming, imminent war between Israel and
| Iran is going to make things works. I'm expecting Israel to
| start a conflict within the next 6 months (or sooner) with
| the aid of United States.
|
| This is the weakest IRGC have been. Many of their allies have
| been crippled, they have water issues, economical issues and
| now protests.
|
| I think that securing Venezuela's oil aids this, should IRAN
| attempt to disrupt the Strait of Hormuz, it will allow Israel
| and United States to maintain reserves (to what extend, I
| don't know).
|
| I think things are going to get difficult for Iranian people,
| no matter what.
| tonymet wrote:
| We have a pro this time
| reissbaker wrote:
| It worked out poorly _for America_ -- we got stuck in a long
| expensive war that we got basically nothing from -- but for
| the average Iraqi? I 'd much rather be an Iraqi citizen than
| an Iranian one, and that wouldn't have been true in the 90s.
| Saddam was pretty evil -- and a bad leader. Iraq's GDP per
| capita is 6x higher today than it was in 2002, a year before
| the invasion.
| csb6 wrote:
| It worked out pretty poorly for the average Iraqi. Hundreds
| of thousands of Iraqis were killed (some estimates put it
| at around 1 million), and millions of people became
| refugees.
|
| Citing the relative GDP per capita number is reductive and
| doesn't give a good picture of the average person's life.
| aprilthird2021 wrote:
| The Kurdish separatists and militants allied with the wrong
| country and they have very little chance of a state of their
| own.
|
| Iranians though, sure, things can change with or without the
| current govt
| Qwertious wrote:
| >The Kurdish separatists and militants allied with the wrong
| country
|
| Which country is that? Last I checked, the Kurds were helping
| out the US a couple of years ago and got absolutely screwed.
| switchbak wrote:
| Sure, a US invasion of Iran would undoubtedly lead to good
| things. And how can you say the Kurds are friends of the USA
| (I'm presuming you mean friends of the USA) given how many
| times they've been abandoned?
|
| Just take a look at what happened to Libya, sometimes removing
| a "bad person" will cause a far worse situation to evolve. Like
| literal human slavery.
|
| I will never cease to be amazed at the amnesia that arises when
| folks in power decide now is a good time to sell a war to the
| people.
| anakaine wrote:
| In Iran they have had several police forces join the
| protestors at this point. Hopefully its a theme that
| continues and includes the military.
|
| It only takes about 30% of the population supporting the
| regime plus military intervention to hold onto power. For
| some time now it seems that they've been below the 30% mark.
| cestith wrote:
| Sadly for the Kurds I'd say they are still pretty good
| friends to the US, as poorly as it's been reciprocated.
|
| As for the rest of what you said, no notes.
| themafia wrote:
| > a US invasion of Iran would undoubtedly lead to good
| things.
|
| I think their neighbor would disagree.
|
| > sell a war to the people.
|
| If you have to sell the war, then you have no business
| conducting it.
| keybored wrote:
| All correct. But something needs to be frontloaded.
|
| 1. Even if removing <bad government> would be good for that
| country, that doesn't give some other state the _right_ to do
| it. We let these entities get away with murder because they
| are our friends and they have the biggest guns, that's it.
|
| 2. Always interrogate the real reasons why a state is doing
| it.
|
| Now only after that we get to the facts like all those times
| it ended horribly for the people that <state> was supposed to
| help.
| DrProtic wrote:
| Even as we speak Kurds are getting attacked near Aleppo by
| US-backed ex-Al-Qaeda president of Syria.
| andrepd wrote:
| Yes, both Venezuela and (in your hypothetical) Iran would
| certainly be better and not worse after US intervention. How
| could they not, with such a great track record (Iraq, Lybia,
| Chile, Guatemala,...)!
| jccx70 wrote:
| Soon free Coca-Cola for Iran.
| breppp wrote:
| Map of protests:
|
| https://pouyaii.github.io/Iran/
| ukblewis wrote:
| Can you please re-share this as a separate link? It deserves
| it's own attention
| breppp wrote:
| https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=46547303
|
| There was a recent post containing a (different) map of the
| protests that was flagged, but here goes
| ukblewis wrote:
| The mods here seem to definitely have an agenda... but they
| can't silence us
| helloaltalt wrote:
| marcosdumay's comment of here explained situation (giving it more
| attention)
|
| they can censor IPv4 when they want, but they don't know how to
| censor IPv6. So they block it entirely.
|
| This is the reason why they aren't blacking out IPv4
|
| From my own experience, my ex gf was iranian. She was using
| discord via some psiphon vpn or something iirc idk how she got
| access to it but she had it.
|
| I didn't trust psiphon that much so I asked her to install proton
| vpn and it did work. I wanted to play minecraft with her so
| prismlauncher but resources couldn't be downloaded so I made her
| download protonvpn so that she can play minecraft with me/install
| it (piracy was forced and also at that point necessary)
|
| She was using tlauncher which somehow worked but tlauncher was
| russian spyware and prism launcher was open source
|
| I talked to her about how she could use stablecoins crypto but
| crypto was illegal so ended up not suggesting it in the end to
| prevent inflation or talked to her about gold which is wild
| considering its like 3-4 months after we broke up but inflation
| is at 50% now.
|
| Anyways the point being that protonvpn worked and other vpn
| worked too.
|
| My question is, would things like protonvpn work after this
| blackout? I mean marco's and other comments in a thread explain
| to me that ipv4 can be blocked by them so I presume vpn's for
| ipv4 would shut down. And so vpns would most likely be using ipv6
| which got blocked down
|
| So does that mean that now Iranian people can't access vpns?
|
| I also saw the other day some video about how when people called
| Iranian numbers from outside countries some random AI robot ass
| voice called and asked who are you and who are you talking to?
| And gave pause, and the most logical explaination to it was that
| the govt was recording these things so dont say anything to them.
| It was a creepypasta video.
|
| Briar might help but Briar still leaks some metadata when I
| talked to their authors or heard about it online.
|
| Instagram isn't blocked in Iran so are these social media apps
| still there after the blackout?
|
| This raises so many questions and wtf is happening in the world
| esseph wrote:
| It depends on how they do it, but you can shut down the router
| ports that connect to the rest of the world easily if they
| want.
|
| Internet participation is voluntary between countries.
| sosborn wrote:
| Most of what's happening in the word can be boiled down to
| either someone craving power, or someone in power desperately
| struggling to hold on to it.
| amir734jj wrote:
| I'm an Iranian and this protest is very different because it's
| not about a specific government policy ... It's about the
| totality of the regime. Unfortunately, government has been
| following the same old brutal playbook by killing protesters and
| cutting off the Internet.
| FilosofumRex wrote:
| that would make it much more suspicious the protests are being
| orchestrated from outside by CIA/Mossad...
|
| The "regime" is a republic with regularly held presidential (8
| presidents in 45 years) and parliamentary elections. What would
| you like to replace it with? Monarchy
| amir734jj wrote:
| I would like people not to get killed when they protest
|
| I would like the internet not to get shut down during the
| protest
|
| Am I asking too much?
| FilosofumRex wrote:
| No, it's just exactly what CIA/Mossad are asking for, too -
| you're in good company
| amir734jj wrote:
| You think I am CIA/Mossad for asking people not to get
| killed when they protest? I expected HN community to be
| better. Shame.
| cramsession wrote:
| Who was killed? Mossad agitators. Maybe they shouldn't be
| conducting attacks on Iran.
| oncallthrow wrote:
| I sometimes feel like declaring a fatwa on IPv6 too, to be fair
| helloaltalt wrote:
| Quick question but would tor work in this case?
|
| Is this the first country which genuinely effectively is able to
| ban tor?
|
| Because even in China, tor can work through bridges or some other
| methods and even Chinese firewalls aren't so extreme as iran
| right now.
|
| Edit: forgot that north korea exists so I guess the second
| country but even in north korea there was this chinese
| interviewer or japanese interviewer who contacted people in north
| korea ig and those north koreans then interviewed for the first
| time completely uncensored north korea and it was brutal (a girl
| saying both her parents died and she was so so skinny i think) ,
| they then went and smuggled the tapes from north korea to china
| and then to japan and then the company/production company or
| something blurred the peoples faces involved for anonymity.
|
| There's also this 1 steam connection in north korea so its just
| gonna be a mystery if we ever see a north korean person using a
| tor but I am 99% sure that it wont but north korea also got 1
| steam connection so you never know.
| flotzam wrote:
| Tor can reach IPv6 destinations through IPv4 entry nodes, if
| that's what your asking.
| helloaltalt wrote:
| IPv4 is sanctioned/heavily restricted in iran as well, I mean
| very high filtering
|
| The reason they didn't do this for ipv6 is because ipv6
| obviously has a lot more addresses and so they just ended up
| blocking it whole.
|
| Atleast that's what I read in one of the comment threads
| discussions in here
|
| I don't think that in iran there would still be any available
| ipv4 entry nodes that they would allow. They would
| filter/block it as well?
| flotzam wrote:
| Right, I should have written "IPv4 bridges" (which can be
| obfuscated and distributed out of band), not "IPv4 entry
| nodes": https://bridges.torproject.org/
|
| But you can reach the IPv6 internet through those too.
| bawolff wrote:
| > I don't think that in iran there would still be any
| available ipv4 entry nodes that they would allow. They
| would filter/block it as well?
|
| That's what bridges are for.
|
| Blocking is a cat and mouse game. It depends how heavy
| handed they are about it, but unless they totally cut off
| the external internet, its unlikely tor is 100% blocked,
| although it might be effectively blocked for most people.
| adamfisk wrote:
| Tor is used relatively little in Iran -
| https://metrics.torproject.org/userstats-bridge-
| country.html...
|
| Other tools are much, much more popular, such as Psiphon,
| Lantern, MahsaNG, etc.
| weregiraffe wrote:
| A communications disruption could mean only one thing...
| jrochkind1 wrote:
| I remember reading about how Venezuela had an internet blackout
| preceding US attack, presumably the blackout was an attack by US
| "cyber". Ah, here we are. https://securitybrief.co.uk/story/us-
| cyber-attack-on-venezue...
|
| The discussion here assumes that the Iranian government is
| responsible for this blackout. I actually don't understand enough
| about network routing to undestand the OP dashboard linked to or
| be able to answer this question, but could it instead be the work
| of an opponent preparing to attack Iran?
| GaggiX wrote:
| Iran has shut down the internet nationwide several times
| before, this is nothing new when there are protests.
| cosmicgadget wrote:
| Seems more likely that an authoritarian regime is suppressing
| protests. Unless there has been a troop buildup of which I am
| unaware, there's no imminent invasion.
| TiredOfLife wrote:
| https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=46538001
| labanimalster wrote:
| The discussion about Starlink is interesting, but with only ~0.1%
| of the population having access, the real story is the 99.9% who
| are cut off right now. The asymmetry between those who can
| broadcast to the world and those who can't is staggering -- and
| even among that 0.1%, many are too afraid to broadcast anything,
| knowing the risks.
| bombcar wrote:
| The key is that the 99% can transfer data and such internally
| to the country; the 0.1% can then leak it out.
| jszymborski wrote:
| but, regrettably, at a trickle
| esafak wrote:
| How effectively can they share data domestically during
| blackouts?
| octoberfranklin wrote:
| Carrier pigeons.
|
| And hamsters.
|
| Don't underestimate the hamsters.
| esafak wrote:
| Especially ones in a station wagon full of tapes hurtling
| down the highway.
|
| But seriously?
| bombcar wrote:
| There are mesh networks, but even so IPv4 isn't down, and
| people can share files p2p.
| adamfisk wrote:
| Theoretically this is true, but in practice it's not.
| Most p2p services rely on the global internet in some
| way. The BitTorrent DHT, for example, is unlikely so
| self-heal in the event of a completely inaccessible
| global internet.
|
| Things like HolePunch have a lot of potential here, but
| you'd need an Iran-only DHT, and it's just not deployed
| at scale.
| OhMeadhbh wrote:
| Oh. Looks like they're not announcing V4 networks as well now.
| 2OEH8eoCRo0 wrote:
| We live in interesting times
| tryauuum wrote:
| I wish interesting times would come without the castrated
| internet
| AlessiaFiorella wrote:
| How many conspiracy theories can people suggest instead of
| accepting that peaceful Iranians want to live and not be
| concerned that they won't have water or food to eat
| MantasPetraitis wrote:
| Free Iran from the terrorists
| cramsession wrote:
| Iran is already doing a great job resisting Zionist terrorism.
| gunalx wrote:
| Its for times like this briar or similar applications are super
| useful. Also memory sticks. To bad distributing is not to simple.
| ChrisMarshallNY wrote:
| I just spent the better part of an hour, trying to track down
| anomalies, in one of my servers (Iran feeds us a lot of data),
| only to find DNS (IPv4) is not resolving. It worked fine, just a
| bit earlier.
|
| Ah, well...
___________________________________________________________________
(page generated 2026-01-08 23:00 UTC)