Unfortunately after 15 years as a network engineer for ISP's and telcos, that's pretty much it when it comes to small routers.
Turnout of new models per vendor is on average 6-10 a year. In many of these cases, they run different OS's. Needless to say, at that rate I'm quite surprised that they work at all.
I could keep on the rant detailing nonsense of several small router vendors, but I'll skip for now:-).
DHCP doesn't give a network admin any more control over a network, either. That's just a silly statement. How does having a server doling out IP addresses make it any easier to control a network? It's not a like a device *must* be set to use DHCP. It's not difficult to figure out what IP address ranges a DHCP server is not doling out and use that, even on IPV4. I beg to differ.
DHCP combined with modern network infrastructure allows network administrators complete control over all addressing issues in the network - including preventing non-DHCP hosts from participating in the network (called DHCP snooping) and location-based services ("DHCP option 82"). DHCP is so much more than just a kludge to get an IP address to the host. Scalability of DHCP allows network administrators to append information such as DNS, NTP, TFTP (for IP Telephony/TV) server information and so much more - default gateway, static routes just to name few. All this is pretty much lacking from IPv6 autoconfiguration.
Wouldn't it be much cooler to have voice recognition software on the camera? That way you can spend more time enjoying the content you are photographing, instead of spending minutes and minutes inserting tags using 2" touch screen. With voice software, you'd just say "nice photo of blonde girl in front of some grafitti". Camera would then convert that into appropriate tags. Etc.
While it is true that Aluminium smelting uses up a lot of energy, the rest of the process is remarkably pollution-free (most of the catalysts are recycled and reused in smelters). As for the energy, there are places in the world that produce vast amounts of clean energy that is used for aluminium smelter. One example of this is Iceland (where I live).
Yes, you can make it use multicast. You have any-to-any multicasting (or as it is actually called, bidirectional multicast). What happens if (when!) on of the hosts misses few packets? It needs to recollect them somehow, but... you can't retransmit, because it retransmits to the whole group? How do you solve that on a global scale? Of course, for that client, you reverse to unicast and send to him. With network of few thousand clients, in a matter of few minutes, you'll be back to a bunch of unicast streams.
That in particular is the reason why you don't see a lot of Internet-wide multicast.
Well, there is only one problem with this. Multicast in itself is connectionless and doesn't work with TCP. If I'm not much mistaken, bittorrent is TCP. To make it work with UDP, the whole new mechanism would have to be developed for it to be reliable. There are solutions like "reliable multicast" that has fallback to unicast, but on a large scale, this won't work. Benefits of multicast would be absolutely minimal.
Security policy is very difficult thing to enforce on other people's networks... Especially in university campuses that have distributed control over their IT assets. In theory, you could create campus-wide policy that all need to respect to connect to the backbone and in theory this solves all security problems. Also, in theory, there is no difference between theory and practice:-)
You are approaching the problem from a wrong direction.
There are different types of firewalls and they can be divided into these types using different criteria. However, I will use the most simple one. There are host-based and network-based firewalls. Host-based firewalls, are not very cost-effective (or even effective at all) for protecting large, medium or even small server "farms". They work fine on single-server or home machines.
The proper way to protect server farms in campus is to have secure network. Firewalls are like city walls. They offer protection, but if breached, you're doomed. Secure network consists of firewalls, segmented network (separate VLAN's, switching blocks, etc.). Excellent reference for secure network design is Cisco's SAFE Blueprint for Enterprise Networks. I would recommend reading it, even though you're not using Cisco gear.
Microsoft is in legal disputes pretty much constantly and noone seems to care about it.
I guess that legal disputes of this kind come with the size. The bigger you are, the bigger your pockets are. The bigger your pockets are, more people want to stick their hands (or claws) inside...
Marko.
Re:No, you just have to worry about nastier things
on
Build Your Own Submarine
·
· Score: 2, Interesting
Please note that 100 meters is roughly 300 ft or so. These depths were "challenge" even for WWII submersibles, and those beast were after all advanced.
If I'm not much mistaken, German type VII (the thing that Joe Sixpack associates with u-boat) u-boats were rated up to 90 meters. After that, it wass "off the warranty".
I would think twice before going below 10 meters (30 ft), for escape could get very tricky, if not impossible.
Slashdot Mirror
Unfortunately after 15 years as a network engineer for ISP's and telcos, that's pretty much it when it comes to small routers.
Turnout of new models per vendor is on average 6-10 a year. In many of these cases, they run different OS's. Needless to say, at that rate I'm quite surprised that they work at all.
I could keep on the rant detailing nonsense of several small router vendors, but I'll skip for now :-).
Marko.
DHCP combined with modern network infrastructure allows network administrators complete control over all addressing issues in the network - including preventing non-DHCP hosts from participating in the network (called DHCP snooping) and location-based services ("DHCP option 82"). DHCP is so much more than just a kludge to get an IP address to the host. Scalability of DHCP allows network administrators to append information such as DNS, NTP, TFTP (for IP Telephony/TV) server information and so much more - default gateway, static routes just to name few. All this is pretty much lacking from IPv6 autoconfiguration.
That's why we tend to like DHCP
Marko
CCIE #18427
Wouldn't it be much cooler to have voice recognition software on the camera? That way you can spend more time enjoying the content you are photographing, instead of spending minutes and minutes inserting tags using 2" touch screen. With voice software, you'd just say "nice photo of blonde girl in front of some grafitti". Camera would then convert that into appropriate tags. Etc.
While it is true that Aluminium smelting uses up a lot of energy, the rest of the process is remarkably pollution-free (most of the catalysts are recycled and reused in smelters). As for the energy, there are places in the world that produce vast amounts of clean energy that is used for aluminium smelter. One example of this is Iceland (where I live).
You are completely missing the point.
Yes, you can make it use multicast. You have any-to-any multicasting (or as it is actually called, bidirectional multicast). What happens if (when!) on of the hosts misses few packets? It needs to recollect them somehow, but... you can't retransmit, because it retransmits to the whole group? How do you solve that on a global scale? Of course, for that client, you reverse to unicast and send to him. With network of few thousand clients, in a matter of few minutes, you'll be back to a bunch of unicast streams.
That in particular is the reason why you don't see a lot of Internet-wide multicast.
Well, there is only one problem with this. Multicast in itself is connectionless and doesn't work with TCP. If I'm not much mistaken, bittorrent is TCP. To make it work with UDP, the whole new mechanism would have to be developed for it to be reliable. There are solutions like "reliable multicast" that has fallback to unicast, but on a large scale, this won't work. Benefits of multicast would be absolutely minimal.
Security policy is very difficult thing to enforce on other people's networks... Especially in university campuses that have distributed control over their IT assets. In theory, you could create campus-wide policy that all need to respect to connect to the backbone and in theory this solves all security problems. Also, in theory, there is no difference between theory and practice :-)
Marko.
You are approaching the problem from a wrong direction.
There are different types of firewalls and they can be divided into these types using different criteria. However, I will use the most simple one. There are host-based and network-based firewalls. Host-based firewalls, are not very cost-effective (or even effective at all) for protecting large, medium or even small server "farms". They work fine on single-server or home machines.
The proper way to protect server farms in campus is to have secure network. Firewalls are like city walls. They offer protection, but if breached, you're doomed. Secure network consists of firewalls, segmented network (separate VLAN's, switching blocks, etc.). Excellent reference for secure network design is Cisco's SAFE Blueprint for Enterprise Networks. I would recommend reading it, even though you're not using Cisco gear.
Marko.
You mean thos same plugs we have been using in Europe for years now?
This is very much wrong. Cisco's hardware is nothing special, really. Just another telco box. What makes Cisco hardware work the way it does is IOS.
Marko.
If worm writers work for SCO -- everything :-)
Russians have used pencils for ages in their space research. It works in pretty much any condition. No ink flow...
I think this statement holds truth at least as much as the statement that we are prisoners of our continets due to debris in our oceans.
Your profit plan is broken. It would never work in the new economy. It's missing the vital "?" part!
My goodness!
If it takes that little for the answer to life, the universe and everything, Vogons must be real close!
Smart self-healin grobots, "unstoppable" spreading virii infecting nuclear power plants...
;-)
Sounds too much like Terminator N to me
The Register has a story here.
Interestingly enough, they mention successful system in Scotland being up to 70% successful in "crowd".
Real geeks don't shower anyway.
Bring it on!
Which in itself is very scary. Just imagine reversed roles...
Marko.
Uhm, yes. I bet they're very worried about SuSE's and RedHat's guns.
;-)
Something like Japanese were afraid of Nigerian Navy in WWII
Like someone smart said. If someone's speaking English with an accent, be sure he knows at least one more language than you do ;-)
[ considering you're an average english speaking person who is unaware that other languages, except perhaps spanish, exist, at all. ]
Microsoft is in legal disputes pretty much constantly and noone seems to care about it.
...
I guess that legal disputes of this kind come with the size. The bigger you are, the bigger your pockets are. The bigger your pockets are, more people want to stick their hands (or claws) inside
Marko.
Please note that 100 meters is roughly 300 ft or so. These depths were "challenge" even for WWII submersibles, and those beast were after all advanced.
If I'm not much mistaken, German type VII (the thing that Joe Sixpack associates with u-boat) u-boats were rated up to 90 meters. After that, it wass "off the warranty".
I would think twice before going below 10 meters (30 ft), for escape could get very tricky, if not impossible.
Yes, yes, "this side facing enemy" sign should be there, too.