I wouldn't claim it is revolutionary, but it is a bit more interesting than laying fiber.
Most folks running networks employ "hot potato(e)" routing methods - the idea is to get it off your network at the earliest possible time.
Internap, instead, attempts to minimize transport time, which usually means reducing the number of hops as much as possible. In practice, this means modifying BGP to approximate solving the Travelling Salesman problem. You can't, but you can make a good guess. So, if your ISP uses them, traffic to a server on the other end of the country will probably not have to pass through the major hubs. And if you are communicating with another Internap customer, you buypass the public net entirely. They will sell you SLAs with pretty low maximum latencies.
Not affiliated with them, but I did almost use them for my company.
The problem with djbdns is that Dan doesn't care about standards, and ignores them when he doesn't like them. AXFR/IXFR are RFC standards, and he makes it "optional". rsync+ssh doesn't work if you want to do zone transfers between, say, djbdns and bind. djbdns turns of TCP queries by default. Standards are about interoperability. Dan just doesn't care.
This is the topic of recurring flame wars on the dns-bind list, and I don't want to start it here. But do note that djbdns is not a drop in replacement.
On gas taxes: It has been pointed out that in the USA, bottled water costs more than gasoline. I don't think there is any clearer statement of the problem than that. Gas _should_ have a real cost. It imposes real problems on others (externalities, in economics lingo).
On guns - you think Bush will do any differently? He'll cave as soon as some Million March makes him look bad on CNN. Call if Protecting Cops, Saving Children, or Punishing Drug Users, I have no doubt that he'll care any more about the second amendment than any other politician. Think about it.
I'm voting this year, because my partner demands it. It will be the first time I've ever voted (I'm 27). The reason I've never voted is pretty clear - it costs too much to make an informed choice. Briefly, guess what it is worth to you to get the president of your choice. Divide that by the number of people voting. Is the result a living wage? You might say democracy isn't about money, and you might be a fool, too.
I'm voting this year because my partner asked me to. Her words are worth a lot more than a vanishingly small voice on which creep is better.
Yeah, and Bush will be so different that we'll all be stunned with what a free nation we've become after ditching that lame Democrat.
Remember that in 1992 we still had ITAR, which indicated the same prison sentence for selling an atomic bomb to Iraq or giving PGP to someone in Germany.
The CDA was doomed - just stupid grand standing. Why would any smart politician worry about what the courts were certain to toss out? Of course, it would be nice if politicians actually did what was right, but think reality.
You think Bush wouldn't jump on COPA?
Carnivore, whatever, red herring.
Taxes, whatever, you know they're coming. The only question is when and how.
DMCA, "wide bipartisan support". Everyone was bought off. What's the question again?
Truth be told, I can't stand the idea of Gore as president. I went to high school in TN when he was in Congress, and actually met him once for a photo-op. The thought if Tipper as First Lady makes me shudder. Even if everyone else forgets, I remember the PMRC.
Compare that with Bush, who is clearly an unabashed corporate whore. Enough said. Look at his behavior in Texas, how he abused is position to help his minority stake in sports. He's a not-very-bright son of a very bright politician, and that seems to be enough, now (though not enough to have kept him from failing in business several times without political help).
Yeah, I can't stand Gore. But he's really the only choice. Too bad he's almost destined to lose.
Good advice. I'd simply add that network architecture should be carefully considered - depending on the trade-offs taken, you're going to see a lot of routine network traffic.
If you do end up with workgroup application/mail/print/etc. servers, think about where they live in the heirarchy, and keep them close to the users.
You'll have to calculate your bandwidth needs, bu t I suspect that for that number of clients, you'll probably end up with a three tier network. Clients on the bottom, on 100MBit switches, connected via fiber to concentrator switches with the user servers, connected to the backbone.
ISPs also tend to use good switches. These (such as any Cisco switch, for instance) have directives for mirroring all traffic from (a) given port(s) to another port. Designed as a debugging aid, it also allows packet sniffers to work in a switched environment.
We use it in conjunction with an http traffic analysis package.
Switch#wri t Current configuration: ! version 11.2
[...]
interface FastEthernet0/1 port monitor FastEthernet0/2 port monitor FastEthernet0/3 port monitor FastEthernet0/4 port monitor FastEthernet0/5 port monitor FastEthernet0/6 port monitor FastEthernet0/7 port monitor FastEthernet0/8
Sorry, I don't want to flame, but do you have any idea what software and support costs for even basic clustering like this?
Go to any other vendor who provides support and look for two tier failover (dispatcher/agent). Add software plus support plus installation. Add required hardware purchases. Divide by the cost of RH's service (this is a _service_, not a Linux distribution. This fact is important.).
Bet you can buy a more big macs than you can eat in one sitting with the result of that little math experiment.
And when some mid-level admin reuses the install media to build a spinner.com bandwidth-limiter and screws up an important service the company rides on, will the vendor tell you all your other licenses are suddenly under review because you violated the one you're calling about, um, we'll get back to? (it happens.)
Sure, any king hell Linux geek could build it. (a) what will they charge? (b) what will they charge to support it to the level that an established third party vendor will? (c) Would you rather bet your personal savings or company on that consultant or RH?
I'm not a RH fan, really. I use BSD variants and Solaris professionally. But give it a rest. This is a great deal, if RH can actually deliver.
Because you're trying to be an ASP? Not saying that's a smart goal, or that you'd be building on the right technology, but there are people who keenly want to.
Because you're a big company sold on Office? Desktop reliability bites. Couldn't a contolled, monitored installation of selected apps work better when centralized? Hey - isn't the network the computer? I'm not trying to troll here - one can reasonably state that (a) Sun has a valid model and (b) M$ productivity software is hard to beat.
I wouldn't bet the company on that, either. But neither vendor is explicitly wrong. They both have long histories they're both betting on.
Of course, neither of them is RH, whom we're supposed to be discussing, and that's my fault. But where do you think they're headed with this?
Wherever the market takes them. (And where are the market leaders?) -j
I wonder what this system actually is. I'd love to see a description, actually - I'd love to compare it to what I build for other people. From the description, it sounds like there is a modified installer that behaves sanely for/etc/inetd.conf, at least. Does anyone know what the baseline installer does?
If someone does start marketing smart pets, we'll probably see all sorts of disruptions in nature. Smarter mice would quickly outcompete the dumber, unmodified ones. How well would they do against unmodified cats?
Very few machines actually push the 32bit limits. I have ~20 boxes from Sun running Solaris 2.7 that are running in 32bit mode for one reason or another.
I understand the push to move infrastructure forward; the day will soon come where 256G RAM makes sense. For something, I can't guess what at the moment, but it will.
I see no speed benefit that the low (less than 1G RAM) end of things. What's the point right, from a business standpoint, right now?
J.D.S. won't. He might, though, make a bunch of sarin gas and not get it so completely wrong next time around. I'm not saying Japan is being rational, I'm saying Japan is scared. Kind of like other nation states. Maybe even one near you. Heard of encryption limitations?
Humour aside, This is a nation state saying a game platform is too advanced. They wouldn't do that if it weren't. Random individuals are gaining the power to harm nations. There you go. This gets interesting really soon. Does South Korea get bombed with a play station powered missile? The days of nation states are over. Different ways of controlling individuals with the ability to topple states (large populations) have to be found.
I think your tin foil cap is slipping. Better adjust it - FEMA is trying to take control of your mind so that they can use your genes to create a race of superhuman zombie soldiers.
They aren't even touching a signifigant segment of the market. In fact, by rebroadcasting content, they are probably EXTENDING the market by getting people who ordinarily wouldn't be watching television to view the webcast
Exactly. I have a vested interest in what certain broadcast media do; I started watching TV with them do to the simple fact that _I could_. Well, guess I won't anymore. Too bad for the networks.
Kind of Pro Wrestling for the whole world, with the proceeds feeding starving malaria victims in third world countries that can't afford to post on slashdot.
Also, it would be government self financing by marketplace means, which can't be a bad thing. I'd rather vote with my pocketbook for slamming a washing machine into Mars than pay ~40K a year for researching Kansas' cricket's anal functions (go look at the US American capital budget if you doubt me...).
Outsourcing national pride through space missions is actually a nice way to decommission a huge range of bullshit functions ("services") governments provide. Selling NASA to Fox/BSkyB/Whatever might not be as silly as it intially sounds.
If microbes were found on Mars, they could have originated on Earth and moved to Mars (or vice versa), but the chances are low indeed (although admittedly not zero) of Earth and Europan life having a common origin.
The finding of life evolving independently in Europe would be news indeed.
[...] is there perhaps a way to keep track of people, which, given enough determination and resolution, you can obtain the data about them, but OTOH is "anonymous enough" that that info will not be readily available?
Complicated question. There are some protocols for very specific purposes that reveal identity upon some protocol violations (various anonymous cash protocols, for instance, are provably anonymous until someone double spends).
I don't believe these could be generalizable to "reveal identity when they try a buffer overflow". A strong system of contractual agreements could work, but I'd be afraid they'd be immediately back doored by law enforcement and whatnot (which one could argue is "OK"... I don't think so, that's a different discussion). In essense, this would be an anonymizing proxy which logs your behaviour and provides a token to remote sites tying your actions to the ISP's logs, with the ISP agreeing to never disclose the logs to the remote site so long as you didn't do certain things.
This would never work without something akin to attourney style relationships with your ISP.
I'm not an anonymous person and I don't want to be. I also don't want other anonymous people because they can do things without being held accountable for them. People on the Internet need to grow up and realize that the Internet isn't an infant anymore. It's evolved into a real-world machine and in the real-world, people aren't anonymous. You don't always get what you want, nor even what you ask for.
Put analogies aside for a minute, and stop and think for a minute what it would mean if an unforgable 1-1 link to your True Name were attached to every packet you sent. Your every action would be analyzed (Don't buy the "just because the data is there doesn't mean it would be used" story - it has value, so someone will mine it) and used to build a model of how you behave on line. Increasingly, everything is becoming more online. In ten years, this will be a detailed map of practically everything you do, including physically where you were at what time (cell phones), with whom you converse, what you buy.
What is really needed is nearly the opposite - strong anonymous identites with selective, voluntary disclosure. There's no inherent need for a porno site to get your credit card number just to verify you're of age (although that's a very convenient excuse to do so, for a variety of reasons). A certificate that states you're 27 years old with nothing else identifiable could get you to thier gallery or whatever. If you wanted the "premium services", you'd use micropayments, or perhaps create a contract with a different certificate used to create a three way relationship between the site operator, your credit institution and you. The site never has any reason to know who you are.
For different sites (Like Ingram, as someone exampled) where there is a compelling reason to know who you are, you can choose to disclose who you are.
This might sound very science fiction like, but it is just how the real world tries (and often fails) to operate. You buy booze and present your driver's license. The cashier isn't writing down your name or DL number; just checking the DOB. If they did start writing it down, I believe you'd be understandably pretty creeped out. Why should web site operators get that data (in an automated fashion ripe for data mining)?
I'm truly afraid we're headed to a Brave New World simply because people don't realize what they're asking for.
0+1 isn't always the answer. Your analysis about losing half the disks is the best case - if everything dies in one cabinet, you're OK.What about a double disk failure in the same cabinet? It happens. RAID 5 mirrored, or R5+transctions, is sound sleeping.
In any case, _Back it up._ RAID doesn't mean you can forgo it. I know this sounds paranoiod, but RAID fails sometimes, even when you don't want it to. Having a backup _will_ save your job.
Slashdot Mirror
Most folks running networks employ "hot potato(e)" routing methods - the idea is to get it off your network at the earliest possible time.
Internap, instead, attempts to minimize transport time, which usually means reducing the number of hops as much as possible. In practice, this means modifying BGP to approximate solving the Travelling Salesman problem. You can't, but you can make a good guess. So, if your ISP uses them, traffic to a server on the other end of the country will probably not have to pass through the major hubs. And if you are communicating with another Internap customer, you buypass the public net entirely. They will sell you SLAs with pretty low maximum latencies.
Not affiliated with them, but I did almost use them for my company.
This is the topic of recurring flame wars on the dns-bind list, and I don't want to start it here. But do note that djbdns is not a drop in replacement.
Does someone pay you for this?
Hm, I think you may find that idle time on a home PC isn't worth enough to pay for a modem speed dial up.
On guns - you think Bush will do any differently? He'll cave as soon as some Million March makes him look bad on CNN. Call if Protecting Cops, Saving Children, or Punishing Drug Users, I have no doubt that he'll care any more about the second amendment than any other politician. Think about it.
-j
I'm voting this year because my partner asked me to. Her words are worth a lot more than a vanishingly small voice on which creep is better.
Remember that in 1992 we still had ITAR, which indicated the same prison sentence for selling an atomic bomb to Iraq or giving PGP to someone in Germany.
The CDA was doomed - just stupid grand standing. Why would any smart politician worry about what the courts were certain to toss out? Of course, it would be nice if politicians actually did what was right, but think reality.
You think Bush wouldn't jump on COPA?
Carnivore, whatever, red herring.
Taxes, whatever, you know they're coming. The only question is when and how.
DMCA, "wide bipartisan support". Everyone was bought off. What's the question again?
Truth be told, I can't stand the idea of Gore as president. I went to high school in TN when he was in Congress, and actually met him once for a photo-op. The thought if Tipper as First Lady makes me shudder. Even if everyone else forgets, I remember the PMRC.
Compare that with Bush, who is clearly an unabashed corporate whore. Enough said. Look at his behavior in Texas, how he abused is position to help his minority stake in sports. He's a not-very-bright son of a very bright politician, and that seems to be enough, now (though not enough to have kept him from failing in business several times without political help).
Yeah, I can't stand Gore. But he's really the only choice. Too bad he's almost destined to lose.
-j
If you do end up with workgroup application/mail/print/etc. servers, think about where they live in the heirarchy, and keep them close to the users.
You'll have to calculate your bandwidth needs, bu t I suspect that for that number of clients, you'll probably end up with a three tier network. Clients on the bottom, on 100MBit switches, connected via fiber to concentrator switches with the user servers, connected to the backbone.
-j, showing his biases
We use it in conjunction with an http traffic analysis package.
Switch#wri t
Current configuration:
!
version 11.2
[...]
interface FastEthernet0/1
port monitor FastEthernet0/2
port monitor FastEthernet0/3
port monitor FastEthernet0/4
port monitor FastEthernet0/5
port monitor FastEthernet0/6
port monitor FastEthernet0/7
port monitor FastEthernet0/8
Go to any other vendor who provides support and look for two tier failover (dispatcher/agent). Add software plus support plus installation. Add required hardware purchases. Divide by the cost of RH's service (this is a _service_, not a Linux distribution. This fact is important.).
Bet you can buy a more big macs than you can eat in one sitting with the result of that little math experiment.
And when some mid-level admin reuses the install media to build a spinner.com bandwidth-limiter and screws up an important service the company rides on, will the vendor tell you all your other licenses are suddenly under review because you violated the one you're calling about, um, we'll get back to? (it happens.)
Sure, any king hell Linux geek could build it. (a) what will they charge? (b) what will they charge to support it to the level that an established third party vendor will? (c) Would you rather bet your personal savings or company on that consultant or RH?
I'm not a RH fan, really. I use BSD variants and Solaris professionally. But give it a rest. This is a great deal, if RH can actually deliver.
-j
Because you're a big company sold on Office? Desktop reliability bites. Couldn't a contolled, monitored installation of selected apps work better when centralized? Hey - isn't the network the computer? I'm not trying to troll here - one can reasonably state that (a) Sun has a valid model and (b) M$ productivity software is hard to beat.
I wouldn't bet the company on that, either. But neither vendor is explicitly wrong. They both have long histories they're both betting on.
Of course, neither of them is RH, whom we're supposed to be discussing, and that's my fault. But where do you think they're headed with this?
Wherever the market takes them. (And where are the market leaders?) -j
I wonder what this system actually is. I'd love to see a description, actually - I'd love to compare it to what I build for other people. From the description, it sounds like there is a modified installer that behaves sanely for /etc/inetd.conf, at least. Does anyone know what the baseline installer does?
If someone does start marketing smart pets, we'll probably see all sorts of disruptions in nature. Smarter mice would quickly outcompete the dumber, unmodified ones. How well would they do against unmodified cats?
What's the big deal?
Very few machines actually push the 32bit limits. I have ~20 boxes from Sun running Solaris 2.7 that are running in 32bit mode for one reason or another.
I understand the push to move infrastructure forward; the day will soon come where 256G RAM makes sense. For something, I can't guess what at the moment, but it will.
I see no speed benefit that the low (less than 1G RAM) end of things. What's the point right, from a business standpoint, right now?
-j
I ain't no socialist. Is this a luvin' stick I'm pointing at you? Heh. Joke.
J.D.S. won't. He might, though, make a bunch of sarin gas and not get it so completely wrong next time around. I'm not saying Japan is being rational, I'm saying Japan is scared. Kind of like other nation states. Maybe even one near you. Heard of encryption limitations?
Humour aside, This is a nation state saying a game platform is too advanced. They wouldn't do that if it weren't. Random individuals are gaining the power to harm nations. There you go. This gets interesting really soon. Does South Korea get bombed with a play station powered missile? The days of nation states are over. Different ways of controlling individuals with the ability to topple states (large populations) have to be found.
> Wake up and smell the coffee.
I think your tin foil cap is slipping. Better adjust it - FEMA is trying to take control of your mind so that they can use your genes to create a race of superhuman zombie soldiers.
It seems unlikely, but it isn't.
Exactly. I have a vested interest in what certain broadcast media do; I started watching TV with them do to the simple fact that _I could_. Well, guess I won't anymore. Too bad for the networks.
-j
Kind of Pro Wrestling for the whole world, with the proceeds feeding starving malaria victims in third world countries that can't afford to post on slashdot.
Also, it would be government self financing by marketplace means, which can't be a bad thing. I'd rather vote with my pocketbook for slamming a washing machine into Mars than pay ~40K a year for researching Kansas' cricket's anal functions (go look at the US American capital budget if you doubt me...).
Outsourcing national pride through space missions is actually a nice way to decommission a huge range of bullshit functions ("services") governments provide. Selling NASA to Fox/BSkyB/Whatever might not be as silly as it intially sounds.
-j
The finding of life evolving independently in Europe would be news indeed.
Complicated question. There are some protocols for very specific purposes that reveal identity upon some protocol violations (various anonymous cash protocols, for instance, are provably anonymous until someone double spends).
I don't believe these could be generalizable to "reveal identity when they try a buffer overflow". A strong system of contractual agreements could work, but I'd be afraid they'd be immediately back doored by law enforcement and whatnot (which one could argue is "OK"... I don't think so, that's a different discussion). In essense, this would be an anonymizing proxy which logs your behaviour and provides a token to remote sites tying your actions to the ISP's logs, with the ISP agreeing to never disclose the logs to the remote site so long as you didn't do certain things.
This would never work without something akin to attourney style relationships with your ISP.
I'm quite familiar with TFM. I suppose I was silly enough to think "plain old text" would mean, well, plain old text.
Put analogies aside for a minute, and stop and think for a minute what it would mean if an unforgable 1-1 link to your True Name were attached to every packet you sent. Your every action would be analyzed (Don't buy the "just because the data is there doesn't mean it would be used" story - it has value, so someone will mine it) and used to build a model of how you behave on line. Increasingly, everything is becoming more online. In ten years, this will be a detailed map of practically everything you do, including physically where you were at what time (cell phones), with whom you converse, what you buy.
What is really needed is nearly the opposite - strong anonymous identites with selective, voluntary disclosure. There's no inherent need for a porno site to get your credit card number just to verify you're of age (although that's a very convenient excuse to do so, for a variety of reasons). A certificate that states you're 27 years old with nothing else identifiable could get you to thier gallery or whatever. If you wanted the "premium services", you'd use micropayments, or perhaps create a contract with a different certificate used to create a three way relationship between the site operator, your credit institution and you. The site never has any reason to know who you are.
For different sites (Like Ingram, as someone exampled) where there is a compelling reason to know who you are, you can choose to disclose who you are.
This might sound very science fiction like, but it is just how the real world tries (and often fails) to operate. You buy booze and present your driver's license. The cashier isn't writing down your name or DL number; just checking the DOB. If they did start writing it down, I believe you'd be understandably pretty creeped out. Why should web site operators get that data (in an automated fashion ripe for data mining)?
I'm truly afraid we're headed to a Brave New World simply because people don't realize what they're asking for.
Hardware raid just handles things. Nuff said.
0+1 isn't always the answer. Your analysis about losing half the disks is the best case - if everything dies in one cabinet, you're OK.What about a double disk failure in the same cabinet? It happens. RAID 5 mirrored, or R5+transctions, is sound sleeping.
In any case, _Back it up._ RAID doesn't mean you can forgo it. I know this sounds paranoiod, but RAID fails sometimes, even when you don't want it to. Having a backup _will_ save your job.