Like many people picked up, what Cisco is trying to patent isn't NAT itself but a way to do stateful inspection (ie. only allowing ftp-data through after a connection is made to the ftp control port) with NAT.
However, Checkpoint's Firewall-1 product has been doing this for years now- even before Cisco bought the PIX and started adding firewall features (the PIX initially was just a NAT device). It wouldn't surprise me one bit to find out that other vendors (including IPChains) have been doing this for a while either.
Of course with the patent office being apparently run buy a bunch of idiots, it wouldn't surprise me one bit that this gets through.
Having had servers at 3 totally different types of Co-Lo's, I can say that you're absolutely right, they are all basically the same. All claim to have the "best network" and uptimes, but reality is that problems will happen no matter where you go. Routers and switches will and do blow up, peering points will and do get saturated, fiber lines will and do get cut. UPS/disel generators will and do fail to keep your servers powered.
Where things are different is the type and level of service you'll get. Some co-lo's are just that- straight co-location. Others provide more managed services. Some claim to have really good managed services, but really really suck at it. Others specialize at managed services and suck at plain co-lo.
Another thing to worry about is the fish/pond issue. Are you a big or small fish? What sized pond do you want to swim in? Small fishes in big ponds tend to get the shaft, but their co-lo's tend to have more negotiating power with other carriers. A small fish in a small pond will get better service, but their co-lo may not have the power to get better connectivity when they need it.
Your most important thing is references from other companies with the same needs as your own. Talk to them at length and get the real scoop. When something broke, how quickly did it get fixed? Did it happen more than once? If they were down for a period of time, did the co-lo's SLA cover their lost revenues/good-will with their customers? How well were they kept informed with regards to the situation and scheduled maintenance.
My.02: Exodus- good for straight co-lo. Lowsy managed services. Has a great or horrible backbone depending on who you ask. NaviSite- good for high-end managed services. Lowsy at straight co-lo. Very different network design which may be a good or bad thing depending on your point of view. AboveNet- Seems to be a nice pond to swim in, but they seem to have more than their fair share of BGP issues than most. GlobalCenter/Frontier- Seems to have a lot of peering problems. No idea on their level of service.
This database is unlikely to be maintained indefinitely. If for no other reason, than you need parental consent for recording information on minors.
Heh, yeah right. My H.S. still has all my personal information in their computers and they never asked my parents for consent. SSN, Grades, attendance records, etc. Shit, they'd post my grades using my full SSN as my ID which is clearly against the law.
While enforcing conformity is a bad thing, it isn't Nazish or Stalinistic, it is obnoxious. This program appears to be well intended...
The road to hell is paved with good intentions.
You really should read up on your history though. Both the Nazi's and Communists under Stalin's (and other's) rule were very big into turning in those "who did not agree with the status quo". Last time I checked, one of the founding ideas behind America was that it was OK to be different and that you could express that without fear of attack by your neighbor or the gov't.
Allowing peers to turn in other peers anonymously is one of the tenents of a police state system. As Benjamin Franklin once said: (paraprased)
Those willing to give up a little freedom for their safety deserve neither.
We've all be newbies at one time or another. For some of us it came easier than others. I used to spend at least an hour each day for about a year replying to newbies on the Red Hat lists, before I got fustrated at people who refused to read the list archives. Then Red Hat took down the archives for lame-ass reasons, so I decided to do soemthing about it.
My first solution was the Red Hat Linux User's FAQ which has been pretty sucessful. It's been around for about 2 years now, and I still get emails all the time from people who found it helped them solve a problem. Makes me feel pretty good actually.
Then a year ago some guy talked me into helping him develop a Linux knowledge base that was non-distribution centric. Looks like we'll be going live in a few weeks.
Point is that it's up to the existing people in th e know, who know what it's like to be a newbie to help them out. And not all documention is for newbies- there's still a lot of things that I'm still learning, even though I've been using Linux for over 6 years. Sure not everyone has the time or patience to build a fully database driven, fully categorized, drill down capable search engine powered knowledge base. But there are enough people like me willing to build that so that other people can write documentation of all lenghts and skill levels and have it easily locatable by the end users.
People interested in writing documentation or PHP coders looking for a challenge should check out The Linux Knowledge Base Project.
Dude, open up your eyes! Virtually every group in society does the exact same thing. School teaches you there is no God, church that there is one. Beer commercials tell you to open up a keg, church says don't get drunk. The ACLU tells you that the KKK should be able to run around with hoods on their heads, and the rest of the sane country says "Are you kidding?" Companies tell you how to dress to be cool, where to go to be cool, what to do to be cool. The school system (think Pepsi only schools) and hence the Gov't is doing virtually the same thing (what to eat/drink/how to dress/etc).
Just because you have a central figure such as Jesus doesn't mean that corporations and the gov't aren't any worse. I'd even say that the gov't and schools *are* worse since you can choose to not go to church, but try to get out of school or watch TV without commercials.
Reality is that religion is only a voice of a larger group of voices all trying to get your attention. If you don't like what Jesus, Allah, or whoever has to say, then walk away. But don't belittle others for taking a leap of faith that you yourself were unwilling to make. You're a lost lamb just like the rest of us, just that you march to a different drummer.
Last, if you really think Christianity limits independant thought, you've obviously never sat in a argument at church about pre/post/mid-trib or what kind of music should be played during the service. I've seen churches split into two just because one group didn't like the fact that they were going to allow someone to play the drums during hymns. Christians can be subcategorized into Protestent, Methodist, Evangelical, and about a 100 other denomiations. Each one exists, because they didn't like everything all the others teach or how they teach it.
Why do you refuse to believe that technology can't solve this problem? Do you think Rob or anyone can come up with a 100% perfect solution that can't be abused or worked around? Problem is that the current solution allows wide-spread abuse via open proxies (If you and I use the same proxy I can effectively prevent you from posting.) and people with dynamic IP's can easily avoid it.
And yes it is censorship. Censorship by definition is not limited to the government- any organization or individual can censor others if they have the power to stop their speech. The second "feature" that Rob has coded is definately censorship as it allows moderators to deny any account or IP the ability to post.
Now, we can argue if the troller has the right to post or is it just a privalege that Rob/Andover grants people. If/. wishes to make posting a privalage rather than a right that is their right, but everyone needs to be aware that this is censorship.
I agree, moderation needs to be changed. One idea that poped into my mind after reading yours (though I like your idea of moderators being named) is giving moderators two classes of points. One class to up articles and one class to down articles. I don't know how many moderators there are at any one time on average, but 5 points/class should be enough to bump up the good and down the bad.
My only concern is that someone else is telling me what I can and can't read on/. As an adult, I want the option to get pissed off at stupid trolls if I'm in that mood.
Censorship on/. seems really wrong to me, especially considering the recent article posted by Hemos on Congress trying to force censorship on the media. How is this any better? I believe it is a lot worse. Rob, even you admit that this "fix" has loopholes. What about people abusing the system to lock out other people from posting? (via open proxies)
If you really want to stop things like hate speech or blatent trolls, the only way to stop them is to get/teach people to NOT respond. The only reason someone posts this on a public forum like/. is to get a rise out of people. Take that away, and the trolls go away.
Let's face it, this is a/. community problem that requires the community to fix it. No manner of technology can fix it.
I hope Rob you'll reconsider this move. 99.99999% of us may loathe 0.0001% of the posts, but that doesn't mean that we should censor them out, even if they are blatent trolls. We all have to learn to grow up and just ignore them. Trying to censor them won't make them go away; rather it will just make them more determined to find a way to work around the censorship.
Until we as a society learn that we don't really want the government/media to protect us from ourselves, we're doomed as a nation to greater losses of freedoms. By/. advocating censorship, that's just one more nail in the freedom coffin.
If you want to rate them -20 or something like that, so that people have to opt-in to read trolls, that's fine. But don't kill the posts.
Slashdot Mirror
However, Checkpoint's Firewall-1 product has been doing this for years now- even before Cisco bought the PIX and started adding firewall features (the PIX initially was just a NAT device). It wouldn't surprise me one bit to find out that other vendors (including IPChains) have been doing this for a while either.
Of course with the patent office being apparently run buy a bunch of idiots, it wouldn't surprise me one bit that this gets through.
Where things are different is the type and level of service you'll get. Some co-lo's are just that- straight co-location. Others provide more managed services. Some claim to have really good managed services, but really really suck at it. Others specialize at managed services and suck at plain co-lo.
Another thing to worry about is the fish/pond issue. Are you a big or small fish? What sized pond do you want to swim in? Small fishes in big ponds tend to get the shaft, but their co-lo's tend to have more negotiating power with other carriers. A small fish in a small pond will get better service, but their co-lo may not have the power to get better connectivity when they need it.
Your most important thing is references from other companies with the same needs as your own. Talk to them at length and get the real scoop. When something broke, how quickly did it get fixed? Did it happen more than once? If they were down for a period of time, did the co-lo's SLA cover their lost revenues/good-will with their customers? How well were they kept informed with regards to the situation and scheduled maintenance.
My .02:
Exodus- good for straight co-lo. Lowsy managed services. Has a great or horrible backbone depending on who you ask.
NaviSite- good for high-end managed services. Lowsy at straight co-lo. Very different network design which may be a good or bad thing depending on your point of view.
AboveNet- Seems to be a nice pond to swim in, but they seem to have more than their fair share of BGP issues than most.
GlobalCenter/Frontier- Seems to have a lot of peering problems. No idea on their level of service.
This database is unlikely to be maintained indefinitely. If for no other reason, than you need parental consent for recording information on minors.
Heh, yeah right. My H.S. still has all my personal information in their computers and they never asked my parents for consent. SSN, Grades, attendance records, etc. Shit, they'd post my grades using my full SSN as my ID which is clearly against the law.
While enforcing conformity is a bad thing, it isn't Nazish or Stalinistic, it is obnoxious. This program appears to be well intended...
The road to hell is paved with good intentions.
You really should read up on your history though. Both the Nazi's and Communists under Stalin's (and other's) rule were very big into turning in those "who did not agree with the status quo". Last time I checked, one of the founding ideas behind America was that it was OK to be different and that you could express that without fear of attack by your neighbor or the gov't.
Allowing peers to turn in other peers anonymously is one of the tenents of a police state system. As Benjamin Franklin once said: (paraprased)
Those willing to give up a little freedom for their safety deserve neither.
The Linux Knowledge Base Project
We (I'm one of the core developers) went live today.
My first solution was the Red Hat Linux User's FAQ which has been pretty sucessful. It's been around for about 2 years now, and I still get emails all the time from people who found it helped them solve a problem. Makes me feel pretty good actually.
Then a year ago some guy talked me into helping him develop a Linux knowledge base that was non-distribution centric. Looks like we'll be going live in a few weeks.
Point is that it's up to the existing people in th e know, who know what it's like to be a newbie to help them out. And not all documention is for newbies- there's still a lot of things that I'm still learning, even though I've been using Linux for over 6 years. Sure not everyone has the time or patience to build a fully database driven, fully categorized, drill down capable search engine powered knowledge base. But there are enough people like me willing to build that so that other people can write documentation of all lenghts and skill levels and have it easily locatable by the end users.
People interested in writing documentation or PHP coders looking for a challenge should check out The Linux Knowledge Base Project.
Dude, open up your eyes! Virtually every group in society does the exact same thing. School teaches you there is no God, church that there is one. Beer commercials tell you to open up a keg, church says don't get drunk. The ACLU tells you that the KKK should be able to run around with hoods on their heads, and the rest of the sane country says "Are you kidding?" Companies tell you how to dress to be cool, where to go to be cool, what to do to be cool. The school system (think Pepsi only schools) and hence the Gov't is doing virtually the same thing (what to eat/drink/how to dress/etc).
Just because you have a central figure such as Jesus doesn't mean that corporations and the gov't aren't any worse. I'd even say that the gov't and schools *are* worse since you can choose to not go to church, but try to get out of school or watch TV without commercials.
Reality is that religion is only a voice of a larger group of voices all trying to get your attention. If you don't like what Jesus, Allah, or whoever has to say, then walk away. But don't belittle others for taking a leap of faith that you yourself were unwilling to make. You're a lost lamb just like the rest of us, just that you march to a different drummer.
Last, if you really think Christianity limits independant thought, you've obviously never sat in a argument at church about pre/post/mid-trib or what kind of music should be played during the service. I've seen churches split into two just because one group didn't like the fact that they were going to allow someone to play the drums during hymns. Christians can be subcategorized into Protestent, Methodist, Evangelical, and about a 100 other denomiations. Each one exists, because they didn't like everything all the others teach or how they teach it.
And yes it is censorship. Censorship by definition is not limited to the government- any organization or individual can censor others if they have the power to stop their speech. The second "feature" that Rob has coded is definately censorship as it allows moderators to deny any account or IP the ability to post.
Now, we can argue if the troller has the right to post or is it just a privalege that Rob/Andover grants people. If /. wishes to make posting a privalage rather than a right that is their right, but everyone needs to be aware that this is censorship.
I agree, moderation needs to be changed. One idea that poped into my mind after reading yours (though I like your idea of moderators being named) is giving moderators two classes of points. One class to up articles and one class to down articles. I don't know how many moderators there are at any one time on average, but 5 points/class should be enough to bump up the good and down the bad.
/. As an adult, I want the option to get pissed off at stupid trolls if I'm in that mood.
My only concern is that someone else is telling me what I can and can't read on
Censorship on /. seems really wrong to me, especially considering the recent article posted by Hemos on Congress trying to force censorship on the media. How is this any better? I believe it is a lot worse. Rob, even you admit that this "fix" has loopholes. What about people abusing the system to lock out other people from posting? (via open proxies)
/. is to get a rise out of people. Take that away, and the trolls go away.
/. community problem that requires the community to fix it. No manner of technology can fix it.
/. advocating censorship, that's just one more nail in the freedom coffin.
If you really want to stop things like hate speech or blatent trolls, the only way to stop them is to get/teach people to NOT respond. The only reason someone posts this on a public forum like
Let's face it, this is a
I hope Rob you'll reconsider this move. 99.99999% of us may loathe 0.0001% of the posts, but that doesn't mean that we should censor them out, even if they are blatent trolls. We all have to learn to grow up and just ignore them. Trying to censor them won't make them go away; rather it will just make them more determined to find a way to work around the censorship.
Until we as a society learn that we don't really want the government/media to protect us from ourselves, we're doomed as a nation to greater losses of freedoms. By
If you want to rate them -20 or something like that, so that people have to opt-in to read trolls, that's fine. But don't kill the posts.