I had a machine with over 10 years of uptime at my last job; it was a cobbled together firewall made from an old x86 load balancer, with the tiny little ide-flash drive replaced with a laptop drive (!) which eventually failed. It developed some bad sectors over the years on/home, which luckily wasn't needed for this machines role. I unmounted that filesystem probably 6 years in. I had backups...
Btw, it was a pf firewall running on openbsd 3.x, can't remember exact release.
Thats not even all of it. Some of those blocks had a permit holder at every house. Do you really think criminals will go rob those houses, knowing the high likelyhood of facing down a gun barrel? Really, they'll look at the houses that don't have gun permits, and go rob them... What have they got to lose? Those home owners probably aren't armed with a gun.
A DoS on a DNS server is a pretty bad thing though... It's such a fundamental service on the network, that if it's down, lots of things break. So a DoS on DNS is an amplified problem such that many services will fail or become unreachable which is just as bad.
You must realize that IPv6 was an attempt to fix the retarded nature of some IPv4 behavior?
Time-To-Live? Yeah that makes a lot of sense! Although that feature was co-opted to eventually become a "hop-limit" just like is in IPv6 now, but there were some really other dumb things that weren't thought through for IPv4 that were fixed in IPv6 (*cough* QoS).
Also, unrelated to IPv6, TCP and UDP are not the only protocols on the Internet. If all I can pass are TCP and UDP packets, then I do not have an Internet connection, I have a bunch of TCP&UDP connection - very much not the same thing.
Carrier Grade NAT can go translate itself in the corner. If my ISP started shoving this down my throat I would switch ISPs, and if that's not an option because you live in the sticks, then file a complaint and bitch until you get up high in the organization.
In my line of work, we've got better things to do than defend boxes against incompetent engineers. If you've got a logon to the box, you should be trustworthy enough to know what you're doing.
That never works. Engineers are not SysAdmins, and rarely are they trained well enough to mimic one.
On shared machines, no one gets root (or sudo) unless they are managing that box and are responsible for it. So, everyone gets sudo on their desktop, and only the real Admins get sudo/root on the development servers. If someone can prove a real need to run something as root, and once we in IT can verify that it's not a security hole, we generally permit only one exact command line to be run via sudo. If they cannot distill their need to a very specific command (using absolute paths, including any arguments) then we reject it.
This is not a BS policy; it was derived from real events. Despite what the engineers around here would like to believe, they aren't generally smart enough to manage a box by themselves. It's been tried, and we refuse to take over any machine they managed without a wipe/reinstall of the OS.
"Oh but the whole build environment is setup on that machine, we'll have to do it over again!" Tough titty, learn to do it over again. If you were a good engineer or programmer, you should be able to find a way to make it not as hard next time. Whats that, the guy who set it up left the company? That sucks, guess you need to figure it out anyways in case your box breaks.
The very first word in your "+5 Informative" diatribe is a derogatory term blanketing all administrators of Windows systems. Anything else you have to say should now be taken as extremely biased, if not plain ignorant. I've been an administrator of Unix systems for over 20 years, and an administrator of Linux and Windows servers since their early days. Being a Windows admin does not mean that one is uniformed or technically inept, any more than being a *nix admin makes one smarter.
Stereotypes exist for a reason. If it wasn't true for at least a statistically relevant number of samples, then the stereotype would not exist.
Also, some things are derogatory on purpose, as they should be. Who cares about windoze admins anyway, it's not like they're *real* people... You might as well try to have a conversation with a retard. Sorry for any offense to actual retards out there...
All you just did was illustrate why globally routeable addresses are important. Consequently, routers were invented for the problem you are describing; to connect multiple networks.. If you need two hosts to appear on the same subnet and they are not, you should explain to us why it's needed, cause otherwise I bet you're doing wrong.
I wonder how many people point to that instead of their ISPs' nameservers?
Seizing the google.com domain would do very little except piss off a lot of ISPs, who now have a complainer in every customer. They would figure out how to make it resolve properly very quickly, and the DHS can go find a root server and cram it where google street view can't see... (dhs - what a waste of tax $$)
What operation should replace ^^here^^ and ^^and_here^^ ?
Also, you don't know how to spell COMPARISON.
Remember, you seem to think everyone else is an idiot, so you must be both precise and accurate lest you will be misunderstood.
Not that I would be picking sides here, but at least Estanislao Martínez appeared to be trying to have an scholarly discussion. Politeness goes along way. Not everyone is as smart as the next guy, but if they are trying then they at least deserve some decency.
Can you elaborate on how LVM gets volume offsets "wrong" and it's impact on RAID performance? I've never heard of that before. Not saying you're wrong, it's just news to me.
Also, IIRC Solaris still has a 2 in front of it. Ie, Solaris 10 is really Solaris 2.10, and is simultaneously SunOS 5.10. They have retarded naming conventions. Oh well, Oracle can only fsck it up further...
ZFS does rock btw, we've got about 80-90TB (guesstimate) spinning with ZFS right now. Our thumper has 32.5GB alone, and another HP box running x86 Solaris has 45.3TB. There's others, but not as big as those two. ZFS really does make it a breeze to manage that much storage.
I was picturing bash/sed/awk/whatever scripts replacing his current batch scripts. Distributing several unmodified GPL binaries, so long as the source is also available, is perfectly acceptable as I understand it...
Also, if this is software that is not going outside your organization, then I don't think you have to worry about it at all...
If it were me, I would put together what you need to work with Cygwin, then it could be cross platform. You could even ship a copy of cygwin.dll and any binaries you need, like bash, netcat, or what have you. I prefer Unix apparently.
Slashdot Mirror
I had a machine with over 10 years of uptime at my last job; it was a cobbled together firewall made from an old x86 load balancer, with the tiny little ide-flash drive replaced with a laptop drive (!) which eventually failed. It developed some bad sectors over the years on /home, which luckily wasn't needed for this machines role. I unmounted that filesystem probably 6 years in. I had backups...
Btw, it was a pf firewall running on openbsd 3.x, can't remember exact release.
What, you don't have front and back headphones?
At what point does a mechanism qualify as self driving?
A computer is just a more complex contraption.
My kid who's 5 now started using KDE/Mint over a year ago. Plays minetest, does abcmouse, watches Nick Jr on it.
Who can't nowadays? Embedded ARM SoCs come with GB's of RAM, and plenty of compute horsepower.
Unless you are bit twiddling on an AVR, or other micro, why not?
Portugal has had an interesting experience with Decriminalization: http://www.spiegel.de/international/europe/evaluating-drug-decriminalization-in-portugal-12-years-later-a-891060.html
Making drug users into felons is not a net positive for society, but man the prison industry sure benefits!
In the days when Sussman was a novice, Minsky once came to him as he sat hacking at the PDP-6.
“What are you doing?”, asked Minsky.
“I am training a randomly wired neural net to play Tic-Tac-Toe” Sussman replied.
“Why is the net wired randomly?”, asked Minsky.
“I do not want it to have any preconceptions of how to play”, Sussman said.
Minsky then shut his eyes.
“Why do you close your eyes?”, Sussman asked his teacher.
“So that the room will be empty.”
At that moment, Sussman was enlightened.
Thats not even all of it. Some of those blocks had a permit holder at every house. Do you really think criminals will go rob those houses, knowing the high likelyhood of facing down a gun barrel? Really, they'll look at the houses that don't have gun permits, and go rob them... What have they got to lose? Those home owners probably aren't armed with a gun.
A DoS on a DNS server is a pretty bad thing though... It's such a fundamental service on the network, that if it's down, lots of things break. So a DoS on DNS is an amplified problem such that many services will fail or become unreachable which is just as bad.
Any magic found in the Doom 3 sources yet? Like 0x5f3759df from Quake III Arena?
... the IPv6 design cock-up...
You must realize that IPv6 was an attempt to fix the retarded nature of some IPv4 behavior?
Time-To-Live? Yeah that makes a lot of sense! Although that feature was co-opted to eventually become a "hop-limit" just like is in IPv6 now, but there were some really other dumb things that weren't thought through for IPv4 that were fixed in IPv6 (*cough* QoS).
Also, unrelated to IPv6, TCP and UDP are not the only protocols on the Internet. If all I can pass are TCP and UDP packets, then I do not have an Internet connection, I have a bunch of TCP&UDP connection - very much not the same thing.
Carrier Grade NAT can go translate itself in the corner. If my ISP started shoving this down my throat I would switch ISPs, and if that's not an option because you live in the sticks, then file a complaint and bitch until you get up high in the organization.
In my line of work, we've got better things to do than defend boxes against incompetent engineers. If you've got a logon to the box, you should be trustworthy enough to know what you're doing.
That never works. Engineers are not SysAdmins, and rarely are they trained well enough to mimic one.
On shared machines, no one gets root (or sudo) unless they are managing that box and are responsible for it. So, everyone gets sudo on their desktop, and only the real Admins get sudo/root on the development servers. If someone can prove a real need to run something as root, and once we in IT can verify that it's not a security hole, we generally permit only one exact command line to be run via sudo. If they cannot distill their need to a very specific command (using absolute paths, including any arguments) then we reject it.
This is not a BS policy; it was derived from real events. Despite what the engineers around here would like to believe, they aren't generally smart enough to manage a box by themselves. It's been tried, and we refuse to take over any machine they managed without a wipe/reinstall of the OS.
"Oh but the whole build environment is setup on that machine, we'll have to do it over again!" Tough titty, learn to do it over again. If you were a good engineer or programmer, you should be able to find a way to make it not as hard next time. Whats that, the guy who set it up left the company? That sucks, guess you need to figure it out anyways in case your box breaks.
Yeah, those damn lazy black people, always raping our precious white women.
Yeah, but at least I didn't compare Windoze admins to Black people. You are not allowed to offend black people you know; that's how you get stabbed.
Windoze admins...
The very first word in your "+5 Informative" diatribe is a derogatory term blanketing all administrators of Windows systems. Anything else you have to say should now be taken as extremely biased, if not plain ignorant. I've been an administrator of Unix systems for over 20 years, and an administrator of Linux and Windows servers since their early days. Being a Windows admin does not mean that one is uniformed or technically inept, any more than being a *nix admin makes one smarter.
Stereotypes exist for a reason. If it wasn't true for at least a statistically relevant number of samples, then the stereotype would not exist. Also, some things are derogatory on purpose, as they should be. Who cares about windoze admins anyway, it's not like they're *real* people... You might as well try to have a conversation with a retard. Sorry for any offense to actual retards out there...
All you just did was illustrate why globally routeable addresses are important. Consequently, routers were invented for the problem you are describing; to connect multiple networks.. If you need two hosts to appear on the same subnet and they are not, you should explain to us why it's needed, cause otherwise I bet you're doing wrong.
All I have to say is 8.8.8.8 and 8.8.4.4, iirc.
I wonder how many people point to that instead of their ISPs' nameservers?
Seizing the google.com domain would do very little except piss off a lot of ISPs, who now have a complainer in every customer. They would figure out how to make it resolve properly very quickly, and the DHS can go find a root server and cram it where google street view can't see... (dhs - what a waste of tax $$)
You're retarded if you rely on a Windows Server for IPv4 routing. That is all.
I disagree, LISP is fine for beginners. I mean an entire OS, emacs, is written in LISP; too bad it doesn't come with a good editor...
All you SuSE people are a bunch of whack-jobs anyways. I mean that in a negative way. You're command line is a joke.
If you are going to rip people apart, you have at least two syntax errors:
log(n)*COMPARRISON_COST + log(n)*MEMORY_ACCESS_COST ^^here^^ log(n)*COMPARRISON_COST + log(n)*MEMORY_ACCESS_COST_MAX ^^and_here^^ CONSTANT*log(n)
What operation should replace ^^here^^ and ^^and_here^^ ?
Also, you don't know how to spell COMPARISON.
Remember, you seem to think everyone else is an idiot, so you must be both precise and accurate lest you will be misunderstood.
Not that I would be picking sides here, but at least Estanislao Martínez appeared to be trying to have an scholarly discussion. Politeness goes along way. Not everyone is as smart as the next guy, but if they are trying then they at least deserve some decency.
If everyone just googled everything, there would be no ask slashdot.
Yes, 32.5TB.
Can you elaborate on how LVM gets volume offsets "wrong" and it's impact on RAID performance? I've never heard of that before. Not saying you're wrong, it's just news to me.
Also, IIRC Solaris still has a 2 in front of it. Ie, Solaris 10 is really Solaris 2.10, and is simultaneously SunOS 5.10. They have retarded naming conventions. Oh well, Oracle can only fsck it up further...
ZFS does rock btw, we've got about 80-90TB (guesstimate) spinning with ZFS right now. Our thumper has 32.5GB alone, and another HP box running x86 Solaris has 45.3TB. There's others, but not as big as those two. ZFS really does make it a breeze to manage that much storage.
I was picturing bash/sed/awk/whatever scripts replacing his current batch scripts. Distributing several unmodified GPL binaries, so long as the source is also available, is perfectly acceptable as I understand it...
Also, if this is software that is not going outside your organization, then I don't think you have to worry about it at all...
must be nostalgic for you or something...
If it were me, I would put together what you need to work with Cygwin, then it could be cross platform. You could even ship a copy of cygwin.dll and any binaries you need, like bash, netcat, or what have you. I prefer Unix apparently.