Jake McGinty

Yeah! I can see how that makes more sense from a least-privilege perspective.

Hey @russkel and sorry for the late reply! One can't run a client and server on the same machine (or, more specifically, the same network namespace) since you'll have conflicting...

@russkel running it in a docker container should also solve the namespace issue since it also has a similar network namespace concept :).

@tommie makes sense to have innernet-server also update its `/etc/hosts`! I'll add that. As for renaming the server peer, that also makes sense just to have one less hard-coded thing....

As far as I'm aware, most ARM variants should be supported and if they're not I'm happy to make changes to add support!

Thanks @the-maldridge! My first thought is that this many-ephemeral-peers use of innernet is a perfect reason to choose a larger RFC 4193 IPv6 /48 network as your root CIDR, where...

Ah, I see. Yeah, perhaps in the future we could allow innernet networks to explicitly be defined as a type where the public keys associated with IPs are not immutable,...

Absolutely - I'm planning on doing that after removing our git-based dependencies (crates.io doesn't allow publishing crates with them). Sorry we didn't mention that in the README as something that...

Note that in the mean time you can checkout the source and run `cargo install --path ./client` and `cargo install --path ./server` and it works fine.

For what it's worth, I also experienced this on my recently-received Pinecil V2. I also have a Pinecil V1, and tried both. Using the same cable, factory reset default IronOS...