I would suggest understanding the base technology of the services you are considering.
Cable for example is a shared platform. You may share 40meg of capacity with 100 other people and be individually limited to 5meg. Depending on the users, you may or may not not ever have the network congested so you will receive less then peak value, but that doesn't mean it won't happen.
You could be unlucky enough to end up on a node with dozens of heavy torrent users.
The up-to is probably generally acceptable because 95% of consumers don't understand the underlying technology and probably are not as concerned about if they get 5meg all the time, or if sometimes they only get 3meg.
The speed they are giving probably refers to the physical cap on your access path, and the up to is to cover them off when the load simply get overwhelmed. If they are good company, they either have have tons of capacity, or they fire customers who use excessive quantities of capacity, most likely a mix of both.
So if I'm driving down the highway at 80km/h, and the oncoming traffic is doing 80km/h should I hit the oncoming car for any reason, it would be 160km/h impact.
If I'm on a controlled freeway with a median between my vehicle and oncoming traffic, no matter how you look at it, I am much safer unless someone decides to drive the wrong way down the freeway.
As far as I'm concerned, the most dangerous things on the road are inattentive drivers. I've driven in many different countries including Germany. When you are on the Autobahn, you are paying attention to the traffic around you, as is everyone else out there.
When I'm driving around in Ontario, I would be surprised if half the people looked around to see what was coming up around them. In a 3 lane freeway, everyone parks their car in the middle of the road and follows the bumper in front of them.
I saw a sign as I was approaching Toronto that said "Drive Defensively" and the first thing that came to mind is that defensive doesn't mean passive. From what I've seen, your typical Ontario driver (I won't generalize for the rest of NA) is a passive driver on the Freeway.
MacGibbon: less than 1/100th of one percent of all items listed result in a confirmed case of fraud
The "confirmed" came up a few more times. Talk about reading from a script. I must assume that "alleged" cases are fraud nicely do not register on this impressive statistic.
Normally speaking, I'm fairly trusting, but when I see something like this being spun this hard, I makes me very suspicious.
Skipping over the database issues, I'm really wondering why two breakers would flip off at the same time. I suspect they have overloaded the circuits.
I know with the servers at work, we are very careful to not go past 50% load on any one UPS since we split the Dual PS servers over them. If one goes down, it draws more power across the other. If it draws too much, the second UPS will fail too.
Also, wouldn't the raid controllers have battery protected write ahead cache? Even if the power was down suddenly, I would expect that the writes would still be completed to disk. Maybe I'm being naive with this expectation or I'm not fully comprehending the problem.
The benefit of RHEL is that they are commited to a 5 year life span of updates. Simple example, had a server that was dependant on a Sendmail 8.11.x install. 8.12.x wouldn't work. RHEL 2.1 was what I had to install. If I went with FC or anything like that, well, it wouldn't have been pretty.
You just don't have the time to resetup and test the interactions of so many new components in production equipment. When your looking at months of planning and implementation per server, you want it to live for a long time.
If your box doesn't come back up after one of these updates, how long can you spend fixing it? Now what if you have 20 of these servers? And they are fairly different from each other?
Just as a quick gotcha, I think RHEL3 is already 2 years in, so if your installing it, You really only have 3 years of life left. I'd like to see Redhat commit to 5 years of life from the point the new releasee comes out.
<Sarcasm>Your so right. Lets put off deploying something that might be able to make a dent until we have the ultimate uber solution that solves all the worlds problems and will get me a date.</Sarcasm>
One thing this could do would be to stop the flow of spam/worms from broadband customers. That right there would have a huge impact on everyone.
The problem that kills simple things like blacklists from working is that most mail comes forged, if you can kill the forged mail, blacklists become effective again.
Yes, if we wait long enough, there is always a better version of whatever coming along. Thats why I'm waiting for the Uberium CPU to upgrade my 386, I know it will be out sometime.
I would be very disappointed if Bluetooth went away. I just got a new laptop, with Bluetooth, synced up my Palm via Bluetooth (no more cradle needed). I'm getting a new Cell phone, and you guessed it, I want it with BlueTooth.
Living in Ontario, our options for BT enabled phones is either Rogers or Fido. Rogers is just making the switch to GSM (well, have been for a while, but not quite complete yet), and Fido only really exists in Cities with populations over 600000. Since I have yet to find a BT enabled phone on any other provider (it seems BT and GSM are tied at the hip), I'm switching networks in a month to get a GSM w/ BT phone.
Of course there will be better ways of doing this in the future, but it works for what it does, which is all that I ask of it.
The point wasn't what you were running on your computer, its that from the ISP's perspective, some customers are running that type of software.
The fundamental problem is that you end up trying to deal with the lowest common denominator. Its also what causes the most frustration when someone who has a clue calls in, because they are being treated the same way.
A quick google search of Norton Antivirus 25 returns results like this one
I suppose I made a relatively grand generalization, but basically, any software that intercepts the traffic on port 25 could break port 25. I have specifically seen it happen with AV. I've suspected ith with Spyware and Viruses, but I tend to just clean machines up if I find them like that instead of seeing if that is the cause.
The cause is quite clearly stated by the blog's author.
The fundamental cause is a basic design decision that you made more than a decade ago, and the only way to really fix it for certain is to rewrite the entire application from the ground up. Since that's simply not an option for a product that you've shipped several times, you're left with trying to make the problem difficult for most users to run into while trying to also minimize the negative effects if the user should ever run into the problem.
I wonder how much of the code in Word is the actual application versus bug fixes and work arounds of fundamental flaws.
I've seen a few times when telneting to port 25 does fail and its not the ISP's fault.
Spyware, Viruses, and my favorite anti-virus software.
The problem as I see it is that 99% of the user problems are the same. I almost think that working in a factory would give you more satisfaction then working in a Call centre doing support. So, those who have real technical skill will get out of doing support, and those who don't won't.
As a mail admin, this to me would be like saying, why can't python, perl, gcc, php all just read the same source file and work. I mean, fundamentally, they all do basically the same thing.
The features that make them unique are in the config files. I know lots of people who despise sendmail because the config is incredibly complex. The way I look at it, sendmail is like an interpreter, and the config file is the script.
Are you sure about that?/sbin exists on the root partition so important static linked binaries are available even if the/usr partition is unavailable.
root for example uses/sbin/sh as its shell for the same reason. Nothing worse then being unable to log in because the libs your shell uses are unavailable.
The biggest reason for the Enterprise version is that it will have a life of 5 years. This means that I can deploy a server, and expect it to remain secure and stable for a significant ammount of time.
This is worth money when your responsible for a significant number of servers, and this is what you pay for. When everyone is running Linux 2.8 or 3.0 or whatever is after 2.6, Redhat Enterprise Linux 3 should still be secure and supported on the servers its deployed on.
This will not be the case for Fedora Core 1, 2 or whatever comes out next. Yes, I'll run FC on my personal machines (or any other distribution) but I don't want to have to rebuild a server for years after its deployed if its a production box.
This is why they have the split, for work, I need the stability of a long deployment life, for hobby, I want the newest sharpest toys to play with. Toys get replaced with the latest toys when they come out.
If you want to rebuild a package to get the optimizations out of them, you should probably learn how to build the packages.
Build once deploy everywhere makes it easy to maintain. Last time we had to do a massive openssh upgarde on our equipment, the rpm based boxes were done in 15 minutes, while the source based boxes took about 2 hours. The real kicker is that we had (at that point) about 3 times the number of rpm based systems compared to source based.
Source is great for the hobbiest, but as a sysadmin, I won't touch them.
Well, I know that up here (Ontario), customers do not own the Cable Modems. So if you do anything to the provided modem, you are tampering with property that isn't yours. I'm pretty sure that there are some laws that would come into effect here. Changing the firmware would probably qualify as tampering.
I suspect you could face both civil and criminal charges doing this.
I've been using Linux on a laptop for 5 years now.
Starting with Slackware on a Pentium 233, working through RH6.2, RH7.0, RH7.1, RH7.2, RH7.3, RH9, each new version is leaps and bounds better then the previous version was.
Just because it isn't there yet doesn't mean it isn't making progress. The people who sell hardware will make sure it works with Windows, otherwise their hardware won't sell. They don't concentrate on Linux though, thats up to end users and maybe if were lucky, a developer or two from within the company.
The ideal place for Linux on the desktop is in a corporate environment where they have standardized (at least in batches) hardware. Solve the problem once, deploy to 50 systems.
If this is where RedHat is going, then I think it will make a much bigger impact on improving the Linux desktop environment. Companies that buy many multiples of hardware have a bit more influence on hardware developers to support their desktop environment.
As far as DVD's go, ogle worked when I was running 7.2/3, and mplayer works now in RH9. The only problem with mplayer is that it requires alsa. This is a good thing in my opinion even though RH9 doesn't have it. It just means that development hasn't stood still. Getting alsa and mplayer on RH9 is pretty simple if you don't mind using rpm's from freshrpms.net.
We use cyrus imap which has sieve as part of it. We've made it so people can tune the sensitivity of their filter, and the mail automatically gets dropped in a special folder that they can browse with a website we made for them. (or webmail, or imap).
On the server a script removes all spam older then 7 days. This seems to work very well. That said though, all the "pretty" stuff we did added months to our ability to deploy it.
I would suggest that you should be pretty happy that your ISP has had it for years now. Its quite a commitment to both hardware and time on their part.
The timeouts are there to handle cases where a remote server is off the net for whatever reason. While I can see shortening the warning message, your not helping yourself if you shorten the period of time that the server attempts to deliver for.
Sendmail (I'm not sure what MTA is being used for this example, but I would hope that would be irrelevant) can handle multiple queue times based on the priority of the message. With this you could have the high priority mail fail in 12 hours while normal mail takes a normal amount of time.
When mail runs great, its smooth and very timely. But when it breaks, it can go down hard.
In my experience, the recovery of a mail server isn't what takes the most time, its the ammount of time it takes to process the backlog from other servers queues.
If you run at 50% capacity, then basically, an outage of 2 hours will take you 2 hours more to get caught up, and thats assumeing that your server is running optimally. Best way to find bottlenecks in your mail servers is to shut it down for an hour and see what stops it from working (syslog is great for doing this if you have unbuffered logging).
Timeouts are there to help the system recover when something goes wrong. Use the priorities to change the timeouts, but dropping mail too quickly is just doing everyone a disservice.
Personal experience. I saw a system setup to drop all messages that were not delivered in 45 minutes. I was floored when I saw this. They had a problem with the machine and their system took almost a week to stabalize and catch up (underpowered systems running too many opposing services. DNS on the mail servers is not good since when you do alot of mail, your lookups steal CPU from your mail servers and the problem gets amplified when you processing the backlog)
Or the account is in her Daughters name since she's the one who uses it. The person who is billed doesn't have to be the same person who's using the account.
The amount of work that an ISP has to do to handle abuse complaints can be quite staggering. This whole concept scares me because I could see it creating a significant amount of abuse mail to ISP's. The worst situation to create is where you have opposing views on the nature of an email. I send an email to someone who's selling something on a personal buy and sell page. The email includes my signature which is very "corporate". They person receiving the message sees the signature, concludes its commercial though I sent it as personal and complains that it violates the policy. I'm not convinced that you could educate the users of the Internet enough to not have this situation exist.
With so many automated complaints coming in in poorly designed formats, from systems with incredibly out of sync clocks, and for the most frivolous issues (My favorite still is someone complaining that our DNS server was attacking them when they received answers to queries they were sending to it.) I think its completely understandable that abuse gets a relatively low response rate. As with everything else, the signal to noise rate gets so bad that the real valid and important complaints get buried.
I do have plans to improve abuse response at my place of work. We plan on automating most of it. Known good automated complaints would get automatically parsed and we would be presented with all relevant information so we can quickly respond (spamcop complaints are a good example of good reports). Anything else will trigger an incident ticket to be generated and require the complaint source to provide information to a website.
I suspect alien involvement... because if SMP couldn't be developed in 2.4/2.6 without SCO's code, then obviously some extraordinary event must have taken place.
Double Opt-in, Closed Loop Optin, Full Confirmation Opt-in, Confirmed Opt-in. Its all basically the same thing. I've pulled most of these terms from many black list sites.
If your dealing with spammers, you need to use a term that they understand. It wasn't that long ago when there was no problem with running an open relay server, or a "signle opt-in" mailling list. Don't confuse intent with simple out-dated implementations. Double Opt-in is simply an improved version of an old concept.
One of the biggest problems of overzealous anti-spammers is that they believe that every one who has ever created a mailing list of people who they have communicated with should be shot, before considering why they made it. I can assure you that my Grandmother making a list of people who left comments on her guestbook had no bad intention. Is she spamming, yes, is she a spammer, no.
Slashdot Mirror
I would suggest understanding the base technology of the services you are considering.
Cable for example is a shared platform. You may share 40meg of capacity with 100 other people and be individually limited to 5meg. Depending on the users, you may or may not not ever have the network congested so you will receive less then peak value, but that doesn't mean it won't happen.
You could be unlucky enough to end up on a node with dozens of heavy torrent users.
The up-to is probably generally acceptable because 95% of consumers don't understand the underlying technology and probably are not as concerned about if they get 5meg all the time, or if sometimes they only get 3meg.
The speed they are giving probably refers to the physical cap on your access path, and the up to is to cover them off when the load simply get overwhelmed. If they are good company, they either have have tons of capacity, or they fire customers who use excessive quantities of capacity, most likely a mix of both.
So if I'm driving down the highway at 80km/h, and the oncoming traffic is doing 80km/h should I hit the oncoming car for any reason, it would be 160km/h impact.
If I'm on a controlled freeway with a median between my vehicle and oncoming traffic, no matter how you look at it, I am much safer unless someone decides to drive the wrong way down the freeway.
As far as I'm concerned, the most dangerous things on the road are inattentive drivers. I've driven in many different countries including Germany. When you are on the Autobahn, you are paying attention to the traffic around you, as is everyone else out there.
When I'm driving around in Ontario, I would be surprised if half the people looked around to see what was coming up around them. In a 3 lane freeway, everyone parks their car in the middle of the road and follows the bumper in front of them.
I saw a sign as I was approaching Toronto that said "Drive Defensively" and the first thing that came to mind is that defensive doesn't mean passive. From what I've seen, your typical Ontario driver (I won't generalize for the rest of NA) is a passive driver on the Freeway.
My favorite part is this...
MacGibbon: less than 1/100th of one percent of all items listed result in a confirmed case of fraud
The "confirmed" came up a few more times. Talk about reading from a script. I must assume that "alleged" cases are fraud nicely do not register on this impressive statistic.
Normally speaking, I'm fairly trusting, but when I see something like this being spun this hard, I makes me very suspicious.
Skipping over the database issues, I'm really wondering why two breakers would flip off at the same time. I suspect they have overloaded the circuits.
I know with the servers at work, we are very careful to not go past 50% load on any one UPS since we split the Dual PS servers over them. If one goes down, it draws more power across the other. If it draws too much, the second UPS will fail too.
Also, wouldn't the raid controllers have battery protected write ahead cache? Even if the power was down suddenly, I would expect that the writes would still be completed to disk. Maybe I'm being naive with this expectation or I'm not fully comprehending the problem.
Sorry, thats just not true.
The benefit of RHEL is that they are commited to a 5 year life span of updates. Simple example, had a server that was dependant on a Sendmail 8.11.x install. 8.12.x wouldn't work. RHEL 2.1 was what I had to install. If I went with FC or anything like that, well, it wouldn't have been pretty.
You just don't have the time to resetup and test the interactions of so many new components in production equipment. When your looking at months of planning and implementation per server, you want it to live for a long time.
If your box doesn't come back up after one of these updates, how long can you spend fixing it? Now what if you have 20 of these servers? And they are fairly different from each other?
Just as a quick gotcha, I think RHEL3 is already 2 years in, so if your installing it, You really only have 3 years of life left. I'd like to see Redhat commit to 5 years of life from the point the new releasee comes out.
<Sarcasm>Your so right. Lets put off deploying something that might be able to make a dent until we have the ultimate uber solution that solves all the worlds problems and will get me a date.</Sarcasm>
One thing this could do would be to stop the flow of spam/worms from broadband customers. That right there would have a huge impact on everyone.
The problem that kills simple things like blacklists from working is that most mail comes forged, if you can kill the forged mail, blacklists become effective again.
Yes, if we wait long enough, there is always a better version of whatever coming along. Thats why I'm waiting for the Uberium CPU to upgrade my 386, I know it will be out sometime.
I would be very disappointed if Bluetooth went away. I just got a new laptop, with Bluetooth, synced up my Palm via Bluetooth (no more cradle needed). I'm getting a new Cell phone, and you guessed it, I want it with BlueTooth.
Living in Ontario, our options for BT enabled phones is either Rogers or Fido. Rogers is just making the switch to GSM (well, have been for a while, but not quite complete yet), and Fido only really exists in Cities with populations over 600000. Since I have yet to find a BT enabled phone on any other provider (it seems BT and GSM are tied at the hip), I'm switching networks in a month to get a GSM w/ BT phone.
Of course there will be better ways of doing this in the future, but it works for what it does, which is all that I ask of it.
The point wasn't what you were running on your computer, its that from the ISP's perspective, some customers are running that type of software.
The fundamental problem is that you end up trying to deal with the lowest common denominator. Its also what causes the most frustration when someone who has a clue calls in, because they are being treated the same way.
A quick google search of Norton Antivirus 25 returns results like this one
I suppose I made a relatively grand generalization, but basically, any software that intercepts the traffic on port 25 could break port 25. I have specifically seen it happen with AV. I've suspected ith with Spyware and Viruses, but I tend to just clean machines up if I find them like that instead of seeing if that is the cause.
The cause is quite clearly stated by the blog's author.
The fundamental cause is a basic design decision that you made more than a decade ago, and the only way to really fix it for certain is to rewrite the entire application from the ground up. Since that's simply not an option for a product that you've shipped several times, you're left with trying to make the problem difficult for most users to run into while trying to also minimize the negative effects if the user should ever run into the problem.
I wonder how much of the code in Word is the actual application versus bug fixes and work arounds of fundamental flaws.
I've seen a few times when telneting to port 25 does fail and its not the ISP's fault.
Spyware, Viruses, and my favorite anti-virus software.
The problem as I see it is that 99% of the user problems are the same. I almost think that working in a factory would give you more satisfaction then working in a Call centre doing support. So, those who have real technical skill will get out of doing support, and those who don't won't.
As a mail admin, this to me would be like saying, why can't python, perl, gcc, php all just read the same source file and work. I mean, fundamentally, they all do basically the same thing.
The features that make them unique are in the config files. I know lots of people who despise sendmail because the config is incredibly complex. The way I look at it, sendmail is like an interpreter, and the config file is the script.
I have to wonder if the publisher/editors didn't change the title on her.
katiet.com was created on 22 Oct 1999. This happened before the book was released.
Personally, over my multiple machines, I am probably counted as 4 users going back over my last 4 machines.
After all, machines may die, but licenses live on forever.
Are you sure about that? /sbin exists on the root partition so important static linked binaries are available even if the /usr partition is unavailable.
/sbin/sh as its shell for the same reason. Nothing worse then being unable to log in because the libs your shell uses are unavailable.
root for example uses
The biggest reason for the Enterprise version is that it will have a life of 5 years. This means that I can deploy a server, and expect it to remain secure and stable for a significant ammount of time.
This is worth money when your responsible for a significant number of servers, and this is what you pay for. When everyone is running Linux 2.8 or 3.0 or whatever is after 2.6, Redhat Enterprise Linux 3 should still be secure and supported on the servers its deployed on.
This will not be the case for Fedora Core 1, 2 or whatever comes out next. Yes, I'll run FC on my personal machines (or any other distribution) but I don't want to have to rebuild a server for years after its deployed if its a production box.
This is why they have the split, for work, I need the stability of a long deployment life, for hobby, I want the newest sharpest toys to play with. Toys get replaced with the latest toys when they come out.
If you want to rebuild a package to get the optimizations out of them, you should probably learn how to build the packages.
Build once deploy everywhere makes it easy to maintain. Last time we had to do a massive openssh upgarde on our equipment, the rpm based boxes were done in 15 minutes, while the source based boxes took about 2 hours. The real kicker is that we had (at that point) about 3 times the number of rpm based systems compared to source based.
Source is great for the hobbiest, but as a sysadmin, I won't touch them.
Well, I know that up here (Ontario), customers do not own the Cable Modems. So if you do anything to the provided modem, you are tampering with property that isn't yours. I'm pretty sure that there are some laws that would come into effect here. Changing the firmware would probably qualify as tampering.
I suspect you could face both civil and criminal charges doing this.
I've been using Linux on a laptop for 5 years now.
Starting with Slackware on a Pentium 233, working through RH6.2, RH7.0, RH7.1, RH7.2, RH7.3, RH9, each new version is leaps and bounds better then the previous version was.
Just because it isn't there yet doesn't mean it isn't making progress. The people who sell hardware will make sure it works with Windows, otherwise their hardware won't sell. They don't concentrate on Linux though, thats up to end users and maybe if were lucky, a developer or two from within the company.
The ideal place for Linux on the desktop is in a corporate environment where they have standardized (at least in batches) hardware. Solve the problem once, deploy to 50 systems.
If this is where RedHat is going, then I think it will make a much bigger impact on improving the Linux desktop environment. Companies that buy many multiples of hardware have a bit more influence on hardware developers to support their desktop environment.
As far as DVD's go, ogle worked when I was running 7.2/3, and mplayer works now in RH9. The only problem with mplayer is that it requires alsa. This is a good thing in my opinion even though RH9 doesn't have it. It just means that development hasn't stood still. Getting alsa and mplayer on RH9 is pretty simple if you don't mind using rpm's from freshrpms.net.
We use cyrus imap which has sieve as part of it. We've made it so people can tune the sensitivity of their filter, and the mail automatically gets dropped in a special folder that they can browse with a website we made for them. (or webmail, or imap).
On the server a script removes all spam older then 7 days. This seems to work very well. That said though, all the "pretty" stuff we did added months to our ability to deploy it.
I would suggest that you should be pretty happy that your ISP has had it for years now. Its quite a commitment to both hardware and time on their part.
Uhm... NO!!!
The timeouts are there to handle cases where a remote server is off the net for whatever reason. While I can see shortening the warning message, your not helping yourself if you shorten the period of time that the server attempts to deliver for.
Sendmail (I'm not sure what MTA is being used for this example, but I would hope that would be irrelevant) can handle multiple queue times based on the priority of the message. With this you could have the high priority mail fail in 12 hours while normal mail takes a normal amount of time.
When mail runs great, its smooth and very timely. But when it breaks, it can go down hard.
In my experience, the recovery of a mail server isn't what takes the most time, its the ammount of time it takes to process the backlog from other servers queues.
If you run at 50% capacity, then basically, an outage of 2 hours will take you 2 hours more to get caught up, and thats assumeing that your server is running optimally. Best way to find bottlenecks in your mail servers is to shut it down for an hour and see what stops it from working (syslog is great for doing this if you have unbuffered logging).
Timeouts are there to help the system recover when something goes wrong. Use the priorities to change the timeouts, but dropping mail too quickly is just doing everyone a disservice.
Personal experience. I saw a system setup to drop all messages that were not delivered in 45 minutes. I was floored when I saw this. They had a problem with the machine and their system took almost a week to stabalize and catch up (underpowered systems running too many opposing services. DNS on the mail servers is not good since when you do alot of mail, your lookups steal CPU from your mail servers and the problem gets amplified when you processing the backlog)
Or the account is in her Daughters name since she's the one who uses it. The person who is billed doesn't have to be the same person who's using the account.
The amount of work that an ISP has to do to handle abuse complaints can be quite staggering. This whole concept scares me because I could see it creating a significant amount of abuse mail to ISP's. The worst situation to create is where you have opposing views on the nature of an email. I send an email to someone who's selling something on a personal buy and sell page. The email includes my signature which is very "corporate". They person receiving the message sees the signature, concludes its commercial though I sent it as personal and complains that it violates the policy. I'm not convinced that you could educate the users of the Internet enough to not have this situation exist.
With so many automated complaints coming in in poorly designed formats, from systems with incredibly out of sync clocks, and for the most frivolous issues (My favorite still is someone complaining that our DNS server was attacking them when they received answers to queries they were sending to it.) I think its completely understandable that abuse gets a relatively low response rate. As with everything else, the signal to noise rate gets so bad that the real valid and important complaints get buried.
I do have plans to improve abuse response at my place of work. We plan on automating most of it. Known good automated complaints would get automatically parsed and we would be presented with all relevant information so we can quickly respond (spamcop complaints are a good example of good reports). Anything else will trigger an incident ticket to be generated and require the complaint source to provide information to a website.
Definitely available for the 2.0.x kernels
/proc/cpuinfo
> uname -r; grep processor
2.0.39
processor : 0
processor : 1
I suspect alien involvement... because if SMP couldn't be developed in 2.4/2.6 without SCO's code, then obviously some extraordinary event must have taken place.
Double Opt-in, Closed Loop Optin, Full Confirmation Opt-in, Confirmed Opt-in. Its all basically the same thing. I've pulled most of these terms from many black list sites.
If your dealing with spammers, you need to use a term that they understand. It wasn't that long ago when there was no problem with running an open relay server, or a "signle opt-in" mailling list. Don't confuse intent with simple out-dated implementations. Double Opt-in is simply an improved version of an old concept.
One of the biggest problems of overzealous anti-spammers is that they believe that every one who has ever created a mailing list of people who they have communicated with should be shot, before considering why they made it. I can assure you that my Grandmother making a list of people who left comments on her guestbook had no bad intention. Is she spamming, yes, is she a spammer, no.