Right, now get a borderline computer-illiterate person to connect to your network, ensure their firewall isn’t misconfigured to block all incoming traffic (with TeamViewer, this configuration would still work because the device just connects to the TV server) and open and set up a completely separate screen sharing program.

I know none of these steps are difficult if you have any idea what you’re doing, but I’ve met plenty of people who would most likely need assistance going through the motions. Funnily enough, the best way to do it remotely would probably be to get them to install TeamViewer to then set this up for them remotely.

By the way, as far as networking goes, Tailscale does the same thing TeamViewer does, just for a VPN instead of a screen sharing application - it will try to do all the NAT punchthrough techniques and IPv6 connection and fall back on tunneling through relay servers if all else fails. It’s not any more of a direct connection than TV.

Convenience (after you install it, all you have to do is enter the code and you’re connected, no other setup required), familiarity (it’s the default name people will think of or find if they want remote access - that alone means they can get away with pushing their users slightly more) and - IMHO most importantly - connectivity: if two computers can connect to the TeamViewer servers, they will be able to connect to each other.

That’s huge in the world of broken Internet where peer to peer networking feels like rocket science - pretty much every consumer device will be sitting behind a NAT, which means “just connecting” is not possible. You can set up port forwarding (either manually or automatically using UPnP, which is its own bag of problems), or you can use IPv6 (which appears to be currently available to roughly 40% users globally; to use it, both sides need to have functional IPv6), or you can try various NAT traversal techniques (which only work with certain kinds of NAT and always require a coordinating server to pull off - this is one of the functions provided by TeamViewer servers). Oh, and if you’re behind CGNAT (a kind of NAT used by internet providers; apparently it’s moderately common), then neither port forwarding or NAT traversal are possible. So if both sides are behind CGNAT and at least one doesn’t have IPv6, establishing a direct link is impossible.

With a relay server (like TeamViewer provides), you don’t have to worry about being unable to connect - it will try to get you a direct link, but if that fails, it will just act as a tunnel and pass the data between both devices.

Sure, you can self host all this, but that takes time and effort to do right. And if your ISP happens to use CGNAT, that means renting a VPS because you can’t host it at home. With TeamViewer, you’re paying for someone else to worry about all that (and pay for the servers that coordinate NAT traversal and relay data, and their internet bandwidth, neither of which is free).

Are you sure you didn’t set DNS directly on some/all of your devices? Because in that case they won’t care about the router settings and will use whatever you set them to.

Also as the other commenter said, DNS changes might not propagate to other devices on the network until the next time they connect - a reboot or unplugging the cable from your computer for a few seconds is a dirty but pretty OS agnostic way to do that.

I’m pretty sure all of those entries are in the same /12 network - 172.16.0.0/12. Apparently there’s nothing wrong with it, but I think you can significantly simplify that config by just removing all the extra ones

Because of the built-in SSD, I could also sell the external SSD and buy an 8-12tb HDD instead.

If you’re going for a 3.5" HDD, then you’ll most likely have to look for a bit bigger form factor than TinyMiniMicro (Lenovo Tiny / HP Mini / Dell Micro series) - these computers can’t fit a 3.5" HDD.

If size isn’t a major concern, I’d go for the SFF variants of these computers - they are often cheaper than minis for same specs, but probably have a bit larger idle power draw and take up more space. As a bonus upside, you get some small PCIe slots in these computers, so yay for expansions.

On the other hand, it’s also worth noting that newer RAM generations are less and less susceptible to this kind of attack. Not because of any countermeasures, they just lose the data without constant refreshing much quicker even when chilled / frozen, so the attack becomes impractical.

So from DDR4 up, you’re probably safe.

I think the idea at the time was that if /usr is unavailable, you won’t be doing much with the system anyway (other than fixing the configuration).

Nevermind, apparently the original meaning had nothing to do with a network (TIL for me), so our discussion is kinda moot. See section 0.24 in this 2.9BSD (1983) installation guide

Locally written commands that aren’t distributed are kept in /usr/src/local and their binaries are kept in /usr/local. This allows /usr/bin, /usr/ucb, and /bin to correspond to the distribution tape (and to the manuals that people can buy). People wishing to use /usr/local commands are made aware that they aren’t in the base manual.

No comment on sensibility, but technically both are equally difficult - mount the parent filesystem, then mount the child filesystem into an empty directory in the parent. Doesn’t matter which one is where, it’s all abstracted away at this level anyway.

I mean, there is the whole 128/8 for localhost, kinda hard to beat that with crazy allocations. And OP still has another /12 and /16 networks available even if they refuse to further divide them.

sfp might be an issue for my since my modem and Ap don’t have that port

SFP is something like a port for ports - you buy an SFP module based on what port you need, so you can just buy a network device with SFP cages that can handle your required speed and then pick a combination of Ethernet / optical SFP modules that match your needs. But the modules aren’t exactly cheap, even the Ethernet ones.

JavaScript. Your browser downloads and runs it automatically and the vast majority of people either don’t consider it a problem at all or just accept that they can’t choose what software they run on their computer. This person apparently wants to avoid websites with proprietary JavaScript if possible.