Did you have a look at Yate (http://yate.null.ro/)? I have also used Asterisk long enough to learn to hate it, but Yate looks very nice. It doesn't have as many features as Asterisk, but the code base is very clean and it does look rather easy to extend.
"Asterisk has a clean code base to contribute to." - Good joke! Did you ever had a look at the SIP module? At the deadlock handling? Asterisk has one of the ugliest codes which I have ever seen.
64bit systems were invented because you can emulate 2 32bit processors on them. And so instead of just 4 I can now run 8 C64 emulator instances on them.
I'm not that stupid;) For mails I usually use IMAPS and SMTP with STARTTLS (the client is setup to cancel the connection if it can't connect or if the certificate is wrong).
I already have my "Personal Computer" in form of a 1.2kg subnotebook. While 1.2kg is still not the ideal weight the new models get better each year (unlike some years ago when notebook manufacturers only cared about the performance and not about the size). All I need is an open accesspoint so that I'm able to check my mails when traveling. If there's no AP nearby I can still use bluetooth to connect to my mobile and then use GPRS to get onto the net. And when I'm at home I just put the notebook into the docking station and I have a "normal PC" with a large monitor and a connected soundsystem.
Plone generates valid XHTML code. However currently the Plone site itself doesn't pass the test as someone forgot to include the ALT tag when adding the 'New Orleans' donate code.
STUN helps - but only in about 80% - 90% of all cases. E.g. it won't be able to traverse symetrical firewalls. And even if you get the basic call setup right - try to transfer a call between different phones which are behind different NATs - and have fun! While some may argue that broken firewalls are the users fault, just see this from a users view: Skype works - always. SIP works - sometimes. Which one would you prefer?
It seems that they are just using some kind of RTP-relay if peers are behind a NAT and e.g. STUN won't work (because of a symetrical NAT). This may scale (if they have enough bandwith and enough hosts), but it still seems like an awful single point of failure. Also I don't like my voice-calls to be relayed half-around the world just because of that. Skype has: 1) better NAT traversal capabilities than SIP and 2) it seems that Skype does use 'local' (in the sense of good reachable) peers to relay the data if the NAT traversal doesn't work. It seems to be hard to match Skypes quality for the current alternatives. On the other hand I think that as soon as amicima is released it won't take long until we have a fully open-source Skype alternative. Look at their MFPNet technology. This is basically the networking layer of Skype - but you are able to build any application on top of it - no more NAT troubles. As soon as someone hacks SIP to work atop amicima we won't need any other proprietary VOIP solution anymore.
If you prefer to have an LDAP server under in the public domain then go and code one yourself. Did you pay ANYTHING to redhat to release their LDAP server? No? Then shut the fuck up and either use it or don't. But don't complain about things which others give away for free. As long as you neither contribute to the code nor pay anything to get it under another license NOBODY will care about your opinion of the GPL.
i2p.net seems to be a better alternative. especially because it provides an overlay network. you can't just transfer files over it - you can do everything which you can do on the current net. you can even choose how "much" anonymity you would like (over how many nodes should your messages be relayed).
We already have Mono - and the JIT works fine for x86, PPC and others too. Why should I use Java? Yeah - there are a number of free JVMs already available, but they are either too buggy or don't feature a JIT. And Classpath doesn't seem to be as complete as Monos Library.
RFC 2440 and RFC 3156 looks pretty much like an IETF standard to me. See http://www.ietf.org/html.charters/openpgp-charter. html for further information.
As for the GNUPG point. As user I really don't care how the source code looks as long as it works. Further GNUPG seems more or less secure to me - there weren't that many security advisories yet.
And if you don't want it you can use PGP - there's a freeware version of it too.
And what are the advantages? We already have the OpenPGP standard which is implemented by GnuPG and PGP. People who prefer free software are able to use GnuPG which is licensed under the GPL. If someone prefers commercial software he can use PGP - it even comes with a nice GUI if you use it on Windows. So let's look at your product: Non-free, No-source code, not standards complient, binaries only available for a limit number of platforms. So - in your posting you say "OpenSource" - on the webpage you write that you may publish the source in the future, but that it will only be free for non-commercial users. This is NOT OpenSource - see http://www.opensource.org/docs/definition.php for the definition what OpenSource means. Anyway, are there ANY advantages why I should even bother do download your product? Ah - don't mind - I just noticed that there aren't any LinuxPPC binaries, so I can't use it.
blah - blah... i don't own a tv oder a radio - not because my 'income is below a certain line', but because i have better things to do with my time.
if this number is so low - why create this new tax after all? and if they are afraid that someone watches their streams over the net, they should protect them with e.g. a username / passwd authentication where you receive your login if you pay the GEZstapo fee.
they just see that more and more people don't have tv sets or radios anymore and create this fee too protect their monopoly.
afaik, it's a fee on receivers which mostly funds the state owned tv and radio stations. you have to pay it as soon as you have a television or radio set in your apartment, no matter if you watch these state owned stations or not.
they argue that with internet capable pc you are able to watch/hear tv and radio programs via the net - therefore your pc is a receiver and you have to pay for it.
Not more - not less. All that portknocking does is shifting the security to a layer where it doesn't belong.
And even if you don't want others to see that there are services running on your host there are better solutions. e.g. sending a special string to some UDP port.
If someone can sniff your traffic and he knows about portknocking it's trivial for him to detect it. If someone can't sniff your traffic there's no advantage in using portknocking.
The Google Filesystem has a Blocksize of 64MB (see http://www.cs.rochester.edu/sosp2003/papers/p125-g hemawat.pdf for more information), so most likely the reason for the 1024MB of total size is, that the granularity of the quota system is 64MB too.
We already have other and better options. Just disable WEP and use IPsec on your accesspoint.
Yeah - it's a little bit slower when the en/de/cryption is done on the client but in most cases you won't notice. And on the AP you can use a crypto accelerator.
If you don't want to use a PC as AP just use http://www.m0n0.ch/wall/ in combination with http://www.soekris.com/net4501.htm (they ship with cases too:) - that should do the trick.
There were already airport firmware updates without asking or notifying the user about them.
On new (old-style) airport cards a very old firmware version is installed. If you use them under OS X, the first time you do, a new firmware version is automatically installed.
You notice this, because WEP doesn't work under Linux before the update, but after using the card under OS X it does.
Yes, it's an open source centrino driver - but i wasn't released by intel. RTFWebsite before you post.
http://ipw2100.sourceforge.net/#about ---snip-- - This project was created to enable support for the Intel PRO/Wireless 2100 (IPW2100) mini PCI adapter. This project is intended to be a community effort as much as is possible given some working constraints (mainly, no HW documentation is available) ---snip---
Green Card Lottery 1994 May Be The Last One! THE DEADLINE HAS BEEN ANNOUNCED.
The Green Card Lottery is a completely legal program giving away a certain annual allotment of Green Cards to persons born in certain countries. The lottery program was scheduled to continue on a permanent basis. However, recently, Senator Alan J Simpson introduced a bill into the U. S. Congress which could end any future lotteries. THE 1994 LOTTERY IS SCHEDULED TO TAKE PLACE SOON, BUT IT MAY BE THE VERY LAST ONE.
PERSONS BORN IN MOST COUNTRIES QUALIFY, MANY FOR FIRST TIME.
The only countries NOT qualifying are: Mexico; India; P.R. China; Taiwan, Philippines, North Korea, Canada, United Kingdom (except Northern Ireland), Jamaica, Domican Republic, El Salvador and Vietnam.
Lottery registration will take place soon. 55,000 Green Cards will be given to those who register correctly. NO JOB IS REQUIRED.
THERE IS A STRICT JUNE DEADLINE. THE TIME TO START IS NOW!!
For FREE information via Email, send request to cslaw@indirect.com
Administrative Contact: DNS Admin (NIC-1340142) Google Inc. 2400 E. Bayshore Pkwy Mountain View CA 94043 US dns-admin@google.com +1.6503300100 Fax- +1.6506181499 Technical Contact, Zone Contact: DNS Admin (NIC-1340144) Google Inc. 2400 E. Bayshore Pkwy Mountain View CA 94043 US dns-admin@google.com +1.6503300100 Fax- +1.6506181499
Created on..............: 2000-Mar-15. Expires on..............: 2005-Mar-15. Record last updated on..: 2003-Dec-30 15:39:39.
Slashdot Mirror
Did you have a look at Yate (http://yate.null.ro/)? I have also used Asterisk long enough to learn to hate it, but Yate looks very nice. It doesn't have as many features as Asterisk, but the code base is very clean and it does look rather easy to extend.
"Asterisk has a clean code base to contribute to." - Good joke! Did you ever had a look at the SIP module? At the deadlock handling? Asterisk has one of the ugliest codes which I have ever seen.
RTFM!
64bit systems were invented because you can emulate 2 32bit processors on them. And so instead of just 4 I can now run 8 C64 emulator instances on them.
"if it can't connect" should have meant "if it can't use STARTTLS".
I'm not that stupid ;) For mails I usually use IMAPS and SMTP with STARTTLS (the client is setup to cancel the connection if it can't connect or if the certificate is wrong).
I already have my "Personal Computer" in form of a 1.2kg subnotebook. While 1.2kg is still not the ideal weight the new models get better each year (unlike some years ago when notebook manufacturers only cared about the performance and not about the size). All I need is an open accesspoint so that I'm able to check my mails when traveling. If there's no AP nearby I can still use bluetooth to connect to my mobile and then use GPRS to get onto the net. And when I'm at home I just put the notebook into the docking station and I have a "normal PC" with a large monitor and a connected soundsystem.
Plone generates valid XHTML code. However currently the Plone site itself doesn't pass the test as someone forgot to include the ALT tag when adding the 'New Orleans' donate code.
STUN helps - but only in about 80% - 90% of all cases. E.g. it won't be able to traverse symetrical firewalls. And even if you get the basic call setup right - try to transfer a call between different phones which are behind different NATs - and have fun! While some may argue that broken firewalls are the users fault, just see this from a users view: Skype works - always. SIP works - sometimes. Which one would you prefer?
It seems that they are just using some kind of RTP-relay if peers are behind a NAT and e.g. STUN won't work (because of a symetrical NAT). This may scale (if they have enough bandwith and enough hosts), but it still seems like an awful single point of failure. Also I don't like my voice-calls to be relayed half-around the world just because of that. Skype has: 1) better NAT traversal capabilities than SIP and 2) it seems that Skype does use 'local' (in the sense of good reachable) peers to relay the data if the NAT traversal doesn't work. It seems to be hard to match Skypes quality for the current alternatives. On the other hand I think that as soon as amicima is released it won't take long until we have a fully open-source Skype alternative. Look at their MFPNet technology. This is basically the networking layer of Skype - but you are able to build any application on top of it - no more NAT troubles. As soon as someone hacks SIP to work atop amicima we won't need any other proprietary VOIP solution anymore.
If you prefer to have an LDAP server under in the public domain then go and code one yourself. Did you pay ANYTHING to redhat to release their LDAP server? No? Then shut the fuck up and either use it or don't. But don't complain about things which others give away for free. As long as you neither contribute to the code nor pay anything to get it under another license NOBODY will care about your opinion of the GPL.
i2p.net seems to be a better alternative. especially because it provides an overlay network. you can't just transfer files over it - you can do everything which you can do on the current net. you can even choose how "much" anonymity you would like (over how many nodes should your messages be relayed).
We already have Mono - and the JIT works fine for x86, PPC and others too. Why should I use Java? Yeah - there are a number of free JVMs already available, but they are either too buggy or don't feature a JIT. And Classpath doesn't seem to be as complete as Monos Library.
RFC 2440 and RFC 3156 looks pretty much like an IETF standard to me. See http://www.ietf.org/html.charters/openpgp-charter. html for further information.
As for the GNUPG point. As user I really don't care how the source code looks as long as it works. Further GNUPG seems more or less secure to me - there weren't that many security advisories yet.
And if you don't want it you can use PGP - there's a freeware version of it too.
So WHAT are the advantages of Ciphire?
And what are the advantages? We already have the OpenPGP standard which is implemented by GnuPG and PGP. People who prefer free software are able to use GnuPG which is licensed under the GPL. If someone prefers commercial software he can use PGP - it even comes with a nice GUI if you use it on Windows. So let's look at your product: Non-free, No-source code, not standards complient, binaries only available for a limit number of platforms. So - in your posting you say "OpenSource" - on the webpage you write that you may publish the source in the future, but that it will only be free for non-commercial users. This is NOT OpenSource - see http://www.opensource.org/docs/definition.php for the definition what OpenSource means. Anyway, are there ANY advantages why I should even bother do download your product? Ah - don't mind - I just noticed that there aren't any LinuxPPC binaries, so I can't use it.
blah - blah... i don't own a tv oder a radio - not because my 'income is below a certain line', but because i have better things to do with my time.
if this number is so low - why create this new tax after all? and if they are afraid that someone watches their streams over the net, they should protect them with e.g. a username / passwd authentication where you receive your login if you pay the GEZstapo fee.
they just see that more and more people don't have tv sets or radios anymore and create this fee too protect their monopoly.
afaik, it's a fee on receivers which mostly funds the state owned tv and radio stations. you have to pay it as soon as you have a television or radio set in your apartment, no matter if you watch these state owned stations or not.
they argue that with internet capable pc you are able to watch/hear tv and radio programs via the net - therefore your pc is a receiver and you have to pay for it.
Not more - not less. All that portknocking does is shifting the security to a layer where it doesn't belong.
And even if you don't want others to see that there are services running on your host there are better solutions. e.g. sending a special string to some UDP port.
If someone can sniff your traffic and he knows about portknocking it's trivial for him to detect it. If someone can't sniff your traffic there's no advantage in using portknocking.
The Google Filesystem has a Blocksize of 64MB (see http://www.cs.rochester.edu/sosp2003/papers/p125-g hemawat.pdf for more information), so most likely the reason for the 1024MB of total size is, that the granularity of the quota system is 64MB too.
We already have other and better options. Just disable WEP and use IPsec on your accesspoint.
:) - that should do the trick.
Yeah - it's a little bit slower when the en/de/cryption is done on the client but in most cases you won't notice. And on the AP you can use a crypto accelerator.
If you don't want to use a PC as AP just use http://www.m0n0.ch/wall/ in combination with http://www.soekris.com/net4501.htm (they ship with cases too
There were already airport firmware updates without asking or notifying the user about them.
On new (old-style) airport cards a very old firmware version is installed. If you use them under OS X, the first time you do, a new firmware version is automatically installed.
You notice this, because WEP doesn't work under Linux before the update, but after using the card under OS X it does.
Yes, it's an open source centrino driver - but i wasn't released by intel. RTFWebsite before you post.
- -
http://ipw2100.sourceforge.net/#about
---snip-
This project was created to enable support for the Intel PRO/Wireless 2100 (IPW2100) mini PCI adapter. This project is intended to be a community effort as much as is possible given some working constraints (mainly, no HW documentation is available)
---snip---
actually this vulnerability was announced on 18. feb. 2004 by isec (see http://lwn.net/Articles/71682/).
isec just waited some weeks until they released the exploit...
From: nike@indirect.com (Laurence Canter)j ect: Green Card Lottery- Final One?s t: id1.indirect.com
Newsgroups: alt.brother-jed,alt.pub.coffeehouse.amethyst
Sub
Date: 12 Apr 1994 07:40:42 GMT
Organization: Canter & Siegel
Lines: 34
Message-ID: <2odj9q$25q@herald.indirect.com>
NNTP-Posting-Ho
Green Card Lottery 1994 May Be The Last One!
THE DEADLINE HAS BEEN ANNOUNCED.
The Green Card Lottery is a completely legal program giving away a
certain annual allotment of Green Cards to persons born in certain
countries. The lottery program was scheduled to continue on a
permanent basis. However, recently, Senator Alan J Simpson
introduced a bill into the U. S. Congress which could end any future
lotteries. THE 1994 LOTTERY IS SCHEDULED TO TAKE PLACE
SOON, BUT IT MAY BE THE VERY LAST ONE.
PERSONS BORN IN MOST COUNTRIES QUALIFY, MANY FOR
FIRST TIME.
The only countries NOT qualifying are: Mexico; India; P.R. China;
Taiwan, Philippines, North Korea, Canada, United Kingdom (except
Northern Ireland), Jamaica, Domican Republic, El Salvador and
Vietnam.
Lottery registration will take place soon. 55,000 Green Cards will be
given to those who register correctly. NO JOB IS REQUIRED.
THERE IS A STRICT JUNE DEADLINE. THE TIME TO START IS
NOW!!
For FREE information via Email, send request to
cslaw@indirect.com