Ok, I'm the sysadmin for this good ol' little company, called rootservers.net. I've planted logic bombs on our DNS servers. Please tell me again what stock to buy?
In this e-mail Robert Barr from Cisco answers to the main developer of keepalived that Cisco will not attack VRRP implementations unless a patent claim is asserted against Cisco. Unfortunately he also states that he expects that IBM's stance on this is the opposite of Cisco's.
Implementations for Linux and FreeBSD
on
VRRP
·
· Score: 2, Informative
The daemons exist, i'm not sure about their legal status however:
Doh! Linus doesn't have warm fuzzy feelings towards the Hammer, or rather he's never expressed them. The poster is referring to a post on LKML on paging issues with Itanium. Linus didn't endorse one platform or the other, he only explained that if Hammer was to become dominant instead of Itanium, it would save the kernel developers problems solving the Itanium paging problems.
It's all good and nice you know, the premiere of "Cowboy Bebop: The Movie", but it's not what we are really waiting for; that has to be the premiere of "CowboyNeal: The Movie"!
So how are we going to call the next generation of large telescopes? The Even More Overwelmingly Large Telescope? The Incredible Supa-Dupa Overwelmingly Huge Motherf***ing Telescope? We are bound to run out of comparatives soon, then all we'll have left is the Largest Large Telescope and then what?
Some arguments for building these types of fast trains according to Lyle Lanley, a gifted monorail salesman, spoken on a meeting of the Springfields townspeople on how to spend Mr. Burns's 3 million dollar fine for illegal waste dumping:
Monorail
Lyle Lanley: Well, sir, there's nothing on earth Like a genuine, Bona fide, Electrified, Six-car Monorail!
What'd I say? Ned Flanders: Monorail!
Lyle Lanley: What's it called? Patty+Selma: Monorail!
Software is developed for a reason: people need new features in software. Though some people may be able to do what they need with old software, most businesses dont. It's not an option for my company to switch our servers back to say linux 2.0, because we need the features that new kernels provide, the scalability, journalling filesystems, decent ATM support and so on. If we can't use those options we can't satisfy our customers and we won't make any money. We and with us many others, don't have a choice; we'll have to take bugs in software under development as another risk in doing business.
RedHat's success with businesses is not that their distribution is better than others; - although it's a fine distribution tailored for businesses - it's that they give manager's what they want - support contracts, courses and certificates for employees etc. Businesses don't like to take risks, they want to see a shiny reliable company selling them a reliable product, instead of "some freeware distribution written by no good hippies in their spare time". RedHat gives them the comfort of that illusion.
If only they could create a machine that I could plug in my TV that would allow me to play a tennisgame involving a dot and two lines together with a friend, perhaps with two rotary controllers; now that would be innovation!
> There are rumors they can compile the Linux kernel too.
Sjeesh this is news? I have been able to compile the kernel for years now. OK, I have to admit I do sometimes forget to put vital things in like netlink code, but then I just compile again and usually it works. I'm sure there are hundreds of Slashdot readers who are able to compile the kernel so I don't understand what the fuzz is.
> What is more important to them - encouraging Windows users to "upgrade" to RedHat or taking existing customers away from other distributors
Neither. They're in business to make money selling an OS based on an open source kernel. They need as many customers as they can get. Apparently they think it's easier to get people already using Linux to switch to RedHat than to get Microsoft windows users to switch. I think that makes sense. It's not unethical, certainly not compared to some of the tricks other companies in this business use (think Microsoft, Larry Ellison).
algorithms in CS? I can't say this often enough: You don't want none of them fancy-schmanzy algorithms in your Counterstrike, they'll ruin your ping for sure.
There is a unix client for RDP, the remote-engineered 'rdesktop'. It's a stable product which I use to manage the W2000 webservers we are running here. Works just fine.
Oracle chief security officer Mary Ann Davidson... suggested that everything depends on what your definition of "unbreakable" is.
break (DAMAGE)
verb
to (cause to) separate suddenly or violently into two or more pieces, or to (cause to) stop working by being damaged (Cambridge online dictionary)
She appears to have a good point there; I don't suspect that Oracle database servers will start to separate violently into two or more pieces when this is exploited, and they probably wont be damaged to the point where they stop working either.
Slashdot Mirror
'The amount of time it takes to set up DNS correctly [...] especially BIND'
/etc/init.d/named start
1 apt-get install bind
2
3 Profit?
Is it just me, or is this a description of a reverse lookup?
No it isn't, a reverse lookup is a request for a PTR record in the in-addr.arpa space.
Even if it were a valid reverse lookup, one shouldn't ask the rootservers as they are not authoritive for in-addr.arpa space.
Ok, I'm the sysadmin for this good ol' little company, called rootservers.net. I've planted logic bombs on our DNS servers. Please tell me again what stock to buy?
In this e-mail Robert Barr from Cisco answers to the main developer of keepalived that Cisco will not attack VRRP implementations unless a patent claim is asserted against Cisco. Unfortunately he also states that he expects that IBM's stance on this is the opposite of Cisco's.
For FreeBSD
For Linux
My God. A DNS change. Life is great.
If only everyone was as easily excited as a geek, i'd actually have a sexlife.
they thought they were 7337
Is that the new Boeing?
Oooh, you mean 1337.
Doh! Linus doesn't have warm fuzzy feelings towards the Hammer, or rather he's never expressed them. The poster is referring to a post on LKML on paging issues with Itanium.
Linus didn't endorse one platform or the other, he only explained that if Hammer was to become dominant instead of Itanium, it would save the kernel developers problems solving the Itanium paging problems.
It's all good and nice you know, the premiere of "Cowboy Bebop: The Movie", but it's not what we are really waiting for; that has to be the premiere of "CowboyNeal: The Movie"!
So how are we going to call the next generation of large telescopes? The Even More Overwelmingly Large Telescope? The Incredible Supa-Dupa Overwelmingly Huge Motherf***ing Telescope?
We are bound to run out of comparatives soon, then all we'll have left is the Largest Large Telescope and then what?
Note: nslookup is deprecated and may be removed from future releases.
Consider using the `dig' or `host' programs instead.
Some arguments for building these types of fast trains according to Lyle Lanley, a gifted monorail salesman, spoken on a meeting of the Springfields townspeople on how to spend Mr. Burns's 3 million dollar fine for illegal waste dumping:
Monorail
Lyle Lanley: Well, sir, there's nothing on earth Like a genuine, Bona fide, Electrified, Six-car Monorail!
What'd I say?
Ned Flanders: Monorail!
Lyle Lanley: What's it called?
Patty+Selma: Monorail!
Lyle Lanley: That's right! Monorail!
[crowd chants `Monorail' softly and rhythmically]
Miss Hoover: I hear those things are awfully loud...
Lyle Lanley: It glides as softly as a cloud.
Apu: Is there a chance the track could bend?
Lyle Lanley: Not on your life, my Hindu friend.
Barney: What about us brain-dead slobs?
Lyle Lanley: You'll be given cushy jobs.
Abe: Were you sent here by the devil?
Lyle Lanley: No, good sir, I'm on the level.
Wiggum: The ring came off my pudding can.
Lyle Lanley: Take my pen knife, my good man.
I swear it's Springfield's only choice...
Throw up your hands and raise your voice!
All: Monorail!
Lyle Lanley: What's it called?
All: Monorail!
Lyle Lanley: Once again...
All: Monorail!
Marge: But Main Street's still all cracked and broken...
Bart: Sorry, Mom, the mob has spoken!
All: Monorail!
Monorail!
Monorail!
[big finish]
Monorail!
Homer: Mono... D'oh!
Software is developed for a reason: people need new features in software. Though some people may be able to do what they need with old software, most businesses dont.
It's not an option for my company to switch our servers back to say linux 2.0, because we need the features that new kernels provide, the scalability, journalling filesystems, decent ATM support and so on. If we can't use those options we can't satisfy our customers and we won't make any money. We and with us many others, don't have a choice; we'll have to take bugs in software under development as another risk in doing business.
RedHat's success with businesses is not that their distribution is better than others; - although it's a fine distribution tailored for businesses - it's that they give manager's what they want - support contracts, courses and certificates for employees etc.
Businesses don't like to take risks, they want to see a shiny reliable company selling them a reliable product, instead of "some freeware distribution written by no good hippies in their spare time". RedHat gives them the comfort of that illusion.
If only they could create a machine that I could plug in my TV that would allow me to play a tennisgame involving a dot and two lines together with a friend, perhaps with two rotary controllers; now that would be innovation!
> There are rumors they can compile the Linux kernel too.
Sjeesh this is news? I have been able to compile the kernel for years now. OK, I have to admit I do sometimes forget to put vital things in like netlink code, but then I just compile again and usually it works.
I'm sure there are hundreds of Slashdot readers who are able to compile the kernel so I don't understand what the fuzz is.
> What is more important to them - encouraging Windows users to "upgrade" to RedHat or taking existing customers away from other distributors
Neither. They're in business to make money selling an OS based on an open source kernel. They need as many customers as they can get. Apparently they think it's easier to get people already using Linux to switch to RedHat than to get Microsoft windows users to switch. I think that makes sense. It's not unethical, certainly not compared to some of the tricks other companies in this business use (think Microsoft, Larry Ellison).
Cool; they should put them new AmVidia videocards in as well, then your PDA would make the perfect portable gaming platform.
I don't trust the comments of anyone who spells 733T L33T.
algorithms in CS? I can't say this often enough: You don't want none of them fancy-schmanzy algorithms in your Counterstrike, they'll ruin your ping for sure.
There is a unix client for RDP, the remote-engineered 'rdesktop'. It's a stable product which I use to manage the W2000 webservers we are running here. Works just fine.
http://www.rdesktop.org
MOSIX 1.5.7 for Linux 2.4.17 (K-MOSIX) is out, according to Freshmeat. Therefore "the last Mosix (1.5.2 for 2.4.13) kernel" seems incorrect.
Relax, B.J. Blazkowicz will finish them super-soldiers.
Oracle chief security officer Mary Ann Davidson ... suggested that everything depends on what your definition of "unbreakable" is.
break (DAMAGE)
verb
to (cause to) separate suddenly or violently into two or more pieces, or to (cause to) stop working by being damaged
(Cambridge online dictionary)
She appears to have a good point there; I don't suspect that Oracle database servers will start to separate violently into two or more pieces when this is exploited, and they probably wont be damaged to the point where they stop working either.
Why would one use Wine to run games on linux when the linux port for Return to castle Wolfenstein has just been released?