no. Arp bridges layer 1 and 2. It's switch local. With a VLAN, it becomes VLAN local, in the sense that 802.1q creates a "virtual" switch.
Broadcast traffic (such as DHCP) doesn't cross subnets without a router configured to forward it. It's one of the reasons subnets exist.
What in the world is "a proprietary OS I cannot trust". What's your actual threat model? Have you actually run any risk analyses or code audits against these OSes vs. (i assume) Linux to know for sure that you can trust any give FOSS OS? You do realize there's still an OS on your dumb switch, right?
This is a silly reason to not learn to manage your networking hardware.
A VLAN is (theoretically) equivalent to a physically separated layer 2 domain. The only way for machines to communicate between vlans is via a gateway interface.
If you don't trust the operating system, then you don't trust that it won't change it's IP/subnet to just hop onto the other network. Or even send packets with the other network's header and spoof packets onto the other subnets.
It's trivially easy to malform broadcast traffic and hop subnets, or to use various arp table attacks to trick the switching device. If you need to segregate traffic, you need a VLAN.
Edit: Should probably note that simply VLAN tagging from the endpoints on a trunk port isn't any better than subnetting, since an untrusted machine can just tag packets however it wants. You need to use an 802.1q aware switch and gateway to use VLANs effectively.
What you are asking will work. That's the whole point of subnets. No you don't need a VLAN to segregate traffic. It can be helpful for things like broadcast control.
However, you used the word "trust" which means that this is a security concern. If you are subnetting because of trust, then yes you absolutely do need to use VLANs.
A small, simple and secure messenger
The answer to your overarching question is not "common maintenance procedures", but "change management processes"
When things change, things can break. Immutable OSes and declarative configuration notwithstanding.
OS and Configuration drift only actually matter if you've got a documented baseline. That's what your declaratives can solve. However they don't help when you're tinkering in a home server and drifting your declaratives.
I’m pretty certain every service I want to run has a docker image already, so does it matter?
This right here is the attitude that's going to undermine everything you're asking. There's nothing about containers that is inherently "safer" than running native OS packages or even building your own. Containerization is about scalability and repeatability, not availability or reliability. It's still up to you to monitor changelogs and determine exactly what is going to break when you pull the latest docker image. That's no different than a native package.
Depends on the specific Zigbee switch, but generally yes.
The magic is in the fact that you can decouple the relay, and use the switch as a sensor that triggers things that may or may not be related to the physical switch position.
The other reason I like it better than a typical "smart switch" is that I can use the shellys with whatever switch I want, so I can have it match my dumb switches and use different colors.
shelly relays will do exactly what you want. just wire them as disconnected switches. i do this to simulate 3-way switches, but it'll work just as well to swap circuit behavior.
you can use a homeassistant action if you’re already using HA, or you can have the shellys call each others web api when it senses the switch.
Anyone know of self-hostable security cameras?
Edit: ideally wifi cameras that I can solar power.
Looking to replace my Arlo cameras with something self-hostable. Arlo lets you store on a USB stick, but there's no way to get out from under their cloud, which gets more expensive all the time.
Deep breathing vs. buoyancy question
Pretty new diver here, about 40 dives, and looking for advice.
Just finished up a week of dives in Grenada, and made a point of paying attention to air consumption. Based on Internet advice, I focused on breathing deeply and exhaling completely, counting 4 seconds in, 6 seconds out. Doing this, my computer reported average SAC has dropped from about 0.8 to 0.5, and I'm not the one calling dives for gas anymore. This seems like a great improvement.
However, my buoyancy goes to shit when I'm doing this. Breathing more "normally", I can maintain a neutral depth with good trim. But with this more efficient breath control, I go up and down several feet with every breath. This actually makes it pretty easy to control when I ascend and descend, but obviously isn't great for most of the dive.
If I try to breathe normally-but-slow, I feel like I'm hyperventilating.
So what's the trick here? How do you both breathe efficiently and control your buoyancy?
I think I'm pretty well weighted, s