This whole thing is kind of ridiculous. I remember as a kid looking at images in women underwear catalogs and in anatomy books at the school library and things were much more restrictive back then. Note that this was before ARPANET (~1971).
So, should Wikipedia be more restrictive than those library school books from back then ?
Granted, Wikipedia might cover topics not covered in my early day school books but either censor the topic entirely or let it be documented like any other topic.
I have come to hate Tim Hortons because of their advertisement on TV where everybody looks stupid and that always end up with stupid laughs after a stupid joke.
I swear I switch the channel every time I see one now.
Everything's bigger up here. Texas is just where Canadian's try things out before commissioning the full-size model...
Nah, Stan, my toolpusher (kinda of like a superintenden) on a canadian oil rig is still telling me that "everything is bigger in Texas". Most of the biggest oil drilling rigs pull 3 pipes at a time from the ground before making those 3 pipes stand on the derrick. My toolpush told me that in Texas, the big oil rigs there pull 6 pipes at a time !
Classful netmasks can screw up even globally routeable netblocks that have been since CIDRed, but it's becoming less and less of a problem. Last time I had issues was dealing with split tunneling on crusty old VPN clients.
>Just wanted to point out that your guidelines are written with > one major and incorrect assumption, which is that you only > need ONE subnet worth of addresses.
This isn't true anymore, at least since 1993, so you can do things like 192.168.128.0/17, 192.168.128.0/28, 192.168.0.0/16 or 10.3.4.0/24.
I know this. I use one networks with 26 bits and another one with 28 bits in the netmask.
Note this wasn't true in the very beginning of time although. 10.X.X.X was considered as one unique physical network and a netmask of 8 was implied back then.
> It may sound stupid but one of the few reasons I've got for accumulating more > money is being able to pay the medicine I hope will exist by the time my body > starts failing in those kind of ways.
Hehe, your post reminded me the movie "The Island".
> my provider uses 10.* addresses there therefore I had to change the > addressing scheme on my LAN because
Why did you chose 10.x.x.x for your LAN in the first place ? I doubt that you are planning to connect 16,777,216 machines to your LAN;-)
Guide lines are to use:
192.168.X.X if you need 65,536 IP addresses or less
172.16.X.X-172.31.X.X if you need between 65,536 and 1,048,576 IP addresses
10.X.X.X if you need between 1,048,576 and 16,777,216 IP addresses
Routing is slightly faster with more bits in your netmask. Although I do not think that you will notice a difference especially nowadays. I think this was one of the reasons for these guidelines. Following the guide lines also ease connectivity to bigger nated networks, your provider in your case.
With more than 150 replies so far, only one poster mentions the Transocean drilling contractor.
Drilling contractors drill wells for oil companies like a house building contractor will build your house.
Mass media almost exclusively talk about BP but the drilling contractor is the real specialist is oil well drilling. So, it is just like the media were mentioning exclusively yourself because the house you had a contractor building blew up and killed people.
Of course the client (BP) might very well have some part of responsibility, especially if they pressured the contractor to cut costs in a way impacting security. I wander how this thing will settle in courts, how the responsibilities will be split.
Anyway, I though that it was good to mention the above in contrast to the over simplistic view usually depicted in mass media.
I know very well how ntpd works. On the other hand, you do not understand what this script is for. Please read the other posts I have made on this tread for further understanding.
"More generally, the algorithm should be designed never to overreact to anything. Remember, its view of the world is always approximate and may be wrong, so why try to be too clever when inaction works so well? Unfortunately, feedback algorithms such as ntpd have more reactive strategies that drive the clock more strongly in the direction of their opinions. This is a major source of their nonrobustness to disruptive events."
I fully agree with this and I realized it several years ago while testing ntpd in various configurations.
Network issues. If say, on average, once every 25 polls, ntpd doesn't get realistic data from higher stratum servers because of the network, don't let ntpd crank up the frequency to ridiculous values like it does when this occurs.
There are realistic values for the frequency on every machine with a good clock. It is ridiculous to set the frequency below or above these values.
Last time I checked, there is no way in ntpd to configure these values. The typical ntp guru reply will be: "Get a decent network connection". The author in TFA noted that such a "decent connection" is virtually impossible to achieve because of "variable delay". He also noted that it is sometime better to trust yourself, which is kind of what that script does.
I like the trust yourself part. I actually implemented a dirty script to restrict how much ntp can change my clock speed and I call every minute from crond;-))
Limits are hardcoded and depend on the machine;-))
Slashdot Mirror
> 6 people running around is almost 2,000 btus
well as long as you do not have to pay to feed them in order for them to produce heat, in which case it might not be that efficient.
Dear Larry Bagina, you wrote:
> wax your asshole and take a picture.
So it would more like the one in the bagina picture on wikipedia ? ;-)
This whole thing is kind of ridiculous. I remember as a kid looking at images in women underwear catalogs and in anatomy books at the school library and things were much more restrictive back then. Note that this was before ARPANET (~1971).
So, should Wikipedia be more restrictive than those library school books from back then ?
Granted, Wikipedia might cover topics not covered in my early day school books but either censor the topic entirely or let it be documented like any other topic.
Well thanks for that, now we have another topic going on about Wikipedia being sexist ;-)
Why is only the female genitals "depilated" ?
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Human_anus
I have come to hate Tim Hortons because of their advertisement on TV where everybody looks stupid and that always end up with stupid laughs after a stupid joke.
I swear I switch the channel every time I see one now.
Everything's bigger up here. Texas is just where Canadian's try things out before commissioning the full-size model...
Nah, Stan, my toolpusher (kinda of like a superintenden) on a canadian oil rig is still telling me that "everything is bigger in Texas". Most of the biggest oil drilling rigs pull 3 pipes at a time from the ground before making those 3 pipes stand on the derrick. My toolpush told me that in Texas, the big oil rigs there pull 6 pipes at a time !
640 petabytes should be enough for everybody.
Classful netmasks can screw up even globally routeable netblocks that have been since CIDRed, but it's becoming less and less of a problem. Last time I had issues was dealing with split tunneling on crusty old VPN clients.
More here on that.
I suspected this could still occur although I have never encountered it.
Thanks for confirming ;-))
> That was annoying...
Yep, I estimate that by year 2115, these types of annoyances will be resolved, thanks to IPv6.
> Because every damn organisation I VPN to uses 192.168.x.x
> addresses, or 172.[16-32].x.x
it is 172.[16-31].x.x. At 32, you are in no longer in the 172.16.0.0/12 reserved for private use IP space.
Same old, same old. Some things will never change.
I am still glad to hear about this specific topic although, just for my personal information.
> We're in the era of VLSM. Please stop spreading this nonsense of
> classful addressing.
WTF ? What I wrote has got nothing to do with classful addressing.
Here is an example of somebody who thinks in a classful way. You can also read my reply to him.
http://slashdot.org/comments.pl?sid=1639534&cid=32083386
>Just wanted to point out that your guidelines are written with
> one major and incorrect assumption, which is that you only
> need ONE subnet worth of addresses.
This isn't true anymore, at least since 1993, so you can do things like 192.168.128.0/17, 192.168.128.0/28, 192.168.0.0/16 or 10.3.4.0/24.
http://slashdot.org/comments.pl?sid=1639534&cid=32083348
I know this. I use one networks with 26 bits and another one with 28 bits in the netmask.
Note this wasn't true in the very beginning of time although. 10.X.X.X was considered as one unique physical network and a netmask of 8 was implied back then.
See:
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Classless_Inter-Domain_Routing
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/IP_address
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Classful_network
> It may sound stupid but one of the few reasons I've got for accumulating more
> money is being able to pay the medicine I hope will exist by the time my body
> starts failing in those kind of ways.
Hehe, your post reminded me the movie "The Island".
http://www.imdb.com/title/tt0399201/
> How?
The same way any blind person would read /.
> my provider uses 10.* addresses there therefore I had to change the
> addressing scheme on my LAN because
Why did you chose 10.x.x.x for your LAN in the first place ? I doubt that you are planning to connect 16,777,216 machines to your LAN ;-)
Guide lines are to use:
192.168.X.X if you need 65,536 IP addresses or less
172.16.X.X-172.31.X.X if you need between 65,536 and 1,048,576 IP addresses
10.X.X.X if you need between 1,048,576 and 16,777,216 IP addresses
Routing is slightly faster with more bits in your netmask. Although I do not think that you will notice a difference especially nowadays. I think this was one of the reasons for these guidelines. Following the guide lines also ease connectivity to bigger nated networks, your provider in your case.
Yep, I do not remember him mentioning Transocean, which did not help with the over simplistic view that mass media offers us as I explained here:
http://news.slashdot.org/comments.pl?sid=1639434&cid=32079132
Note that Transocean stock has been a little more affected than BP stock so far:
http://www.nyse.com/about/listed/lcddata.html?ticker=RIG&fq=D&ezd=1Y&index=5
http://www.nyse.com/about/listed/lcddata.html?ticker=BP&fq=D&ezd=1Y&index=5
With more than 150 replies so far, only one poster mentions the Transocean drilling contractor.
Drilling contractors drill wells for oil companies like a house building contractor will build your house.
Mass media almost exclusively talk about BP but the drilling contractor is the real specialist is oil well drilling. So, it is just like the media were mentioning exclusively yourself because the house you had a contractor building blew up and killed people.
Of course the client (BP) might very well have some part of responsibility, especially if they pressured the contractor to cut costs in a way impacting security. I wander how this thing will settle in courts, how the responsibilities will be split.
Anyway, I though that it was good to mention the above in contrast to the over simplistic view usually depicted in mass media.
I know very well how ntpd works. On the other hand, you do not understand what this script is for. Please read the other posts I have made on this tread for further understanding.
http://slashdot.org/comments.pl?sid=1638098&cid=32062158
http://slashdot.org/comments.pl?sid=1638098&cid=32062314
He should be careful what he wishes for, apparently there might be a risk of ending up like this women:
http://idle.slashdot.org/story/10/04/15/146236/Woman-Claims-Wii-Fit-Caused-Persistent-Sexual-Arousal-Syndrome
Author of TFA also mention:
"More generally, the algorithm should be designed never to overreact to anything. Remember, its view of the world is always approximate and may be wrong, so why try to be too clever when inaction works so well? Unfortunately, feedback algorithms such as ntpd have more reactive strategies that drive the clock more strongly in the direction of their opinions. This is a major source of their nonrobustness to disruptive events."
I fully agree with this and I realized it several years ago while testing ntpd in various configurations.
Network issues. If say, on average, once every 25 polls, ntpd doesn't get realistic data from higher stratum servers because of the network, don't let ntpd crank up the frequency to ridiculous values like it does when this occurs.
There are realistic values for the frequency on every machine with a good clock. It is ridiculous to set the frequency below or above these values.
Last time I checked, there is no way in ntpd to configure these values. The typical ntp guru reply will be: "Get a decent network connection". The author in TFA noted that such a "decent connection" is virtually impossible to achieve because of "variable delay". He also noted that it is sometime better to trust yourself, which is kind of what that script does.
I like the trust yourself part. I actually implemented a dirty script to restrict how much ntp can change my clock speed and I call every minute from crond ;-))
Limits are hardcoded and depend on the machine ;-))
$ cat setclockfrequency
#!/bin/sh
# 251616 = 3.839
# 269120 = 4.106
# 280448 = 4.279
# 288544 = 4.403
# 9372208 = 143.009
# 10703936 = 163.329
# 11308784 = 172.558
###let LOWLIMIT=243520
###let HILIMIT=286496
let LOWLIMIT=10072208
let HILIMIT=10408784
let FREQ=`adjtimex -p | grep frequency | cut -d ":" -f 2 | cut -c 2-`
if [ ${FREQ} -gt ${HILIMIT} ]
then
adjtimex -f ${HILIMIT}
fi
if [ ${FREQ} -lt ${LOWLIMIT} ]
then
adjtimex -f ${LOWLIMIT}
fi