Location: Poland
Remote: Yes
Willing to relocate: No
Technologies: Scala (Akka/ZIO), Javascript/Typescript (React), Kafka, PostgreSQL, Redis, MongoDB, Elasticsearch, Kubernetes, Terraform, GCP, OpenTelemetry
Résumé/CV: upon request
Github: https://github.com/duxet
Email: duxetlg@gmail.com
I am a self-taught backend developer with 7 years of professional experience. I am looking for a full-time opportunity where I could make use of my functional programming and DevOps skills.
You can see the easiest one will be SLAAC since you don't have to set up anything but IPv6, but you should be able to see that you can't SLAAC someone a single address. So one possibility is they use DHCP to do it -- DHCP on v6 is pretty similar to IPv4, and can give out single addresses. Another possibility is something called route-filtering. But these are both more complex than SLAAC, so it begs the question why would the sysadmin do something more complex when something easier is (well) easier?
In addition to move your packets around, the ISP needs to know about you moving those packets around, and this typically feeds into accounting and compliance.
One way ISPs do accounting is by monitoring traffic on a link level: This usually involves setting up some database to poll the networking hardware periodically, for example using SNMP polling: https://www.ibm.com/docs/en/networkmanager/4.2.0?topic=mecha... -- this information is then sent to the departments that need usage information.
Another way, is kindof lame, is to do it by assignment: Instead of monitoring the traffic you generate, they arrange for their DHCP-v6 server to trigger an event, for example using SNMP traps or more frequently, by reading the syslog output for ip addresses.
Not knowing anything about Poland except I like your food, but knowing how sysadmins are: my guess is that the move from IPv4 to IPv6 was motivated by trying to reuse some of this accounting/compliance (or configuration) infrastructure the ISP had to build for their IPV4 network. And if all your ISPs do it, well, maybe it's because they all used to be one ISP or the sysadmin-club in Poland is pretty small.
All that being said, something I have seen a few ISPs do in rural UK is interesting: They give you a router which does the NAT locally-- it used SLAAC to establish IPv6 and then it's running a link-local address for me. The effect is the same, but doing NAT carrier-side (or any other kind of connection tracking) is expensive, and more-so for IPv6 (all the addresses are bigger), so even if they gave you a single address, your ISP might not NAT'ing you in their network, but instead gave you a box that NAT's you by default. And if you have (root) access to your router, you can check if this is the case, otherwise you can buy your own router and see if you can swap it. The reason one company gave me for this is that it simplifies support and that "you know what you're doing anyway" so unless you know that you're being NAT'd inside their network, you should check because you might not be.
Having used both, I find that although Semantic UI has a lot more pluggable components, documentation on anything beyond simple examples and one sentence descriptions is severely lacking. Some components are just plain buggy, and the developer is not very fast at fixing them. It's got a lot of features but the lack of polish and development speed makes it hard to recommend for a larger team.
I think only having a single developer has had mixed effects on the project, which is a shame because it's so close to being great.
Meanwhile BS4 has solid built in components that are just documented enough to be usable despite not having as many. Issues get fixed quickly and it feels easier to follow its conventions. The JS APIs are simple enough as well, and the code behind it is much easier to follow than in Semantic UI.
Yes Semantic UI has come a long way and changed since I first used them 1-2 years ago. I have just tried it on a new project their annoying build process and lack of official SASS support the style and out of box components are really great.
Semantic UI looks the best, but once you start to do your own things, you end up fighting it. I'd love to see some of the stuff Semantic UI does just as an add-in/theme for Bootstrap (Forms are beautifull).
I created an app for a customer in it, and while it looks shiny, it would have been more cost-effective to just have used bootstrap.
I've been helping out a developer that has been building sites with Semantic UI and it's making my skin crawl.
It seems like a good start for prototyping and admin interfaces, but for anything else it just adds too much styling and classes that need to be overridden.
The name seems poorly choosen, since you're constantly adding classes that reference styling decisions making it everything but semantic (ui very wide, ui very thin, ui three column doubling grid, …).
