'7' is certainly a less interesting name. 'XP' was certainly more interesting in that, as I understand it, Microsoft's code word for the convergence of the 9x & NT platforms was "Cairo," which became the Greek letters Chi & Rho or X & P.
You could have made that argument about IPv4 in 1994.
> 3. IPv6 fails to solve the Internet's core routing problem. . .
I don't know what IRTF IPv6 research you're referencing, despite some cursory Googling, but there's several examples of large-scale IPv6 routing in deployment (sixxs.net, go6.net, tunnelbroker.net, AfriNIC, Et al.) and they're working quite well. When talking about IPv6, people always want to talk about the address space, but it has a lot more features and enhancements than that. One key one in regards to making things easier on the routing infrastructure is MTU Path Discovery, which puts the burden of packet fragmentation on the sending host, instead of the routers along the way.
> 2^32 addresses IS enough for everybody. . .
Well. . . it's not 2^32 though. Despite the address space, if you look at how the IP space was doled-out, it's barely 2^31 (http://icicle.dylex.net/~ipmap/). NAT's gotten us a long way, and it's fine if all you're into is web & E-mail, and it fits the anti-net-neutrality model of providers and consumers, but it breaks horribly the model of open, peer-to-peer communication. The internet can be so much more if everything's potentially routable to everything else.
I read somewhere (Can't find it now.) that IPv6's address space was intended to provide addressing for 250 years worth of expansion into the solar system. Well, that hints at all sorts of cool possibilities, but as someone who's done a lot of IPv6 deployment, when I think of the advantages of the address space, I don't think so much in terms of the billions (of billions) of devices across the solar system I can assign addresses to, but I think of it in terms like this.
I administer a very extensive network testing environment. About six years ago, we allocated a/22 sized VLAN (~1024 addresses) of RFC-1918 space for a very specific purpose and over the next four years, we gradually issued just about every available IP for active devices on the network. We knew we needed to add another VLAN for the same purpose, but we didn't think we'd need another/22, so we went with a/23 (~512 addresses), but now we regret having not just gone with a second/22 instead, because the/23 is full as well. I just recently allocated an other/22 in addition to the/22 and/23 we already had. I'd love to just re-do it all into a single/20 (~4096) addresses, but I can't take the downtime hit to do so.
Now had this been an IPv6 network, a standard/64-sized prefix, even using EUI-64/stateless-autoconfig addressubg (which burns two or three bytes of address space), we'd could still *IN THEORY* have 2^40 hosts.
Now since we're on the subject of IPv6, I do actually have one concern about its potential longevity, but it's not about the IP address space, but the "next header" field, or the protocol ID. Just like IPv4, IPv6 only allocates one byte for this field. If you look at the list (http://www.iana.org/assignments/protocol-numbers/), you'll see that in 30 or so years of IPv4, we've allocated roughly 140 IP protocols. The next 250 years protocol specs could get a little dicey. >=]
Yesterday I was having major issues with Amazon's CC auth. I placed an order, it accepted my CC credentials, but about two hours later, I'd get an E-mail saying:
Your credit card payment for the above transaction could not be completed. An issuing bank will often decline an attempt to charge a credit card if the name, expiration date, or ZIP Code you entered at Amazon.com does not exactly match the bank's information.
Valid credit card information must be received within 3 days, otherwise your order will be void.
I re-tried the same CC, two hours later, got the same. Then I called the CC company and they said there was no issues with the card and they could even see the pre-auth from Amazon for the correct amount. Then I called Amazon's customer (non-)service and was fed a "Well, it's gotta be your financial institution line."
Re-tried the card again, same issue.
Called Amazon cust-service again, only this time I got a more helpful person on the phone. She put me on hold for four minutes to investigate, then came back on and just as she began explaining what the problem was, the call was dropped.
At his point, I re-tried with another card (one that I use all day, every day), same issue.
At this point I called Amazon again, but was told they couldn't access my order because their customer services system was being "upgraded."
Did anyone else experience, similar?
I should also mention that today I've used both cards and different retailers with no issues.
I know it's, unfortunately en vogue to bash the USA, but has anyone considered that maybe some jihadi has some scuba gear? Wants to keep out the evil, infidel influence?
While I think you make some really good points, especially about much of the corporate world's reluctance to rely upon in-house compiled binaries, support contracts, etc., I think you're being pretty short-sighted about the advantages of a custom compile.
Gentoo-Rice-Boi compiler optimizations aside, sometimes stock binaries don't support really important things like OpenGL and/or multi-threading. These two examples can make a *VAST* difference in performance as I'm sure you must admit.
Also, even if "riceboi" compiler optimizations did only get you a 1% performance advantage. . . for many applications, that'd be very significant and desirable. Tell a genetic researcher you could shave 1% off his genome mapping project by breaking his support contract, and he'd say "Contract be damned, fire up the --funroll-loops!"
Okay, let's pretend for a minute what we're willing to entertain the possibility that the interior of comets is conducive to "primordial soup." Okay, I guess that part isn't so big of a stretch.
How, pray tell, is this "soup" supposed to survive atmospheric re-entry and impact on earth's surface?
First of all I think it was called "X-Wing vs. Tie-Fighter." Secondly, I can't imagine why you couldn't get this one to run. It was a Direct-X v3 game, which even NT4 should run nicely.
There was also a patch for it called 'XVT_3DFX.exe' which despite the name added improved Direct-3D support.
If you can't find the file, I might provide it for you if you bug me nicely.
Those are valid concerns, but this may be an ideal opportunity for people in my position. I've already got an HDTV that I dumped $1200 a few years ago. . . a Toshiba 42H82 which only supports 480i/p, 720i/p, & 1080i, plus it only has component inputs, no HDMI.
The HD-A2 player supports 1080i output over component cables, so it will fully utilize my TV.
Apparently not enough people have called, because the receptionist A) actually answered and B) didn't hang-up when I said was calling no behalf of Tyrone King.
This isn't tomorrow's technology, it is something the human race might do a hundred years from now.
I think you're wrong about that, as do the people doing most of the research on the subject.
In this discover.com article covering Brad Edwards' NASA-sponsored research into Space Elevator technology, his completed work under a $500,000 NASA research grant reveals the technological and economic feasibility of space elevators.
First let me preface with the statement that I'm no Microsoft lover. . . I'm a pragmatist. . . preffer the right tool for the job. . . though if I have to pick a favorite OS, it's FreeBSD, hands down.
I have, however, experienced no such problems with Vista. The only bugs I've encountered with RC2 on this Inspiron 9300 have been with dragging documents into an XP-created Briefcase on a USB stick. If you drag newer versions of an existing file in, they new files never appear and the old ones are erased. Vista-created Briefcases are fine.
I agree. . . the sprit and promise of Lady Liberty is still very much alive.
You know what though, you know what the immigrants who were welcomed by the Statue of Liberty did? They stopped at Ellis Island to register and apply for residency.
It's certainly nice to see S.H.O.D.A.N. and the System Shock series getting the front-page/. props it deserves.
The System Shock series introducted me to an entirely differnet realm of video gaming: Fear.
I'm not a fan or horror movies and not into being scared by books or film, but for some strange reason, I love a scary video game and the SS games are the only ones that have ever managed to do it.
I'm such a fan of these games that I absolutely had to chase down and have the trioptimum dot com domain for myself.
Slashdot Mirror
'7' is certainly a less interesting name. 'XP' was certainly more interesting in that, as I understand it, Microsoft's code word for the convergence of the 9x & NT platforms was "Cairo," which became the Greek letters Chi & Rho or X & P.
-CR
> 1. It's very expensive. . .
Too bad. It costs money to run a decent network.
> 2. IPv6's rate of deployment to date. . .
You could have made that argument about IPv4 in 1994.
> 3. IPv6 fails to solve the Internet's core routing problem. . .
I don't know what IRTF IPv6 research you're referencing, despite some cursory Googling, but there's several examples of large-scale IPv6 routing in deployment (sixxs.net, go6.net, tunnelbroker.net, AfriNIC, Et al.) and they're working quite well. When talking about IPv6, people always want to talk about the address space, but it has a lot more features and enhancements than that. One key one in regards to making things easier on the routing infrastructure is MTU Path Discovery, which puts the burden of packet fragmentation on the sending host, instead of the routers along the way.
> 2^32 addresses IS enough for everybody. . .
Well. . . it's not 2^32 though. Despite the address space, if you look at how the IP space was doled-out, it's barely 2^31 (http://icicle.dylex.net/~ipmap/). NAT's gotten us a long way, and it's fine if all you're into is web & E-mail, and it fits the anti-net-neutrality model of providers and consumers, but it breaks horribly the model of open, peer-to-peer communication. The internet can be so much more if everything's potentially routable to everything else.
I read somewhere (Can't find it now.) that IPv6's address space was intended to provide addressing for 250 years worth of expansion into the solar system. Well, that hints at all sorts of cool possibilities, but as someone who's done a lot of IPv6 deployment, when I think of the advantages of the address space, I don't think so much in terms of the billions (of billions) of devices across the solar system I can assign addresses to, but I think of it in terms like this.
I administer a very extensive network testing environment. About six years ago, we allocated a /22 sized VLAN (~1024 addresses) of RFC-1918 space for a very specific purpose and over the next four years, we gradually issued just about every available IP for active devices on the network. We knew we needed to add another VLAN for the same purpose, but we didn't think we'd need another /22, so we went with a /23 (~512 addresses), but now we regret having not just gone with a second /22 instead, because the /23 is full as well. I just recently allocated an other /22 in addition to the /22 and /23 we already had. I'd love to just re-do it all into a single /20 (~4096) addresses, but I can't take the downtime hit to do so.
Now had this been an IPv6 network, a standard /64-sized prefix, even using EUI-64/stateless-autoconfig addressubg (which burns two or three bytes of address space), we'd could still *IN THEORY* have 2^40 hosts.
Now since we're on the subject of IPv6, I do actually have one concern about its potential longevity, but it's not about the IP address space, but the "next header" field, or the protocol ID. Just like IPv4, IPv6 only allocates one byte for this field. If you look at the list (http://www.iana.org/assignments/protocol-numbers/), you'll see that in 30 or so years of IPv4, we've allocated roughly 140 IP protocols. The next 250 years protocol specs could get a little dicey. >=]
-CR
Yesterday I was having major issues with Amazon's CC auth. I placed an order, it accepted my CC credentials, but about two hours later, I'd get an E-mail saying:
Your credit card payment for the above transaction could not be completed.
An issuing bank will often decline an attempt to charge a credit card if
the name, expiration date, or ZIP Code you entered at Amazon.com does not
exactly match the bank's information.
Valid credit card information must be received within 3 days, otherwise
your order will be void.
I re-tried the same CC, two hours later, got the same. Then I called the CC company and they said there was no issues with the card and they could even see the pre-auth from Amazon for the correct amount. Then I called Amazon's customer (non-)service and was fed a "Well, it's gotta be your financial institution line."
Re-tried the card again, same issue.
Called Amazon cust-service again, only this time I got a more helpful person on the phone. She put me on hold for four minutes to investigate, then came back on and just as she began explaining what the problem was, the call was dropped.
At his point, I re-tried with another card (one that I use all day, every day), same issue.
At this point I called Amazon again, but was told they couldn't access my order because their customer services system was being "upgraded."
Did anyone else experience, similar?
I should also mention that today I've used both cards and different retailers with no issues.
Or the center tag either, for that matter.
-CR
I'm doubting that the home.mcom.com page is a vintage 1994 page. I don't believe HTML supported images as links that far back.
-CR
I know it's, unfortunately en vogue to bash the USA, but has anyone considered that maybe some jihadi has some scuba gear? Wants to keep out the evil, infidel influence?
-CR
VMware. . . done. Done.
-CR
While I think you make some really good points, especially about much of the corporate world's reluctance to rely upon in-house compiled binaries, support contracts, etc., I think you're being pretty short-sighted about the advantages of a custom compile.
Gentoo-Rice-Boi compiler optimizations aside, sometimes stock binaries don't support really important things like OpenGL and/or multi-threading. These two examples can make a *VAST* difference in performance as I'm sure you must admit.
Also, even if "riceboi" compiler optimizations did only get you a 1% performance advantage. . . for many applications, that'd be very significant and desirable. Tell a genetic researcher you could shave 1% off his genome mapping project by breaking his support contract, and he'd say "Contract be damned, fire up the --funroll-loops!"
-CR
If you'd wipe better, you wouldn't have so much prior art.
-CR
> So, you see, it's a feature, not a bug ;-)
http://www.flickr.com/photos/dratz/1045336659/
-CR
Okay, let's pretend for a minute what we're willing to entertain the possibility that the interior of comets is conducive to "primordial soup." Okay, I guess that part isn't so big of a stretch.
How, pray tell, is this "soup" supposed to survive atmospheric re-entry and impact on earth's surface?
"Inquiring minds want to know."
-CR
First of all I think it was called "X-Wing vs. Tie-Fighter." Secondly, I can't imagine why you couldn't get this one to run. It was a Direct-X v3 game, which even NT4 should run nicely.
There was also a patch for it called 'XVT_3DFX.exe' which despite the name added improved Direct-3D support.
If you can't find the file, I might provide it for you if you bug me nicely.
-CR
Those are valid concerns, but this may be an ideal opportunity for people in my position. I've already got an HDTV that I dumped $1200 a few years ago. . . a Toshiba 42H82 which only supports 480i/p, 720i/p, & 1080i, plus it only has component inputs, no HDMI.
The HD-A2 player supports 1080i output over component cables, so it will fully utilize my TV.
Looks like a great deal to me.
-CR
Apparently not enough people have called, because the receptionist A) actually answered and B) didn't hang-up when I said was calling no behalf of Tyrone King.
-CR
It must me.
. . . Disneyland!
-CR
Since we have the attention of the IPv6 crowd, everyone should add this record to your forward zones:
aacs IN AAAA 09f9:1102:9d74:e35b:d841:56c5:6356:88c0
-CR
Everyone should create this DNS record in all your forward zones:
aacs IN AAAA 09F9:1102:9D74:E35B:D841:56C5:6356:88C0
This isn't tomorrow's technology, it is something the human race might do a hundred years from now.
I think you're wrong about that, as do the people doing most of the research on the subject.
In this discover.com article covering Brad Edwards' NASA-sponsored research into Space Elevator technology, his completed work under a $500,000 NASA research grant reveals the technological and economic feasibility of space elevators.
First let me preface with the statement that I'm no Microsoft lover. . . I'm a pragmatist. . . preffer the right tool for the job. . . though if I have to pick a favorite OS, it's FreeBSD, hands down.
I have, however, experienced no such problems with Vista. The only bugs I've encountered with RC2 on this Inspiron 9300 have been with dragging documents into an XP-created Briefcase on a USB stick. If you drag newer versions of an existing file in, they new files never appear and the old ones are erased. Vista-created Briefcases are fine.
-CR
Dominatricies don't wear gags.
-CR
Frak!
-CR
It's become a mamby-pamby world.
I blame the lawyers. The US makes up about 1/20th of the world's population, yet we have 70% of the world's lawyers.
Shakespeare's Jack Cade had the right idea.
-CR
I agree. . . the sprit and promise of Lady Liberty is still very much alive.
You know what though, you know what the immigrants who were welcomed by the Statue of Liberty did? They stopped at Ellis Island to register and apply for residency.
-CR
It's certainly nice to see S.H.O.D.A.N. and the System Shock series getting the front-page /. props it deserves.
The System Shock series introducted me to an entirely differnet realm of video gaming: Fear.
I'm not a fan or horror movies and not into being scared by books or film, but for some strange reason, I love a scary video game and the SS games are the only ones that have ever managed to do it.
I'm such a fan of these games that I absolutely had to chase down and have the trioptimum dot com domain for myself.
-CR