Slashdot Mirror
D-Link Settles Danish Time Dispute
igb writes "The Register reports that DLink has settled the time server dispute described a little over a month ago here on Slashdot. They're going to stop using an NTP server they're not really authorized to chime with, and they've reached an amicable settlement over the use by existing products. The details of the settlement are, not unsurprisingly, somewhat vague, but let's hope that the good guys aren't out of pocket any more."
than to challenge a Time Lord!
It's strange these companies can't afford to set up a few of their own NTP servers instead of overloading servers that don't have the bandwidth. It it's because they are clueless or they are cheap?
And likely more. I've been telling my friends not to buy them, and I know of at least one buying decision that was made specifically for that reason that cost them $120 worth of sales of USB wireless adapters.
Need a Python, C++, Unix, Linux develop
Part of the settlement involves him putting on his website "D-Link is dedicated to remaining a good corporate and network citizen."
Otherwise, considering his previous level of frustration, there's no chance he would shill for them like that.
[Fuck Beta]
o0t!
Seems to me that if you run a (public) NTP server with a publicly available IP address and/or DNS resolution, that means anyone (public) can use the (public) service - no?
No.
Do you Gentoo!?
The reason for this is to avoid problems like this, where the NTP server is overloaded or the NTP client is mis-configured and overloads the server or network.
Is silently migrate my legit users to another ntp server and then set the D-Link'ed ones to something like Klingon time or something bizarre, streach 8 hour days to 10 hours, etc. Of course that wouldn't solve the excess traffic, but you can get creative with revenge, especially when you're in the right.
try { do() || do_not(); } catch (JediException err) { yoda(err); }
Public or not, you have to follow the rules. It is pretty well known that only 'Stratum 2' NTP servers are to use 'Stratum 1' NTP servers. This is not just a 'because we want it that way' policy. There are many good reasons for this.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/NTP_vandalism
"If you make people think they're thinking, they'll love you; But if you really make them think, they'll hate you." - DM
There is now a way for vendors to use the NTP pool. See http://www.pool.ntp.org/vendors.html for details.
Agreed. D-Link appears to occupy a point on the cost-quality curve that ultimately costs more in hair-pulling time than it saves in cash. Their products may be OK for lightweight use at home, but they can really give you fits in a more demanding environment.
Case in point: we recently put a bunch of DGS-1008D 8-port gigabit switches into service, and immediately started having problems with dropped Ethernet connections. Our laser printer was sucking down enough power at the onset of its fuser-warmup phase to trigger a nearby UPS momentarily. The resulting switchover transient lasted only a few milliseconds, but it was enough to reset the DGS-1008D. After a LOT of tail-chasing, it transpired that the (cheap-ass linear) wall-wart supplies that D-Link ships with the DGS-1008D lack sufficient filter capacitance to absorb even the slightest power glitch under high-load conditions (e.g., when there are several cables plugged into the switch.)
We took a few of their power supplies apart and found that the oldest ones -- which didn't have the problem -- used a 2000-uF filter capacitor at the rectifier output. At some point, they saved 10 cents by moving to a supply with only 1000 uF, rendering their product useless in many real-world office environments.
This isn't supposed to be a general "let's all bag on D-Link" thread, but hey, if the shoe fits...
Dahlmann tightly grips the knife, which he may have no idea how to use, and steps out into the plain.
His NTP server access policy explicitly limited use of said server to the Danish Internet Exchange (DIX). In return, DIX provided him with a free internet connection for his NTP server. Because D-Link was sucking so much bandwidth, DIX told Kamp he would have to pay yearly for the connection. D-Link disregarded his server policy and abused his server. That's why it's a problem.
Also, his server is a Stratum 1, and, while not explicitly written, the D-Link devices should getting the time via a Stratum 2 server. At least, that's how it's commonly done.
Does that help explain things better?
Slackware
Someone at D-Link should simply have realized the mistake and paid for a few very fast servers to sit at a hosting facillity and respond to the requests -- and all the requests already using that service -- for as long as the Danes were willing to point the DNS entry for that server to them.
In the scheme of things, and from a marketing perspective, anything else is stupid and a waste of good will.
The problem with quotes on the internet, is that nobody bothers to check their veracity. -- Abraham Lincoln
What do they say that? - Sound like they go out of their way (advice about firewalls, etc) to let taxpayers "Set Your Computer Clock Via the Internet".
try { do() || do_not(); } catch (JediException err) { yoda(err); }
$8000 a year isn't exactly chump change for most people.
Windows sends a 1-byte ping to a server within the microsoft.com domain, ostensibly to confirm network connectivity
Years ago, Bill Gates said 'If only I had $1 for every time a windows server rebooted..'
And the rest is history.
- Stratum 1 are principle time servers for a region & directly query atomic clocks.
- Stratum 2 are general use for large regions or institutions - generally they should only be contacted by Stratum 3 servers - clients only as a last resort.
- Stratum 3 are the generic NTP servers of the internet - if you're an end client you should be talking to a Stratum 3 unless none are available/unrestricted for your use.
D-Link SOHO routers do 3 things wrong.- They don't follow the NTP protocol for requests to stop using the service.
- They ignore the restrictions place on the server usage - in Denmark, for use by ISP or Stratum (2/3) requests.
- They hit a Stratum 1 NTP server as an end client.
So no, if you run a public NTP server that you have dutifully entered restrictions on, you are expecting everyone who comes to you to obey the NTP protocol. That includes following the restrictions, listening to the go away requests, and following the basic rules of who to talk to.[Analogy type=bad]
In the US there are a number of parking spaces set asside for handicapped parking in almost every parking lot. Physically you can park there if you are not handicapped, but you're not supposed to (covers both ignoring restrictions and a client talking to a Stratum 1 server). If the manager of the parking lot tells you to get your car out of the spot - you should do that(refers to the kill request in the NTP protocol). In the real world if it get's this far, the cops come & give you a ticket. On the net you get open letters calling you an arogant prick who can't be bothered to figure out the basics of the protocols you are boasting about
[/Analogy]
For the record the Danish server was not the only Stratum 1 server they hit, they appear to have taken the Stratum 1 list (almost all of which restrict usage to Stratum 2 servers) and shoved it into the routers for general use - hardly the "Good internet citizen" they claim to be.
Poul-Henning Kamp got 200.000 DDK (Danish kroner) which is about 33.000 US$.
;-). This information is from the danish version of computerworld online at http://www.computerworld.dk/
;-)
The settlement states that Poul-Henning Kamp must not talk about the history of problems which the D-Link routers caused. But He tells danish press that any future problemes causes by D-link equiptment will be posted around the net
His homepage is http://people.freebsd.org/~phk/
For those in america: Denmark is not the capital of sweden
Taping a note to your front door that reads 'only enter if you live here' doesn't accomplish a lot if you leave the door open all the time.
Please, stop with stupid analogies. They are never helpful. You can leave your door open all the time, that doesn't give anyone the right to go in! In Vermont, thats criminal trespass, and the fine is much larger than the other forms of trespass defined in the act.
> What D-Link did was unprofessional and irresponsible...
It was also stupid. Why would anyone buy a router from people who can't even get something this simple right?
Warning: this article may contain humor, sarcasm, parody, and perhaps even irony. Read at your own risk.
IMHO they should donate their best products to him,
Dude! They've already fucked him once. What have you got against the poor guy?