Slashdot Mirror

Repeaters are powered by a constant direct current passed down a conductor near the center of the cable. All repeaters in a cable are powered in series. Power feed equipment (PFE) is installed at the terminal stations on the land. These PFEs inject huge voltage into the line - 3,000, 4,000, and up to 10,000 volts - to power each repeater on the cable (now you can understand why Jaws went to shark heaven after his mid-morning snack).

http://www.networkworld.com/ar...

http://www.networkworld.com/ar...

That was the deregulated AT&T model. Phone companies were allowed to use AT&T lines. http://www.networkworld.com/ar...

It seems like it's based on dynamically allocating spectrum between GSM and LTE

http://www.networkworld.com/ar...

However, using a technology called GL DSS (GSM-LTE Dynamic Spectrum Sharing) Vodafone and Huawei have shown a way to allow GSM and LTE to coexist.

In a traditional mobile network, operators allocate each technology an exclusive set of frequencies. For example, many operators, including Vodafone, currently hold 20MHz of spectrum at 1.8GHz, of which 10MHz is used for LTE and the rest for GSM traffic.

GL DSS lets Huawei's SRC (Single Radio Controller) give GSM a higher priority during periods of heavy traffic, ensuring that voice calls get though unharmed. But the SRC can also provide more room for LTE when users aren't making calls, allowing for better throughput, the vendor said on Tuesday.

There's a paper on it (or at least a similar idea) here

http://arxiv.org/pdf/1302.0320...

It's interesting because it seems like GSM will live on for low bandwidth machine to machine applications even though most of the spectrum has been converted to LTE. So if you've got an embedded system with a GSM modem, there's no need to worry that the carriers will cut off the signal in order to get more LTE bandwidth.

No provider has 1Tbps of bandwidth to other providers. No one puts in upstream capacity of terabit for a few thousand customers.

No one does, but it doesn't mean they can't. We have the tech, but not the demand. My whole point, if you had the ability to comprehend what you read, was that supply has outpaced demand.

This isn't the same router I was looking at before, because that router had 2tb per slot, but this router is capable of 400gb per slot.

The CRS-X, which will be available this year, is a 400Gbps per slot system that can be expanded to nearly one Petabit per second in a multi-chassis

http://www.networkworld.com/ne...

No, the entire patent system needs to be thrown out. It's not just broken, it's not really ethical to allow forcibly banning second inventors from independently inventing.

Also, it's not an exaggeration to say the patent system is killing people. E.g.:
- http://archive.mises.org/15365/update-patents-kill-compulsory-licenses-and-genzymes-life-saving-drug/
- "Why Aren’t There More Cancer Vaccines? Blame America’s lousy patent system."
- A case to abolish patents - Two authors from the Federal Reserve lay bare the patent myths

Right. What would you consider a "non faulty OS, Linux? Then I guess Torvalds should be shot because when it comes to bugs here they come! . Oh and don't forget which OS it was that gave us heartbleed. Was it Windows? No no no no, was it OSX? No no nooo no, was it Linux? yeah yeah yeah yeah! BTW you should try to play the "how many year old Linux bug" game, its fun and easy! Simply type into any search engine " (X) year old Linux bug" with (X) replaced by a random number, see how far back you can go! I doubt you will be able to top 20 years old but single digits are easy peasy!

Anybody still on XP deserves what they get, they got 12 years of support, which just FYI is 10 years longer than the average Linux distro LOL, unless you consider the bi annual death march to be "support", and they have had more than enough time to switch over to a newer version of Windows. They can't even use the hardware excuse as the average XP box is a power piggie P4 and for less than $100 you can toss that P4 board for a Bobcat or jaguar board that will run rings around the P4 while using less power under load than the piggie P4 does at idle. they can even keep their old IDE drive using a $7 IDE to PCI converter so there really is no longer any excuses, anybody who hangs onto a thirteen year old OS (XP was released in 2001 and has more in common with NT4 than it does with a modern OS like 7/8) that is three and soon to be four versions behind? Deserves what they get.

Out of the hundreds of boxes I moved to 7, how many problems did I have? A grand total of THREE, and one of those doesn't count since the software in question (Quickbooks 07 IIRC, may have been 06) was "broken by design" and tied to a VERY insercure version of Flash (V7) and would refuse to install if ANY version of Flash other than 7 was on the system, but it took less than 30 minutes to turn the XP install into a VM and run it on Win 7 via Virtualbox. The other 2? A scanner from 2000 that was so low res a $35 all in one printer gave the guy a 300%+ increase in quality and an old ATI IGP that ran but was flaky, it cost a grand total of $8 to replace the IGP with an HD2400. That system was a first gen C2D with 2GB of RAM and was recently traded back in on a new quad, I turned around and sold it to my landlord who runs it 6 days a week and it purrs like a kitten. If a 8 year old system can run Win 7 so well the customer who buys it in 2014 says "I just love this machine,it runs my stock software and surfs like a dream" there really is no excuse, let XP die already.

Oh and just for shits and giggles I tried the "hairyfeet challenge" using that box before I reloaded Windows, since it would probably be considered high end of the XP era hardware and thus would give Linux a performance advantage over some dusty P4, result? Ubuntu crapped the video first update, PCLOS crapped out on the second, no point in continuing after that since it had already failed the test.

In the case of netflix and amazon, they're sorta the same entity. Hulu is probably the one they fear, since they are backed by the networks and "content producers" who are interested in regaining the distribution side of things. And, bonus, Hulu is part owned by comcast. I'm obviously not in any board room discussions, but who wants to bet that if netflix and amazon don't pay up, their customers will suddenly find that netflix and amazon are nothing but buffering while Hulu offers everyone a free month of mega super duper high-def hulu plus.

One could further conjecture that the Hulu conspiracy players would be fine if ALL streaming companies including Hulu took a hit, as they'd like nothing more than to stop the cord cutting momentum and get people back on cable.

DS-Lite from what I've read is no better than CGN in the sense that something still has to translate the IPv6 ip of the customer to a IPv4 address from the pool of available addresses all the while keeping a tunnel open to the IPv6 endpoint (CPE). This may be a better solution than whatever else is available, due to the lack of movement on switching to IPv6 any ISP has the choice between llama-goat-crap and wow-holy-bovine-crap. DS-lite pretty much also assumes that the customer only wants to make connections out via IPv4, with no inbound connections allowed. There is almost no way to have a 1-to-1 mapping between IPv4 to IPv6 (any ISP with enough address space available to have a DS-lite IPv4 pool that big will just run dual-stack).

Also based on http://www.networkworld.com/co...

If a simple mapping between inside IPv4 source address / port to outside IPv4 source address / port was performed on outgoing packets, as is done with regular NAT44, the LSN would have no way to differentiate between overlapping RFC1918 IPv4 addresses in different customer networks.

In other words the LSN has to somehow be able to differentiate between 192.168.1.5 on your network (which might be your PS4 but for the guy down the street its his wife's laptop). This is normally handled by VRF (separate routing / arp / NAT table) per customer, Thankfully they have dealt with this by just tacking on the customer's unique IPv6 address to the record it just makes what I expect to be huge NAT tables even larger. The diagrams from that article also show that the real benefits of DS-lite won't start showing up until the end user's devices are running IPv6 natively (only then can they take advantage of the direct paths, instead of the translated paths).

So if I'm understanding you (and DS-Lite) correctly, how does this remove the need for at least some part of the service provider to understand both IPv6 and IPv4? To me it concentrates the load on the translator devices in exchange for removing the need for the entire network to understand IPv4. In the short term this will be an extremely high load for these devices to maintain, I guess the hope is only token effort has to be put into them so it forces users to switch to IPv6 when available. Given that only 3 of the top 10 sites on http://www.alexa.com/topsites lack IPv6 records (twitter, amazon and baidu) that may not be an unreasonable expectation (the heavy streaming sites like, youtube & netflix are IPv6 so load may actually be lower than expected).

I'll save you all the trouble. Their "music" sounds like one of those sleep CDs you hear them playing at incense shops that sell quartz "power crystals" and/or the soundtrack to Myst.

Here's their picture:
http://www.networkworld.com/gr...

The guy on the left clearly did the kernel bit.
The dude in the middle has a cello and tattoo so he's clearly getting laid and therefor has never heard of Linux.
The guy on the right... well look at his hat and shoes... he's way too busy putting imitation carbon fiber parts on his Mitsubishi Lancer to have time for programming.

Your welcome for the 10min of your life I saved you.

NO connection is point-to-point.

Most Internet communications are carried in packets with unique source address and unique destination address. Conceptually, it doesn't matter whether those packets are encoded with Point-to-Point Protocol on a serial cable, or whether they go through a bunch of routers first. A more pedantic term is unicast. So, the actual counterexample would be multicast, and despite best efforts, there's very little of that on the Internet.

The real exception to point-to-point communications is WAN acceleration, but I'm guessing that its effects are minor across the Internet.

first, you posted the wrong link...here's the proper link: http://www.networkworld.com/co...

2nd, You commit fatal false equivalence. These two things:

1. ALL REPUBLICANS in lockstep opposing ***any*** net neutrality policies

2. ONE legislator **writing a letter** that does nothing more than **ask** for **another agency** to consider regulating something

false equivalence all over...1 is way different than 2. 1 is a baseball bat to the head...the other is...

3rd, everyone who understands the issue agrees Net Neutrality is the right course....only corporations & their GOP sockpuppets oppose net neutrality. However, ***regulating Bitcoin is a debatable policy*** Many would want some kind of government resopnse. I'm not saying its a good idea, or that i agree with the letter.

1 is different than 2...your comparison is full of logical error, false equivalence, trolling, and willful ignorance

How about this article: http://www.networkworld.com/co...

Hint: This **IS** the article that this entire /. story is about...

Link from the article:

Senator Joe Manchin of West Virginia penned an open letter urging federal regulators to outlaw Bitcoin citing its instability and use among criminals.

If you cannot use the intertubes to figure out which party is belongs to, I pity you.

it's obvious from your multiple comments that you've got an agenda, harrkev.

Here is a snippet from YOUR post:

stop voting for Republicans

Pot, kettle, etc. There is good and bad with both parties. How can you just make a blanket statement like that and claim that you DON'T have an agenda?

My point is that BOTH sides of the aisle have their problems. Use your noggin.

How about that they have?

These OpenBTS guys have been running a cell phone network at the Burning Man festival for several years now as a way to prototype and test the technology. Yes, they got the necessary FCC permits as well and understand not just the technical but also the legal issues involved. The only thing they lack is the money to buy the necessary cell phone tower, and that is mainly buying the permanent license rather than trying to set up a cell tower temporarily in a place in the middle of nowhere.

These guys have also set up low-power cell network demonstrations at several conferences in 1st world countries where they demonstrate the technology on stage during the conference.

Seriously, try to RTFA and learn about the group first. I'll admit you don't want to set up a cell tower of your own unlicensed and within a block of a major carrier, which seems to be what you are suggesting they accomplish.

http://www.networkworld.com/co...

Uh, most phones use IPv6 already. NAT is a bad idea on cell networks. Most phone carriers require IPv6 and have done so since like 2010. The exception to the rule here is AT&T who have through that NAT and 6RD would be better solutions. When that bet didn't play out well, started taking hard looks at IPv6, which in turn means they fallen behind on IPv6 adoption compared to others.

A lot of big boys are realizing NAT is not a good idea at least on the large scale. IPv6 is really easy to roll out within the network so long as all the clients can use it. That said, there's still a lot of legacy and that tends to complicate things. There really isn't any valid reason someone shouldn't use IPv6 if they are already able to do so. As far as the crisis goes. Head over to Europe or Asia to see its effects. Everyone knew that ARIN would be one of the last boys to cry because ARIN had so many /8 networks assigned to it compared to everyone else. ARIN however, is not immune and is already in Phase 3 of the count down process.

NAT isn't a real solution and a lot of people are trying to avoid as best they can. Processing power in routers is expensive, so why choose the solution that is going to cause you to double or triple that cost?

While I respect your zeal, it is your sheer ignorance of the issues have me at awe. Oh and US Justice System disagrees with you too.

http://m.networkworld.com/news/2011/042111-google-linux-patent-infringement.html?mm_ref=https%3A%2F%2Fwww.google.com%2F#mobify-bookmark

If proven true in court, this justifies a boycott of Oracle products.

It wasn't the public shaming and mudslinging between Oracle and Google, or the dozens of lawsuits Oracle has brought on with various companies, like those providing Solaris support "illegally", or even the controversies surrounding the company and it's business tactics. No, one racial comment and termination in an at-will state is what's going to cause the boycott.

http://www.networkworld.com/community/blog/google-had-opportunity-join-group-won-nortels-6000-patents

http://www.networkworld.com/news/2013/101713-cisco-nsa-backdoor-274965.html

I love that they say possible but not exploited. Like suuuuure. They would just save that one for later right? They will never leave any option or opportunity open. they collect more data than they will ever ever ever need. It's like the NSA is run by obsessive hoarders.

They are claiming it will handle 54 Tbps of network traffic ... up from the Vancouver games four years ago that was only 4 Tbps. One interesting tidbit is the ratio of wired to wireless traffic was 4-to-1 back then ... they expect that ratio to be reversed this time ... with 2,000 802.11n access points!

That a bit more bandwidth than this Christmas website has ... HO-HO-HO! ;-)

Here's a link to a single page version of the article.

The book were published in 2009, the agent that prevented her entry specifically referred to a hospitalization that took place in 2012. How did they know about events that should be shielded under patient privacy laws and took place years after publishing of mentioned book? Unless you can point to a source describing her 2012 hospitalization that were publicly available at the time of her entry denial, then I'd say that her story have a very interesting place in this matter.

There is a diverse range of companies. Alternatives include Microsoft or Yahoo.

Yeah I'm sticking to Google too. Nothing prevents the alternatives from being worse.

Actually Google has pretty fierce competition these days from Bing, the caliber of Bings competitiveness is simply not acknowledged on Slashdot for religions reasons. While several recent studies have refuted Microsoft's BingItOn claim of two thirds of users preferring Bing results. Interestingly enough blind studies also suggest that that Bing actually delivers superior results to Google 41% of the time and 6% of the time they tied. Furthermore a lot of Bing's inferiority is largely perceived (i.e a 'halo' effect of the Google brand), people actually pick Bing results over Google results much of the time when you swap the brands on the search results. Myself I prefer Bing image results to Googles much of the time, the image search results from Bing often contain less noise.

[cite]
[cite]

That last link seems pretty negative at first but it also concludes:

There are two potential, contradictory reactions to the Ayers study:

It either conclusively or largely disproves the Bing preference claims;
  * Putting aside the Bing advertising claims, the search engine performed relatively well vs. Google.
  * Google won 53 percent of the time and Bing won 41 percent of the query tests, with a tie in 6 percent of instances. That suggests that Bing has the capacity to gain much more market share than it currently has (67 percent vs. 18 percent).

Ayers points out that the more assertive "prefer Bing 2:1 claim has been replaced on the Bing It On website with the more limited claim that "people prefer Bing."

I remember when Bing's market share was far down in the sub 10% range not that long ago.

Emerging markets ... likely need enterprise class equipment too.

....snip....

SDN is coming, and the likes of Cisco are terrified of it. So would you be if your own executives thought it was going to cut your company's value in half .....shop....

Hmmm..... SDN... I cannot comment on the "cut value in half" but they
seem to have a toe in the waters. Of interest big Cisco hardware has
few if any honest competition. One of the keys issues is provisions for
"legal" wiretaps. Legal taps in contrast to the NSA vacuum it all up problematic
processes.

http://www.networkworld.com/community/blog/cisco-sdn-splash-coming

The high end seems secure(ish} but the machine room is under attack.
Note the interesting project that Facebook has undertaken where a router
at the top of the rack seems to be the keystone for machine room nework
redesign. The performance and bandwidth of modern computation hardware
and modern disk (SSD) bandwidth is moving some key performance metrics
down to the rack one, two, three router hops and an equal number of bandwidth
edges closer onto the rack.

Who do you think would have made a better voice? Check out this: http://www.networkworld.com/slideshow/122853/10-people-who-should-have-been-apples-siri.html

Metada is as private as the contents is. However, I can't loose the the feeling, that somehow entire debate is being spun as if society "accepts" that metadata does not matter. It matters. The thing is that if existing law would be followed " The right of the people to be secure in their persons, houses, papers, and effects, against unreasonable searches and seizures, shall not be violated, and no Warrants shall issue, but upon probable cause, supported by Oath or affirmation, and particularly describing the place to be searched, and the persons or things to be seized", then most of NSA would be out of work. The Irony is that one, merely mentioning his rights is automatically classified as potential terroris http://www.networkworld.com/community/blog/ridiculous-dhs-list-you-might-be-domestic-ter

"In fact, I would expect that if we got into a (patent) dispute with Cisco and we conducted discovery, what they would tell us is that you'd have to go talk to our customers if you want to find out how their networks are configured because we can't tell you." - See more at: http://www.networkworld.com/community/blog/cisco-can%E2%80%99t-shield-customers-patent-suits-court-affirms#sthash.BD5PFArh.dpuf So, if the customers are "configuring" the equipment in an infringing way . . . In essence, the appeals court agreed with a lower court's acceptance of TR Labs' contention that its patent infringement claims are rightfully against the users of telecommunications equipment - be it gear made by Cisco, Juniper, Ciena or others - and not the manufacturers - See more at: http://www.networkworld.com/community/blog/cisco-can%E2%80%99t-shield-customers-patent-suits-court-affirms#sthash.BD5PFArh.dpuf So anyone could have been in the courtroom? It was just luck that it was Cisco?

"In fact, I would expect that if we got into a (patent) dispute with Cisco and we conducted discovery, what they would tell us is that you'd have to go talk to our customers if you want to find out how their networks are configured because we can't tell you." - See more at: http://www.networkworld.com/community/blog/cisco-can%E2%80%99t-shield-customers-patent-suits-court-affirms#sthash.BD5PFArh.dpuf So, if the customers are "configuring" the equipment in an infringing way . . . In essence, the appeals court agreed with a lower court's acceptance of TR Labs' contention that its patent infringement claims are rightfully against the users of telecommunications equipment - be it gear made by Cisco, Juniper, Ciena or others - and not the manufacturers - See more at: http://www.networkworld.com/community/blog/cisco-can%E2%80%99t-shield-customers-patent-suits-court-affirms#sthash.BD5PFArh.dpuf So anyone could have been in the courtroom? It was just luck that it was Cisco?

Some pretty juicy contracts are floating around too for a new version of the https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Distant_Early_Warning_Line
http://www.networkworld.com/community/blog/darpa-wants-ultimate-technology-sensor-network-monitor-vast-arctic (03/20/12)
"DARPA wants the ultimate technology, sensor network to monitor the vast Arctic"
Under-ice awareness, surface awareness, unmanned autonomous systems, anti-submarine warfare - guess Canada is doing its part with snowmobile upgrades.

There was no way to fix SYN attacks against TCP without replacing it either...oh wait yes there was cookies were added to mitigate the problem and today are widely deployed. The same solution for DNS continues to sit on a shelf and collect dust for no sane reason.

The inherent problem is that DNS uses a 16-bit number for the query id as a means to authenticate the response. Changing DNS to use a larger number would require a major re-architecture of the protocol. The short-term patch was to pair the id with a 16-bit port number to increase the possible combinations. But that was only a short-term solution.

April 1st must come late this year cuz DNSSec is glued on top of DNS and has all the same insane transport issues that we continue to allow DNS to have. Only now now with significantly higher computational cost and DDOS amplification factors which just might give SNMP with public community strings a run for its money.

Um what? If I said WPA is vulnerable, replace it with WPA2, would your response be "Wait, WPA2 is glued on top of WPA!" Also I didn't recommend DNSSec. Dan Kaminsky and others did: "DNSSec has been proposed as the way to bring cryptographic assurance to results provided by DNS, and Kaminsky has spoken in favor of it."

PowerPC was an instruction set architecture based on the POWER ISA; a few instructions were removed, and a number were added; more were added to PowerPC over time. The POWER3 processor implemented the full 64-bit version of PowerPC, and I think it also implemented some of the POWER instructions removed from PowerPC. PowerPC ended up getting renamed "Power ISA" - not to be confused with the all-caps "POWER ISA" mentioned earlier - as part of the "Power Architecture".

I don't know what stuff this consortium is dealing with. There's already Power.org for the Power Architecture, including the Power ISA. I'm guessing that this is for licensing the microarchitecture of the POWERn microprocessors; that seems to be what some of the articles are saying. Then again, some articles are calling it OpenPOWER and other articles are calling it OpenPower, so who knows?

Worst @ ISP level (vs. Kaminsky bug redirection) http://www.networkworld.com/news/2013/012913-dnssec-266197.html?page=3 & is also taken advantage of in its VERY NATURE vs. fastflux + dynamic DNS utilizing botnets.

Hosts gain you reliability vs. downed DNS servers & protect you vs redirected DNS servers as well as securing you vs. known malicious sites/servers/hosts-domains online http://tech.slashdot.org/comments.pl?sid=3985079&cid=44310431 (and even block phishing/spam mail malicious links).

Hosts work against each of those threats FOR YOUR BENEFIT, also gaining you speed by blocking ads, AND via local hardcodes of your favorite sites in them also (also avoiding DNS totally also avoiding dns request logs + DNSBL's you may not like).

AdBlock "souled-out" to Google, Ghostery = advertiser owned (Fox guarding the henhouse).

APK

P.S.=> I had no idea GOOGLE was doing that on ANDROID phones! Thus, I agree with you since they're an advertising company, they'd love to do that (& according to you apparently they are) - too bad they're opening the doors to malicious code in adbanners that way, and yes, that happens:

---

THE NEXT AD YOU CLICK MAY BE A VIRUS:

http://it.slashdot.org/story/09/06/15/2056219/The-Next-Ad-You-Click-May-Be-a-Virus

---

More dangerous to click on an online advertisement than an adult content site these days, Cisco said:

http://www.securityweek.com/easier-get-infected-malware-good-sites-shady-sites-cisco-says

---

... apk

Worst of all @ ISP level vs. Kaminsky bug redirection http://www.networkworld.com/news/2013/012913-dnssec-266197.html?page=3 & is also taken advantage of in its VERY NATURE vs. . Hosts work against each of those threats FOR YOUR BENEFIT, also gaining you speed you up via local hardcodes of your favorite sites in them also (also avoiding DNS totally that way along with dns request logs + DNSBL's you may not like). They also protect and gain you reliability vs. downed or redirected DNS servers.

APK

P.S.=> I had no idea GOOGLE was doing that on ANDROID phones but I have to agree with the person you quoted that since they're an advertising company, they'd love to do that - too bad they're opening the doors to malicious code in adbanners:

---

THE NEXT AD YOU CLICK MAY BE A VIRUS:

http://it.slashdot.org/story/09/06/15/2056219/The-Next-Ad-You-Click-May-Be-a-Virus

---

More dangerous to click on an online advertisement than an adult content site these days, Cisco said:

http://www.securityweek.com/easier-get-infected-malware-good-sites-shady-sites-cisco-says

---

... apk

Little details always mess numbers

So you agree that you're wrong, then. Good. Clearly if 56% of consumers are buying the Mac Air instead of an Ultrabook, they're selling a lot of them.

No I think the market segment is a bit of a failure.

Ultra-hyped ultrabooks ultra-flopped in 2012 http://www.networkworld.com/news/2013/010713-ultrabooks-265469.html
http://www.digitaltrends.com/computing/are-ultrabooks-an-epic-failure/ http://www.digitaltrends.com/computing/are-ultrabooks-an-epic-failure/
A year on, Ultrabooks are a worse disaster than most expected http://semiaccurate.com/2012/10/02/a-year-on-ultrabooks-are-a-worse-disaster-than-most-expected/
Remember Ultrabooks? Yeah, That Was A Good Time http://techcrunch.com/2012/10/01/remember-ultrabooks-yeah-that-was-a-good-time/

as I said apples sales are down 22%, 2% and 7%

TFA gave a link to http://www.networkworld.com/community/blog/colliding-exploding-stars-may-have-created-all-gold-earth , which led to another link at http://arxiv.org/abs/1306.3960 , which I have dl-ed the PDF at http://arxiv.org/pdf/1306.3960v1.pdf? but no matter how I search, I couldn't find any mention of the word 'gold' anywhere

Can someone please point us to the real article, please ?

Thus - Your use of tcp vs. udp = you being less efficient & slower: Tcp != faster than udp & has literally twice as many operations + overheads. Newsflash: udp does no callback (tcp does). You just made your inferior by itself 'solution' less efficient considering it's riddled with security issues too, & you depend solely on it!. You continually avoid that "fastflux" botnets (the primarily used design using host-domain names vs. IP addresses (easily killed in the latter)) Abuse a security flaw in dns servers that allows them to operate - Period. You also avoid you add more complexity, cpu usage, memory usage, & other forms of added I/O as well as electricity usage that dns servers entail (not to mention their security issues). Fact: You also solely rely on something built on a known multiply faulty unpatched "foundation"/infrastructure as you called it -> 2013: 5 years after major dns flaw is discovered, few US companies have deployed long-term fix (dns vs. kaminsky bug): -> http://www.networkworld.com/news/2013/012913-dnssec-266197.html?page=1 A fault which hosts files can overcome by bypassing said faulty infrastructure ENTIRELY for favorite sites hardcoded into them which also resolves ip addresses faster too vs. remote dns servers, yielding added anonymity & added reliability (Vs. dns request logs tracking & dnsbl's too as well as blocking known malicious sites/servers/hosts-domains). Admins should thank me for it - their machines work less with guys like me around & it keeps users cleaner vs online attacks. Lastly Blocking speed doesn't matter on how fast it occurs since with blocked sites since you never intended to get to blocked sites in the 1st place, so so much for that from you..

APK

P.S.=> You have been "schooled", completely... apk

DNS = clearly faulty (especially in security) & you use it, hosts overcome that! Hosts also get you past downed/redirect poisoned DNS servers also! Hosts remove the threat of "fastflux" designed malware online/botnets/malicious sites etc.-et al,by avoiding them, totally! Fastflux botnets are the prevalent design, 99% of the time for decades in fact! They are HARD to kill recycling host-domain names they use - Which is WHY more of that is used by botnets vs. IP addresses (easy to kill in the latter).

FastFlux botnets abuse a flaw in DNS to operate essentially.

( ... & it keeps me off DNS request logs, & outside of any puny DNSBL's (makes the servers work less too though, so "bonus for you too" dns admins)).

* All that, & more - from a SINGLE file part of the IP stack used by tcpip.sys @ kernelmode driver level (fastest possible), written in C (near fast as possible) with less moving parts with room for breakdown...

Especially THIS kind of "room for breakdown" -> 2013: 5 years after major DNS flaw is discovered, few US companies have deployed long-term fix (DNS vs. Kaminsky Bug): -> http://www.networkworld.com/news/2013/012913-dnssec-266197.html?page=1

APK

P.S.=> Anyone wonder WHY I built this, then?

http://start64.com/index.php?option=com_content&view=article&id=5851:apk-hosts-file-engine-64bit-version&catid=26:64bit-security-software&Itemid=74

Don't... & don't wonder WHY I released it publicly either:

See this discussion & only a partial list fragment of good results virtues a single file bestows on you running outta kernelmode in a multi-OS ported STABLE & FAST IP Stack as a driver using it as a filter (& since that's what it's really about, not the program, but the resulting output file's massive usefulness on many levels of versatility, nigh ubiquituous almost, in added/better speed, security, reliability, & even "anonymity" to an extent as well...)...

... apk

You were asked to SOLVE a KNOWN PROBLEM in DNS:

"I told you how to do it with existing DNS infrastructure." - by Ash-Fox (726320) on Wednesday July 03, 2013 @03:22PM (#44180573)

LMAO: Ok - Then here's your "existing DNS infrastructure" (crumbling with unpatched bugs) -> 2013 - 5 years after major DNS flaw is discovered, few US companies have deployed long-term fix (DNS vs. Kaminsky Bug): -> http://www.networkworld.com/news/2013/012913-dnssec-266197.html?page=1

* :)

(So much for THAT outta you... like any other "evasions" you use typically!).

APK

P.S.=> Now, THIS "takes the cake" from you, the most:

"Should have read the thread I linked. If you did, your reading comprehension is pretty bad." - by Ash-Fox (726320) on Wednesday July 03, 2013 @04:32PM (#44181445)

Beg to differ - YOURS clearly is, especially since you had to concede points of mine (& I never have any of yours)!

Face facts, & now I am just using your "OWN medicine" against you?

From our last discussions - You RAN FROM THESE 3 SIMPLE QUESTIONS BEFORE:

---

1.) Does DNS have numerous issues?

2.) Can custom hosts files overcome some of those issues??

3.) Does running programs of ANY KIND consume CPU, Memory, &/or Other Forms of I/O???

---

* Just answer those 3 questions...

Better yet? I will!

(THIS apparently needs to be done, again!)

A.) Never denied #1 above

B.) Not admitted that #2 can solve parts of #1

C.) You have already ADMITTED that running a DNS server machine (separate from a client workstation) eats more power, as well as the fact that running programs of ANY KIND do the same (albeit, to a lesser degree than running another system to do so, instead electing to run a DNS service/daemon on said client workstation instead locally)... ... apk

Fact is this: 2013 - 5 years after major DNS flaw is discovered, few US companies have deployed long-term fix (DNS vs. Kaminsky Bug): -> http://www.networkworld.com/news/2013/012913-dnssec-266197.html?page=3

AND?

How the FUCK is a custom hosts file more "resource intensive" when it's a SINGLE FILE being run from a kernelmode driver in the IP stack's own built in resolver (tcpip.sys)?

Fact: DNS has more "moving parts" LAYERED ON over that... that, in & OF itself means DNS is more complex and thus more prone to breakdown as well (as if "fastflux" botnets don't prove that much for me, easily)!

More evasions on electrical usage being GREATER with more added moving parts, ala a DNS server, too I see? Sorry - there IS NO DISPROVING THAT MUCH from myself on your part either...

APK

P.S.=> You're so FULL of it, it's making me laugh... apk

Wish I had this feature the first time I was sent a goatse pic.

Two articles (three pages NetworkWorld without images and one page PCWorld with images) on "How hacking fixed the worst video game of all time... So why should you give it another chance? Because code hackers managed to fix some of the games most glaring problems, and now it's actually fun to play..."

That summary is a giant train wreck.
Here's a less biased version.

"You may remember the story of Brandon Raub, a former Marine who was arrested for making threats on Facebook. After being questioned by the police, he was put on an involuntary psychiatric hold at local hospital John Randolph Psychiatric in Hopewell VA, then moved to Veterans Hospital in Salem, Virginia. Now with the help of the Rutherford Institute, he is suing Chesterfield County police, social workers, a psychotherapist, and other unnamed individuals . According to his complaint [PDF], his detention was part of a federal government program code-named 'Operation Vigilant Eagle,' which monitors military veterans with certain political views."

Read his facebook wall yourself
I wish him luck with the "they were only song lyrics" defense.

When will those idiots running things realise disagreeing with your views doesn't make you an enemy?

The governments are doing more to destroy peace & safety of it's people than the terrorists ever did.

"Disagree" can cover quite a range; you make it sound like the "disagreement" is minor.
This situation sounds more complicated than "a minor disagreement."
If these Raub quotes are accurate (below), what would you do? People act surprised (and upset that "nobody did anything!") when shooters turn up in movie theaters or schools, or when bombers crash your marathon.
So on the one hand it looks like it was worth investigating. On the other hand, it sounds like the authorities involved here will have some motivation to be better about following due process once the lawyers are done.
All in all it sounds like the checks & balances are working as planned in this situation.

Excerpts from http://www.networkworld.com/community/node/81243/

On Facebook, Raub talked about the Illuminati, a shadow organization in which "some of the leaders were involved with the bombing of the twin towers" and the "great amount of evil perpetrated by the American Government."
He said people may think he was going crazy, but a "civil war," the "Revolution" is coming.
"I'm starting the Revolution. I'm done waiting."
On July 24, he said he was at a "great crossroads. As if a storm of destiny is about to pick me up and take me to fight a great battle."
On August 9 he talked about severing heads and told the generals he was coming for them.
On August 13, he wrote, "Sharpen up my axe; I'm here to sever heads."
On August 14, Raub wrote, "The Revolution will come for me. Men will be at my door soon to pick me up to lead it."
On August 15, Raub wrote, "And they will say he said it to the NSA first."

Uhm, like General Petraeus, former head of the CIA?

Seriously, if our head of the top spy agency in this country is that stupid, how stupid do you think the rest of the diplomatic or legislative folks are in DC?

He was a political appointee, what do you expect? He was actually never in any capacity a spy. He was an infantry officer and a teacher more than he was anything else until 2004 and after when he was overall commander of Iraq then Afghanistan. The director of any agency in the US is an administrator above all else.

Good point.

When they have as head of FBI or CIA anyone but a seasoned veteran, they are making a poor decision.

Too often Presidents (does not matter who, left or right) tend to put political cronies in these positions. They may do what the President says and being "yes men", but they are not strong enough or experienced enough to actually lead the organization.

Uhm, like General Petraeus, former head of the CIA?

Seriously, if our head of the top spy agency in this country is that stupid, how stupid do you think the rest of the diplomatic or legislative folks are in DC?

He was a political appointee, what do you expect? He was actually never in any capacity a spy. He was an infantry officer and a teacher more than he was anything else until 2004 and after when he was overall commander of Iraq then Afghanistan. The director of any agency in the US is an administrator above all else.

Yes, exactly. That's why I roll my eyes whenever I hear, "Well if the head of the CIA can't keep his communications private..." Yeah, he's head of the CIA but it's not like he's trained in espionage. The spooks who do the real work generally don't have their communications compromised.

Uhm, like General Petraeus, former head of the CIA?

Seriously, if our head of the top spy agency in this country is that stupid, how stupid do you think the rest of the diplomatic or legislative folks are in DC?

He was a political appointee, what do you expect? He was actually never in any capacity a spy. He was an infantry officer and a teacher more than he was anything else until 2004 and after when he was overall commander of Iraq then Afghanistan. The director of any agency in the US is an administrator above all else.

Uhm, like General Petraeus, former head of the CIA?

Seriously, if our head of the top spy agency in this country is that stupid, how stupid do you think the rest of the diplomatic or legislative folks are in DC?

Nice slashvertisment, Colin Neagle (Community Editor covering Microsoft security and network management for Network World). I'd say "GYOFB", but you already have.

I'd keep an eye on your coworker Andy Patrizio though - he's so dumb he needs to run software to run iTunes when he plugs his phone in, rather than just disabling the service & clicking on the icon when he needs to...