well, obviously with the PPP in the network you'd need a BRAS/NAS type of a gateway in order to 'enter' the backbone. But it's still part of the 'user connectivity' leg, not the backbone. Modding me as "troll" is a bit harsh.
I was merely saying that the central backbone nodes in BT already run IPv6. The backbone-to-users gateways will be and ARE the biggest problem for IPv6 deployment and adoption. Every single ISP develops a migration plan, BT is behind like every one else trying to weed out and come up with user access scenarios. I'm not defending BT, don't get me wrong, just saying that uneducated trolls like that blog users create panic and spread FUD.
Another FUD article. BT's backbone supports IPv6. End-user (CPE's) devices might currently have a problem with IPv6 packets but it's a matter of a firmware fix. But saying "BT insists that IPv4 is enough for everyone" is just lame...
why is it that every single demo of these multi-touch technologies involve moving/rotating/resizing f-ing pictures or photographs? What am I, a private eye looking for f-ing clues? For christ's sake, show me some some practical applications, gawdammit..
Even though I agree with you on the second half of the comment I still think you are spreading FUD with the first part..
1) "Researchers" don't "just" send the polluted hashes to the bots in hopes of it to disrupt communications.
2) They aren't "fuzzing" the bots looking for a vulnerability, that will disrupt a command channel and possibly crash a bot completely. That would be extremely irresponsible.
3) "Researchers" analyze the bot software localy in order to determine the correct hash strings to figure out the way to disrupt communication
4) obviously the 'attackers' can introduce a back process in to their bot software that would destroy the bot image and OS completely if such control channel disruption is detected, however it's pointless since the bot is out of the commission anyway.
Comcast is doing Syn-proxy. Obviously they are still tunning the parameters and figured out that less then 100 Syn/sec is enough for a regular user to upload/download.
However now Comcast will have to face the 'perception' problem. Not a lot of users, even the "Student PHD", realize the amount of trash traffic that exists on the Internetz. Comcast is doing its job to reduce the amount of syn-floods originated from zombie machines by placing some sort of a TCP state aware system (Cisco Guard comes to mind, but there might be something else in place - Sandvine.. d'oh).
Slashdot Mirror
I see what you did there. However, the alarming claim was misleading. W7 has a dynamic memory utilization, that's pretty much it.
You want FUD? Saying "BT insists IPv4 is enough for everyone" is FUD. WTF is wrong with you people.
well, obviously with the PPP in the network you'd need a BRAS/NAS type of a gateway in order to 'enter' the backbone. But it's still part of the 'user connectivity' leg, not the backbone. Modding me as "troll" is a bit harsh. I was merely saying that the central backbone nodes in BT already run IPv6. The backbone-to-users gateways will be and ARE the biggest problem for IPv6 deployment and adoption. Every single ISP develops a migration plan, BT is behind like every one else trying to weed out and come up with user access scenarios. I'm not defending BT, don't get me wrong, just saying that uneducated trolls like that blog users create panic and spread FUD.
Another FUD article. BT's backbone supports IPv6. End-user (CPE's) devices might currently have a problem with IPv6 packets but it's a matter of a firmware fix. But saying "BT insists that IPv4 is enough for everyone" is just lame...
From TFA: "Mammoth Lakes is about 10,000 feet, or 30,400 meters, above sea level "
30.4 kilo-meters above sea level? Boy, I surely hope the lake isn't in the fly path of commercial airliners.. or x-prize space vehicles..
why is it that every single demo of these multi-touch technologies involve moving/rotating/resizing f-ing pictures or photographs? What am I, a private eye looking for f-ing clues? For christ's sake, show me some some practical applications, gawdammit..
the video in the live stream doesn't seem to play smoothly. Can that be attributed to overheating?
Even though I agree with you on the second half of the comment I still think you are spreading FUD with the first part.. 1) "Researchers" don't "just" send the polluted hashes to the bots in hopes of it to disrupt communications. 2) They aren't "fuzzing" the bots looking for a vulnerability, that will disrupt a command channel and possibly crash a bot completely. That would be extremely irresponsible. 3) "Researchers" analyze the bot software localy in order to determine the correct hash strings to figure out the way to disrupt communication 4) obviously the 'attackers' can introduce a back process in to their bot software that would destroy the bot image and OS completely if such control channel disruption is detected, however it's pointless since the bot is out of the commission anyway.
Comcast is doing Syn-proxy. Obviously they are still tunning the parameters and figured out that less then 100 Syn/sec is enough for a regular user to upload/download. However now Comcast will have to face the 'perception' problem. Not a lot of users, even the "Student PHD", realize the amount of trash traffic that exists on the Internetz. Comcast is doing its job to reduce the amount of syn-floods originated from zombie machines by placing some sort of a TCP state aware system (Cisco Guard comes to mind, but there might be something else in place - Sandvine.. d'oh).