I belive they mean they are going to model it in the sense that both Darwin and Fedora are the scaled down, community driven OS that is the base for a commercial one.
Darwin -> OS X
Fedora -> RHES
I know, I know it is a long shot to group these two together. But I think that is what is meant.
Makes sense though. Most of Solaris couldn't be open source, due to UNIX/SCO, Motif, and CDE licencing problems. So if they have a base to build it off of then reintroduce these back into Solaris Enterprise Edition or something.
If Avalon and Indigo is the new ways of displaying and programming applications. As a company why would I start porting my apps to it if it won't be used until 2006! If I have a pratical application now, then when 2006 comes out a lot of "native" apps .
Our largest collision domain serves approximately 90 hosts that are all heavily used, and it never congests its 100mb pipe (unless a worm gets in and actually does some damage, anyways).
You still have collision domains?!?/me Thinks you need to invest in some switches and proper uplinks and not even worry about gig for your desktop/servers
This is completly insane. The same problems exist with a NAT firewall and a not NAT firewall.
The rules may be much simpler if you are only nat'ing one ip address. You add NAT'ing of more than one (like most companies need) then your configuration is much more complecated than a non nat firewall.
So lets say on my NAT firewall I redirect port 80 to my webserver. Then on my non-NAT firewall permit port 80 to go through to my webserver. What the fuck is the difference. I have allowed a security hole in both instances. Both have to be monitored just as much.
By default what does nat do. Not allow any inbound traffic. Same thing a non nat firewall could/can do.
Now you are confusing routing and NATing. With lets say a Cisco PIX firewall you can do firewalling with out nat. You make the PIX the default gateway out to the internet. Walla all the data goes to one spot. (as with any firewall). You should be able to snort, sniff, and ids to your delight at one access point. Oh and now you don't have to trace IP's back to the NAT'ed IP.
To think that a NAT firewall has _anything_ over a standard access-list based firewall is stupid.
Wow, a firewall with out nat. The only reason most the hardware firewalls are NAT out of the box is due to the fact that most ISP's don't hand out more than one ip. So NAT is just there to share the connection.
NAT was a good idea and still is for overloading ipv4 networks. And yes it does work as a great natural firewall, but it's not the end all when it comes to security.
Configure and Monitor stuff on a non NAT firewall? Like what? And you are a TCP/IP security professional. I fear for your networks.
Evolution is presently distributed under the GPL, so of course Evolution in its present state can not be "closed".
Since Novell now owns the original copyright of Evolution they can rerelease it under a closed binary-only licence. Or even release two seperate versions (one open, one closed) and be abiding by the GPL.
You are correct Groupwise is not open source at all. So lets look at the options novell has:
Keep Evolution open source and expand to run on other platforms (windows). And keep groupwise server and the connector closed source. (Like how the current exchange connector is being developed>
Re-release Evolution under a closed source licence and add the Groupwise code into to it. Keep Groupwise server closed source.
Keep Evolutions on linux open source and close on other platforms.
Other combinations.
As you can see there is not really a problem here with the two being differently licenced. I don't think Groupwise will ever become open source as it is one of the best assits that Novell has over other products.
You are correct, our biggest fear is Evolution becoming closed source. I don't personaly think this will happen, but the current source is GPL and can be forked! The best move for Novell is to keep it open sourced and work on a closed source connector.
I have used my laptop on a 802.11b network with Cisco's SoftPhone to place calls and there is little to no delay. 802.11b has more than enough bandwidth to carry calls.
I have also done the same with a vpn connection. Little more delay but still very clear. Not to mention the toll bypassing you do when doing this.
Also on Cisco's new access points you can define different vlans with different ammounts of QoS. So your wireless phone has presidence above normal 802.11 traffic wirelessly!
Ciscos whole selling point of Voip is one network for everything (video,data,voice) and that is why 802.11b was used.
I belive you failed to see the point of this phone. First of all it is a SCCP (skinny) phone that talks back to a CCM (Cisco Callmanager). So unless you can vpn in back into your companies network to use thier callmanagers, and gateways.
Where this phone does come in handy is in your office where 802.11b already is or will be. You are already on your network with easy access to your callmanagers and gateways. It is NOT intended to replace cell phones by using wireless hotspots
Cisco is trying to put CDMA into the phone as well and implement more "smarts" into the call manager. So that if your phone is out of the 802.11b range (not in the office) it will automatically forward your calls from the office line to your cell phone number (same phone!). So you only have one number to reach you anywhere
Acutally it's not the Music that Brad Thomas and UW is worried about. It's the bandwidth. I belive UW only has one 155mbit ATM link to the net. This link is shared with voice, video, and remote backups. When I was working for brad thomas he was having paying people complain about video being choppy so something had to be done. Now with ports jumping all around the place it is harder to find p2p programs which have a sponge effect on the outpound pipe.
Read the article buddy. They did do that, that what the Packeteer program was for. But the problem was that the programs and the students themselved were finding ways around it.
Kazza started hopping ports, very had to throttle the ports then. Also the students found ways to get around this, like httptunnels. Or the one I used at UW. I had a work machine that was unthrottled, so I setup a Socks server on my machine at work(I worked for the Network team at UW) and tunneled all my traffic though that. Worked great, expecially since all the other traffic was slow
I know now that they are having such a problem with bandwidth that internet access in the dorms is slow for anyone and anything you just can block a couple of ports and call it good.
is free! There is no extra charge when you live in the dorms or a on campus fraternaty or sorority. This gives the students even less say on what the bandwidth can be used for.
I used to work directly under Brad Thomas and actually setup cricket to monitor the bandwidth on campus and as far as I know this is still working. The Packeteer software was added while I was working there while this new finger printing was added later. I know that the bandwidth from the dorms (as high as 50MB when unlimited) was killing voice and video trasmissions for remote schooling. Something definatly had to be done, they are not just evil.
Also I remember a couple of times where abuse@uwyo.edu would be hit by Sony records asking us to shutdown someones computer sharing illegal music on the net. Few switch commands later, *BAM*, the kid was disconnected until he removed the material. Kinda a fun job:). Kinda wish I was still there
Slashdot Mirror
Check out this link as to what will work on VPC and what won't. http://vpc.visualwin.com/
Thats why the number is 0. Get it? Zero as in not really RAID.
RAID-0 does have the advantage of being very fast, which is why it was used here.
Funny.... he doesn't look druish.
SunOS is Solaris. Just a different marketing name.
I belive they mean they are going to model it in the sense that both Darwin and Fedora are the scaled down, community driven OS that is the base for a commercial one.
Darwin -> OS X
Fedora -> RHES
I know, I know it is a long shot to group these two together. But I think that is what is meant.
Makes sense though. Most of Solaris couldn't be open source, due to UNIX/SCO, Motif, and CDE licencing problems. So if they have a base to build it off of then reintroduce these back into Solaris Enterprise Edition or something.
If Avalon and Indigo is the new ways of displaying and programming applications. As a company why would I start porting my apps to it if it won't be used until 2006! If I have a pratical application now, then when 2006 comes out a lot of "native" apps .
Uhh... there is hotplug in 9 and 10. That will detect any pci/usb items and try to modprobe the right kernerl module. This works like a charm!
Our largest collision domain serves approximately 90 hosts that are all heavily used, and it never congests its 100mb pipe (unless a worm gets in and actually does some damage, anyways).
/me Thinks you need to invest in some switches and proper uplinks and not even worry about gig for your desktop/servers
You still have collision domains?!?
Note to self, never post before coffee. Yes, its a dupe. get over it.
Ya tell that to the Slashdot Subscribers, they pay for this shit. You want to run a business, do it professionaly.
the fire department on stand-by...
Well they would be, but I needed some more money for street repair so I cut their funding and now they are on strike.
This is completly insane. The same problems exist with a NAT firewall and a not NAT firewall.
The rules may be much simpler if you are only nat'ing one ip address. You add NAT'ing of more than one (like most companies need) then your configuration is much more complecated than a non nat firewall.
So lets say on my NAT firewall I redirect port 80 to my webserver. Then on my non-NAT firewall permit port 80 to go through to my webserver. What the fuck is the difference. I have allowed a security hole in both instances. Both have to be monitored just as much.
By default what does nat do. Not allow any inbound traffic. Same thing a non nat firewall could/can do.
Now you are confusing routing and NATing. With lets say a Cisco PIX firewall you can do firewalling with out nat. You make the PIX the default gateway out to the internet. Walla all the data goes to one spot. (as with any firewall). You should be able to snort, sniff, and ids to your delight at one access point. Oh and now you don't have to trace IP's back to the NAT'ed IP.
To think that a NAT firewall has _anything_ over a standard access-list based firewall is stupid.
hmm... how about
deny all inbound
Wow, a firewall with out nat. The only reason most the hardware firewalls are NAT out of the box is due to the fact that most ISP's don't hand out more than one ip. So NAT is just there to share the connection.
NAT was a good idea and still is for overloading ipv4 networks. And yes it does work as a great natural firewall, but it's not the end all when it comes to security.
Configure and Monitor stuff on a non NAT firewall? Like what? And you are a TCP/IP security professional. I fear for your networks.
Ya, but Slackware users arn't this stupid.
Since Novell now owns the original copyright of Evolution they can rerelease it under a closed binary-only licence. Or even release two seperate versions (one open, one closed) and be abiding by the GPL.
You are correct Groupwise is not open source at all. So lets look at the options novell has:
As you can see there is not really a problem here with the two being differently licenced. I don't think Groupwise will ever become open source as it is one of the best assits that Novell has over other products.
You are correct, our biggest fear is Evolution becoming closed source. I don't personaly think this will happen, but the current source is GPL and can be forked! The best move for Novell is to keep it open sourced and work on a closed source connector.
Could this be because of AU/X and not OS X?
AU/X was Apples first try at Unix on the mac and I belive this was an official Unix.
I have used my laptop on a 802.11b network with Cisco's SoftPhone to place calls and there is little to no delay. 802.11b has more than enough bandwidth to carry calls.
I have also done the same with a vpn connection. Little more delay but still very clear. Not to mention the toll bypassing you do when doing this.
Also on Cisco's new access points you can define different vlans with different ammounts of QoS. So your wireless phone has presidence above normal 802.11 traffic wirelessly!
Ciscos whole selling point of Voip is one network for everything (video,data,voice) and that is why 802.11b was used.
I belive you failed to see the point of this phone. First of all it is a SCCP (skinny) phone that talks back to a CCM (Cisco Callmanager). So unless you can vpn in back into your companies network to use thier callmanagers, and gateways.
Where this phone does come in handy is in your office where 802.11b already is or will be. You are already on your network with easy access to your callmanagers and gateways. It is NOT intended to replace cell phones by using wireless hotspots
Cisco is trying to put CDMA into the phone as well and implement more "smarts" into the call manager. So that if your phone is out of the 802.11b range (not in the office) it will automatically forward your calls from the office line to your cell phone number (same phone!). So you only have one number to reach you anywhere
Ever hear of the Personal Telco Project?
I though the bandwidth would go down after I moved out of the dorms. Since I kept trying to /. it in my posts (succeded once too).
Like here Or here. Or even here.
Guess my old drinking buddies filled the bandwidth gap I left when I dropped out.
We don't call the university U of Wyoming or UW(you double-you). It's U Dub (you dub) :P
Proud freshman flunkout!
Acutally it's not the Music that Brad Thomas and UW is worried about. It's the bandwidth. I belive UW only has one 155mbit ATM link to the net. This link is shared with voice, video, and remote backups. When I was working for brad thomas he was having paying people complain about video being choppy so something had to be done. Now with ports jumping all around the place it is harder to find p2p programs which have a sponge effect on the outpound pipe.
Read the article buddy. They did do that, that what the Packeteer program was for. But the problem was that the programs and the students themselved were finding ways around it.
Kazza started hopping ports, very had to throttle the ports then. Also the students found ways to get around this, like httptunnels. Or the one I used at UW. I had a work machine that was unthrottled, so I setup a Socks server on my machine at work(I worked for the Network team at UW) and tunneled all my traffic though that. Worked great, expecially since all the other traffic was slow
I know now that they are having such a problem with bandwidth that internet access in the dorms is slow for anyone and anything you just can block a couple of ports and call it good.
is free! There is no extra charge when you live in the dorms or a on campus fraternaty or sorority. This gives the students even less say on what the bandwidth can be used for.
:). Kinda wish I was still there
I used to work directly under Brad Thomas and actually setup cricket to monitor the bandwidth on campus and as far as I know this is still working. The Packeteer software was added while I was working there while this new finger printing was added later. I know that the bandwidth from the dorms (as high as 50MB when unlimited) was killing voice and video trasmissions for remote schooling. Something definatly had to be done, they are not just evil.
Also I remember a couple of times where abuse@uwyo.edu would be hit by Sony records asking us to shutdown someones computer sharing illegal music on the net. Few switch commands later, *BAM*, the kid was disconnected until he removed the material. Kinda a fun job
In America we don't beat a dead horse
Is it just me or are these "Soviet Russia" jokes geting damn old. I plead with you, Please Stop!