- Welcome to IDNetters Forums.
Recent posts
#1
Broadband, Internet & General Computer News & Discussion / Re: Ofcom unable to take furth...
Last post by zappaDPJ - Jul 21, 2026, 00:10:41Quote from: nowster on Jul 20, 2026, 22:35:28The OSA is a right pain for legitimate forums and is toothless against the really harmful content.
This is a graphics forum where people can showcase their work. This is what I see without using a VPN. When I move on to the next site, usually located in the UK, I often I get banned for using a VPN
You cannot view this attachment.
#2
Broadband, Internet & General Computer News & Discussion / Re: Ofcom unable to take furth...
Last post by nowster - Jul 20, 2026, 22:35:28The OSA is a right pain for legitimate forums and is toothless against the really harmful content.
#3
Broadband, Internet & General Computer News & Discussion / Re: Ofcom unable to take furth...
Last post by Simon - Jul 20, 2026, 20:46:11Quote from: zappaDPJ on Jul 20, 2026, 20:36:34It would seem so. I'd be interested to know where the server for that site is situated geographically. If it's inside the UK I would have expected there would be laws that could be employed to be taken it down.
I think this is probably the difficulty. If it isn't, presumably there's bugger all they can do.
#4
Broadband, Internet & General Computer News & Discussion / Re: Ofcom unable to take furth...
Last post by zappaDPJ - Jul 20, 2026, 20:36:34Quote from: Simon on Jul 20, 2026, 20:24:08So, basically this proves what we've thought all along, in that apart from the ability to issue fines, Ofcom is toothless to actually take any concrete action.
It would seem so. I'd be interested to know where the server for that site is situated geographically. If it's inside the UK I would have expected there would be laws that could be employed to be taken it down.
#5
Broadband, Internet & General Computer News & Discussion / Ofcom unable to take further l...
Last post by Simon - Jul 20, 2026, 20:24:08Ofcom said it is unable to take further legal action against a pro-suicide forum which campaigners say has been linked to over 130 UK deaths.
The regulator said, external the site had blocked access for the "vast majority" of UK users, and it had "no further legal routes available" under the Online Safety Act.
But it accepted people would still be able to access the forum by using a VPN, which hides your location online.
Andy Burrows, chief executive of the Molly Rose Foundation, said the decision to take no further legal action would "result in more lost lives" and that announcing it on the day a new prime minister was named showed "an utter lack of moral courage".
In response, an Ofcom spokesperson said it had made the decision a "matter of days ago" following "months of work to exhaust all possible legal routes".
They said bereaved families were informed of the decision this morning after being contacted last week.
"In that context, we do not consider it appropriate to delay the announcement further to accommodate today's political developments," they said.
Meanwhile, Ofcom enforcement director Suzanne Cater said the regulator had used its powers "to the fullest extent possible".
"We'll continue to monitor the forum closely to check the geoblock remains in place," she said.
The geoblock means people based in the UK are unable to access the site, unless they mask their location through a VPN or similar means.
Ofcom said it was working with the government to explore whether its enforcement powers should be strengthened.
In particular, this concerns its ability to get a website blocking order through the courts, which would legally mandate internet service providers in the UK to block the website.
The regulator says it has reached the limit of what it can legally do under the Online Safety Act because the forum has implemented the geoblock.
https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/articles/c3d3ejgdm20o
So, basically this proves what we've thought all along, in that apart from the ability to issue fines, Ofcom is toothless to actually take any concrete action.
The regulator said, external the site had blocked access for the "vast majority" of UK users, and it had "no further legal routes available" under the Online Safety Act.
But it accepted people would still be able to access the forum by using a VPN, which hides your location online.
Andy Burrows, chief executive of the Molly Rose Foundation, said the decision to take no further legal action would "result in more lost lives" and that announcing it on the day a new prime minister was named showed "an utter lack of moral courage".
In response, an Ofcom spokesperson said it had made the decision a "matter of days ago" following "months of work to exhaust all possible legal routes".
They said bereaved families were informed of the decision this morning after being contacted last week.
"In that context, we do not consider it appropriate to delay the announcement further to accommodate today's political developments," they said.
Meanwhile, Ofcom enforcement director Suzanne Cater said the regulator had used its powers "to the fullest extent possible".
"We'll continue to monitor the forum closely to check the geoblock remains in place," she said.
The geoblock means people based in the UK are unable to access the site, unless they mask their location through a VPN or similar means.
Ofcom said it was working with the government to explore whether its enforcement powers should be strengthened.
In particular, this concerns its ability to get a website blocking order through the courts, which would legally mandate internet service providers in the UK to block the website.
The regulator says it has reached the limit of what it can legally do under the Online Safety Act because the forum has implemented the geoblock.
https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/articles/c3d3ejgdm20o
So, basically this proves what we've thought all along, in that apart from the ability to issue fines, Ofcom is toothless to actually take any concrete action.
#6
IDNet Help / Re: setting for dhclient for m...
Last post by nowster - Jun 30, 2026, 11:09:04My "cake" script is:
Adjust the up/down numbers to match the service level you've got. In the middle of July I'll be bumping those numbers up to 100/20 (and saving about £2 a year).
Code Select
#!/bin/bash
set -x
DOWN="50.0Mbit"
UP="10.0MBit"
ext=ppp0
ifb=ifb4${ext}
# egress
tc qdisc delete root dev $ext
tc qdisc add root dev $ext cake bandwidth $UP pppoe-vcmux nat
# ingress
ip link add name $ifb type ifb
tc qdisc del dev $ext ingress
tc qdisc add dev $ext handle ffff: ingress
tc qdisc del dev $ifb root
tc qdisc add dev $ifb root cake bandwidth $DOWN besteffort
ifconfig $ifb up
# if you don't bring the device up your connection
# will lock up on the next step.
tc filter add dev $ext parent ffff: protocol all \
prio 10 u32 match u32 0 0 flowid 1:1 action mirred egress \
redirect dev $ifb
Adjust the up/down numbers to match the service level you've got. In the middle of July I'll be bumping those numbers up to 100/20 (and saving about £2 a year).
#7
IDNet Help / Re: setting for dhclient for m...
Last post by nowster - Jun 30, 2026, 10:58:54That's because you need to do it at the PPP level:
And then you advertise a route internally:
And don't forget to add forwarding and appropriate filtering. I'm using foomuuri.
Adding some traffic shaping using "cake" might help with the bufferbloat problem too.
Code Select
~# more /etc/ppp/peers/dsl-provider
# Minimalistic default options file for DSL/PPPoE connections
noipdefault
defaultroute
replacedefaultroute
hide-password
noauth
persist
maxfail 0
plugin rp-pppoe.so eth1
+ipv6 ipv6cp-use-ipaddr
# debug
user "accountname@idnet.gw6"
And then you advertise a route internally:
Code Select
# more /etc/radvd.conf
interface br0 {
IgnoreIfMissing on;
AdvSendAdvert on;
AdvLinkMTU 1280;
prefix 2A02:390:XXXX:XXXX::/64
{
AdvOnLink on;
AdvAutonomous on;
AdvRouterAddr off;
};
};
And don't forget to add forwarding and appropriate filtering. I'm using foomuuri.
Adding some traffic shaping using "cake" might help with the bufferbloat problem too.
#8
IDNet Help / setting for dhclient for my IP...
Last post by mikebray - Jun 29, 2026, 20:55:48I have my IDnet IPv4 working fine, but cannot get IPv6 assigned
Trying to use dhclient with command
dhclient -6 -d -cf /etc/dhcp/IDnIPv6.conf -P --prefix-len-hint 48 eth1
IDnIPv6.conf just
request;
send dhcp-client-identifier "FTTH.91961@idnet";
Is keeps trying
Listening on Socket/eth1
Sending on Socket/eth1
PRC: Soliciting for leases (INIT).
XMT: Forming Solicit, 0 ms elapsed.
XMT: X-- IA_PD 5c:d4:11:c5
XMT: | X-- Request renew in +3600
XMT: | X-- Request rebind in +5400
XMT: Solicit on eth1, interval 1060ms.
forever
---.--
This is a Debian Linux box as the router
eth1 is the PPPoE connection ppp1 to the ONT
or eth1.911 which is up and running
my local LAN is on eth0
I have other IPv6 addresses live and working
---.---
># ip add sh dev ppp1
ppp1: <POINTOPOINT,MULTICAST,NOARP,UP,LOWER_UP> mtu 1492
qdisc fq_codel state UNKNOWN group default qlen 3 link/ppp
inet 212.xx.xx.50 peer 212.69.63.19/32 scope global ppp1
inet6 fe80::18a8:552f:6ab3:bbdc peer fe80::4e4e:35ff:fed6:e400/128 scope link
Thanks in anticipation
Trying to use dhclient with command
dhclient -6 -d -cf /etc/dhcp/IDnIPv6.conf -P --prefix-len-hint 48 eth1
IDnIPv6.conf just
request;
send dhcp-client-identifier "FTTH.91961@idnet";
Is keeps trying
Listening on Socket/eth1
Sending on Socket/eth1
PRC: Soliciting for leases (INIT).
XMT: Forming Solicit, 0 ms elapsed.
XMT: X-- IA_PD 5c:d4:11:c5
XMT: | X-- Request renew in +3600
XMT: | X-- Request rebind in +5400
XMT: Solicit on eth1, interval 1060ms.
forever
---.--
This is a Debian Linux box as the router
eth1 is the PPPoE connection ppp1 to the ONT
or eth1.911 which is up and running
my local LAN is on eth0
I have other IPv6 addresses live and working
---.---
># ip add sh dev ppp1
ppp1: <POINTOPOINT,MULTICAST,NOARP,UP,LOWER_UP> mtu 1492
qdisc fq_codel state UNKNOWN group default qlen 3 link/ppp
inet 212.xx.xx.50 peer 212.69.63.19/32 scope global ppp1
inet6 fe80::18a8:552f:6ab3:bbdc peer fe80::4e4e:35ff:fed6:e400/128 scope link
Thanks in anticipation
#9
Broadband, Internet & General Computer News & Discussion / Re: UK's top data and AI regul...
Last post by zappaDPJ - Jun 20, 2026, 01:10:35I imagine he wanted to test whether the ICO is capable of following the data protection procedures they set out for everyone else. At the moment it appears not which is quite understandable because as we already know it's just a massive tangle of word spaghetti 
#10
Broadband, Internet & General Computer News & Discussion / Re: UK's top data and AI regul...
Last post by Simon - Jun 19, 2026, 22:02:54Blimey! My first thought is that this guy has too much time on his hands! I get the general gist of his complaint, but I didn't quite grasp why he is so keen to obtain this information in the first place.