IPv6 may not have been DESIGNED to handle routing table overload, but that will probably be a side effect.
IPv6 is much more geared toward route aggregation. And since its just being rolled out, and people already know the effects of the messy routing setup of today, route aggregation will be encouraged to a much greater degree.
Yes, this could be done with IPv4. But it isn't going to happen. Far too late into the game. -- Brandon Hume hume -> BOFH.Halifax.NS.Ca, http://WWW.BOFH.Halifax.NS.Ca/
Its very interesting reading the comments posted here. Most of them, overall, seem to be caught up in the same flow as the original article. Some seem intelligently placed. Some are just plain stupid.
1) "Sun just wants Linux to hurt Microsoft."
Well, there's only one thing that can be said to this... DUH! Does anyone really think that the Oracle, IBM, SGI, and anybody else are operating on any other motivation? Sun wants to sell Solaris. IBM wants to sell AIX.
Why is one more evil than another?
Was the UltraPenguin program faked? Sun got up, and declared Linux worthy. Was that a BAD thing to do? A lot of people were pleased when Sun did that, saying they were simply wise to do so... its interesting how fast people turn their coats.
Honestly... how many people run Linux without any concept of just what kind of OS is beneath their fingers and what it can do, but run it just because its not Microsoft? A fair number I think, because I run into these people every day.
2) "Sun will drop Linux as soon as it starts to threaten Slowlaris".
First off... Find something newer than "Slowlaris", its getting worn out.
Sun has been marketing Solaris x86 for a while now. They haven't turned against Linux over that yet. Secondly, Sun ships a copy of Solaris free with every Sun workstation. So, if a person gets their sparc and blows off Solaris, why should Sun care? They've done their duty.
Thirdly, I know this may shock some people, but some people LIKE Solaris, and they're not necessarily idiots for doing so. I like its filesystem layout. I like its driver model. I like how I don't need kernel headers to compile applications. I like its threading model, and its great SMP. I compared these to Linux (and other Unixes) equivalents, and I made a CHOICE. And generally I find that the people who like and use Solaris tend to KEEP liking and using Solaris. I don't think Linux is going to erase Solaris from existence any time soon. Would you WANT it to? Isn't that what competition is about, even for free Unixes?
3) "Sun is trying to keep Linux down by not porting Java".
This is amazingly stupid. Sun IS helping port Java. The people complaining about it not being out yet seem to have no concept of just how complex and involved such a project IS. Java 1.2 exists from Blackdown, and they appear to be working on getting it passing the Java Compatibility Tests which Sun insists on. (And before someone starting griping about THAT, let me say that that's called being "fair". Sun stomped on MS for violating those tests, they can't very well turn around and let Linux get away without them, otherwise the conspiracy theorists will REALLY crawl out of the woodwork.)
So, if Java for Linux isn't moving fast enough for you, why not volunteer to help out with the project?
The rest of the comments, along with the article itself, appear to be just more FUD. Sun killed Wabi, the author is annoyed, and tries to spin off an anti-Linux conspiracy to make the zealots hurt Sun back. I don't think so. Linux is here to stay, Solaris isn't going to die anytime soon, Sun's actions have NOT been inconsistent, and the world continues to spin. -- Brandon Hume hume -> BOFH.Halifax.NS.Ca, http://WWW.BOFH.Halifax.NS.Ca/
Uh... Java was NATIVELY DEVELOPED on Solaris. It seems like a natural function of REALITY that Java for Solaris would be out first.
Wasn't it only a few months ago that Sun took up Java for Linux personally? I think you seriously underestimate how difficult it is to port a large system between achitectures, to Linux in particular. (Hello, glibc, libc5, application kernel includes, inconsistent interfaces, endian mistakes, etc, anybody?) -- Brandon Hume hume -> BOFH.Halifax.NS.Ca, http://WWW.BOFH.Halifax.NS.Ca/
A troll is a troll, no matter what OS they use. They'll say anything to stir up trouble, it doesn't matter what OS they PERSONALLY use.
Just ignore them, like real leeches they'll shrivel up and die if you don't give them more blood to suck on. -- Brandon Hume hume -> BOFH.Halifax.NS.Ca, http://WWW.BOFH.Halifax.NS.Ca/
1.Nobody needs dumb terminals in today's workplace environment. Real computers are necessary, not slick looking terminals.
OK, why? That's an awfully general statement, with absolutely nothing backing it up.
2.A five year commitment is too long a technology commitment in today's marketplace.
Not when only barely functionality is on the desktop. Do you constantly upgrade your monitor? With thin clients, you upgrade the SERVER. So long as the client has enough colors, high enough resolution, and doesn't break, they'll last for YEARS. The hundreds of PCs you upgrade every two years for $1k apiece is that much money you sink into the server. And ~$100000 will buy one hell of a server.
3.This won't integrate very well with a Windows-centric economy.
Well then, I guess we should all nuke our Unix partitions and go to Windows then, if there's no point in trying.
4.It doesn't just involve buying a thin client. It also involves buying the server, the software, the administrators to configure it all and the technicians to train the masses
Umm... the cost savings from buying hundreds of PCs buys you the server. You'd need to buy the software ANYWAY, whether its hundreds of single user licenses or one network group license. If you don't hire an idiot, you only need ONE admin for the server, and the whole POINT of these devices is that you turn them on and go. A person who needs training to use a monitor or telephone shouldn't be allowed near either.
I think the problem is you're stilling thinking small... just you, sitting at a PC. These devices were made for groups of hundreds of people, a level where one independent machine per person is a nightmare... where you DO need dozens of techs and administrators and constant upgrading.
My first home-run Unix-like OS was Linux... 1.0.x kernel, Slackware, and it was a blast. I felt that the Linux community back then was very different. They were trying to improve the world- open standards, viewable source, nifty utilities, and most of all having FUN. And they weren't just doing it for their toy operating system... they were making it available for everybody, recognizing that Linux wasn't the only non-MS OS in existance and making sure their benefits could be passed around.
Then, I got myself a sparc and set about learning Solaris. During that time I rarely booted into Linux on my PC, and kinda lost track of the scene. When I came back to it a couple of years later, I wasn't pleased with what I saw. The whole attitude had changed. It wasn't just "run this OS because its neat", or even "run this OS because its not made by Microsoft". The theme was "run Linux because Linux is better than absolutely anything and if you disagree you're in big trouble". We've noticed this latter attitude before, there have been Slashdot articles on this "frothing advocacy".
I started noticing posts from Linux users forced to use Solaris at work or school... all too often, the post boiled down to "Hey, why doesn't Solaris do THIS, Linux does THIS, why does Solaris suck so much?" I'd check out the other Unix newsgroups and notice the same attitude, just replace "Solaris" with the name of the OS in question. And usually the feature the said user was having a seizure over was a simple thing, like gzip or the pretty network configuration gizmo. Linux, for power users? It doesn't seem like it anymore.
But, OK. Everyone has a right to the little features they've gotten used to, and hey, some of them ARE cool. So, I sit down to try and port some of these things to the OS I'm currently on. Uh oh. It uses inline assembler, completely uncommented of course. Or, its completely reliant on the bastardized Linux kernel headers. Or it needs a "convenience" device that exists on Linux despite the fact that the stuff could be done completely fine at the application level. And let's not forget the hordes of other utilities and libraries I have to port/install just to get that far. What happened to the portability I was familiar with? What is this stuff... open source, yet proprietary? How does that work?
Of course, if I worked hard enough, I could probably get it going. But why? I'd be just completely rewriting the whole thing, to add a measure of portability that could have been easily added during initial development if the coder had thought of it. But why would s/he do that? Who is stupid enough to run something OTHER than Linux?
This pure, narrow vision is why *I* no longer run Linux. We can see it here in knee-jerk reactions to some "Ask Slashdot" questions. A user wants to build a pop/smtp server for a bazillion users. Another wants to construct a high-availability database server. What's the best choice for a good news server? How about a closet print server?
Always, 90% of the replies are "use Linux". It doesn't matter that DG/UX has some of the best high-availability tools around. I've personally seen an RS/6000 running AIX munch some absolutely insane mail loads. Four of the top five Usenet transport servers are Solaris boxes. And hell, if you've GOT the NT license, why not stick it on the free box and stick it in the closet to print? Its one of the few tasks its good for. But the reasoned, use-the-right-tool responses get drowned out under the "use Linux because its cool" followups.
I think Linux has some of the niftiest gadgetry I've seen in an OS. It certainly manages to support every device in existance, and its a great thing for the environment, reducing the number of PCs that end up in the landfill every year. I won't begrudge it that. But why can't I play? Why am I an idiot because I won't use it at every opportunity?
I certainly hope this "migration" happens sometime soon. There's nothing specifically wrong with the OS, but the people seem to be getting stale and sedentary. Maybe a new project would shake it all up again. -- Brandon Hume hume -> BOFH.Halifax.NS.Ca, http://WWW.BOFH.Halifax.NS.Ca/
> IMAP. Plus, unless you completely customize it, > sendmail will store mail in one giant file per > user,
Incorrect. Sendmail uses the local delivery agent in the final delivery process, and this delivery agent can store the mail however it wants.
An example is the Cyrus IMAPd, which uses its own delivery agent to store the email in the newspool-like message tree. Using the delivery agent is less than a one-line modification to sendmail.cf. -- Brandon Hume hume -> BOFH.Halifax.NS.Ca, http://WWW.BOFH.Halifax.NS.Ca/
Slashdot Mirror
IPv6 may not have been DESIGNED to handle routing table overload, but that will probably be a side effect.
IPv6 is much more geared toward route aggregation. And since its just being rolled out, and people already know the effects of the messy routing setup of today, route aggregation will be encouraged to a much greater degree.
Yes, this could be done with IPv4. But it isn't going to happen. Far too late into the game.
--
Brandon Hume
hume -> BOFH.Halifax.NS.Ca, http://WWW.BOFH.Halifax.NS.Ca/
Its very interesting reading the comments posted here. Most of them, overall, seem to be caught up in the same flow as the original article. Some seem intelligently placed. Some are just plain stupid.
1) "Sun just wants Linux to hurt Microsoft."
Well, there's only one thing that can be said to this... DUH! Does anyone really think that the Oracle, IBM, SGI, and anybody else are operating on any other motivation? Sun wants to sell Solaris. IBM wants to sell AIX.
Why is one more evil than another?
Was the UltraPenguin program faked? Sun got up, and declared Linux worthy. Was that a BAD thing to do? A lot of people were pleased when Sun did that, saying they were simply wise to do so... its interesting how fast people turn their coats.
Honestly... how many people run Linux without any concept of just what kind of OS is beneath their fingers and what it can do, but run it just because its not Microsoft? A fair number I think, because I run into these people every day.
2) "Sun will drop Linux as soon as it starts to threaten Slowlaris".
First off... Find something newer than "Slowlaris", its getting worn out.
Sun has been marketing Solaris x86 for a while now. They haven't turned against Linux over that yet. Secondly, Sun ships a copy of Solaris free with every Sun workstation. So, if a person gets their sparc and blows off Solaris, why should Sun care? They've done their duty.
Thirdly, I know this may shock some people, but some people LIKE Solaris, and they're not necessarily idiots for doing so. I like its filesystem layout. I like its driver model. I like how I don't need kernel headers to compile applications. I like its threading model, and its great SMP. I compared these to Linux (and other Unixes) equivalents, and I made a CHOICE. And generally I find that the people who like and use Solaris tend to KEEP liking and using Solaris.
I don't think Linux is going to erase Solaris from existence any time soon. Would you WANT it to? Isn't that what competition is about, even for free Unixes?
3) "Sun is trying to keep Linux down by not porting Java".
This is amazingly stupid. Sun IS helping port Java. The people complaining about it not being out yet seem to have no concept of just how complex and involved such a project IS. Java 1.2 exists from Blackdown, and they appear to be working on getting it passing the Java Compatibility Tests which Sun insists on. (And before someone starting griping about THAT, let me say that that's called being "fair". Sun stomped on MS for violating those tests, they can't very well turn around and let Linux get away without them, otherwise the conspiracy theorists will REALLY crawl out of the woodwork.)
So, if Java for Linux isn't moving fast enough for you, why not volunteer to help out with the project?
The rest of the comments, along with the article itself, appear to be just more FUD. Sun killed Wabi, the author is annoyed, and tries to spin off an anti-Linux conspiracy to make the zealots hurt Sun back. I don't think so. Linux is here to stay, Solaris isn't going to die anytime soon, Sun's actions have NOT been inconsistent, and the world continues to spin.
--
Brandon Hume
hume -> BOFH.Halifax.NS.Ca, http://WWW.BOFH.Halifax.NS.Ca/
Uh... Java was NATIVELY DEVELOPED on Solaris.
It seems like a natural function of REALITY that
Java for Solaris would be out first.
Wasn't it only a few months ago that Sun took up
Java for Linux personally? I think you seriously
underestimate how difficult it is to port a large
system between achitectures, to Linux in
particular. (Hello, glibc, libc5, application
kernel includes, inconsistent interfaces, endian
mistakes, etc, anybody?)
--
Brandon Hume
hume -> BOFH.Halifax.NS.Ca, http://WWW.BOFH.Halifax.NS.Ca/
Recompile? Vuz iz zees... recompile?
Solaris packaged KDE installations, available
right off the KDE main site.
pkgadd -d, baby.
--
Brandon Hume
hume -> BOFH.Halifax.NS.Ca, http://WWW.BOFH.Halifax.NS.Ca/
A troll is a troll, no matter what OS they use.
They'll say anything to stir up trouble, it
doesn't matter what OS they PERSONALLY use.
Just ignore them, like real leeches they'll
shrivel up and die if you don't give them more
blood to suck on.
--
Brandon Hume
hume -> BOFH.Halifax.NS.Ca, http://WWW.BOFH.Halifax.NS.Ca/
1.Nobody needs dumb terminals in today's
workplace environment. Real computers are
necessary, not slick looking terminals.
OK, why? That's an awfully general statement,
with absolutely nothing backing it up.
2.A five year commitment is too long a
technology commitment in today's marketplace.
Not when only barely functionality is on the
desktop. Do you constantly upgrade your monitor?
With thin clients, you upgrade the SERVER. So
long as the client has enough colors, high enough
resolution, and doesn't break, they'll last for
YEARS. The hundreds of PCs you upgrade every two
years for $1k apiece is that much money you sink
into the server. And ~$100000 will buy one hell
of a server.
3.This won't integrate very well with a
Windows-centric economy.
Well then, I guess we should all nuke our Unix
partitions and go to Windows then, if there's no
point in trying.
4.It doesn't just involve buying a thin client.
It also involves buying the server, the software,
the administrators to configure it all and the
technicians to train the masses
Umm... the cost savings from buying hundreds of
PCs buys you the server. You'd need to buy the
software ANYWAY, whether its hundreds of single
user licenses or one network group license. If
you don't hire an idiot, you only need ONE admin
for the server, and the whole POINT of these
devices is that you turn them on and go. A person
who needs training to use a monitor or telephone
shouldn't be allowed near either.
I think the problem is you're stilling thinking
small... just you, sitting at a PC. These devices
were made for groups of hundreds of people, a
level where one independent machine per person is
a nightmare... where you DO need dozens of techs
and administrators and constant upgrading.
--
Brandon Hume
hume -> BOFH.Halifax.NS.Ca, http://WWW.BOFH.Halifax.NS.Ca/
My first home-run Unix-like OS was Linux... 1.0.x
kernel, Slackware, and it was a blast. I felt
that the Linux community back then was very
different. They were trying to improve the world-
open standards, viewable source, nifty utilities,
and most of all having FUN. And they weren't
just doing it for their toy operating system...
they were making it available for everybody,
recognizing that Linux wasn't the only non-MS OS
in existance and making sure their benefits could
be passed around.
Then, I got myself a sparc and set about learning
Solaris. During that time I rarely booted into
Linux on my PC, and kinda lost track of the scene.
When I came back to it a couple of years later, I
wasn't pleased with what I saw. The whole
attitude had changed. It wasn't just "run this
OS because its neat", or even "run this OS because
its not made by Microsoft". The theme was "run
Linux because Linux is better than absolutely
anything and if you disagree you're in big
trouble". We've noticed this latter attitude
before, there have been Slashdot articles on this
"frothing advocacy".
I started noticing posts from Linux users forced
to use Solaris at work or school... all too often,
the post boiled down to "Hey, why doesn't Solaris
do THIS, Linux does THIS, why does Solaris suck so
much?" I'd check out the other Unix newsgroups
and notice the same attitude, just replace
"Solaris" with the name of the OS in question.
And usually the feature the said user was having
a seizure over was a simple thing, like gzip or
the pretty network configuration gizmo. Linux,
for power users? It doesn't seem like it anymore.
But, OK. Everyone has a right to the little
features they've gotten used to, and hey, some
of them ARE cool. So, I sit down to try and port
some of these things to the OS I'm currently on.
Uh oh. It uses inline assembler, completely
uncommented of course. Or, its completely reliant
on the bastardized Linux kernel headers. Or it
needs a "convenience" device that exists on Linux
despite the fact that the stuff could be done
completely fine at the application level. And
let's not forget the hordes of other utilities
and libraries I have to port/install just to get
that far. What happened to the portability I was
familiar with? What is this stuff... open source,
yet proprietary? How does that work?
Of course, if I worked hard enough, I could
probably get it going. But why? I'd be just
completely rewriting the whole thing, to add a
measure of portability that could have been easily
added during initial development if the coder had
thought of it. But why would s/he do that? Who
is stupid enough to run something OTHER than
Linux?
This pure, narrow vision is why *I* no longer run
Linux. We can see it here in knee-jerk reactions
to some "Ask Slashdot" questions. A user wants
to build a pop/smtp server for a bazillion users.
Another wants to construct a high-availability
database server. What's the best choice for a
good news server? How about a closet print
server?
Always, 90% of the replies are "use Linux". It
doesn't matter that DG/UX has some of the best
high-availability tools around. I've personally
seen an RS/6000 running AIX munch some absolutely
insane mail loads. Four of the top five Usenet
transport servers are Solaris boxes. And hell,
if you've GOT the NT license, why not stick it on
the free box and stick it in the closet to print?
Its one of the few tasks its good for. But the
reasoned, use-the-right-tool responses get
drowned out under the "use Linux because its cool"
followups.
I think Linux has some of the niftiest gadgetry
I've seen in an OS. It certainly manages to
support every device in existance, and its a great
thing for the environment, reducing the number of
PCs that end up in the landfill every year. I
won't begrudge it that. But why can't I play?
Why am I an idiot because I won't use it at every
opportunity?
I certainly hope this "migration" happens sometime
soon. There's nothing specifically wrong with
the OS, but the people seem to be getting stale
and sedentary. Maybe a new project would shake
it all up again.
--
Brandon Hume
hume -> BOFH.Halifax.NS.Ca, http://WWW.BOFH.Halifax.NS.Ca/
> IMAP. Plus, unless you completely customize it,
> sendmail will store mail in one giant file per > user,
Incorrect. Sendmail uses the local delivery
agent in the final delivery process, and this
delivery agent can store the mail however it
wants.
An example is the Cyrus IMAPd, which uses its
own delivery agent to store the email in the
newspool-like message tree. Using the delivery
agent is less than a one-line modification to
sendmail.cf.
--
Brandon Hume
hume -> BOFH.Halifax.NS.Ca, http://WWW.BOFH.Halifax.NS.Ca/