There is no infrastructure to support DNSSEC, so including it in djbdns is a useless exercise at this time. When NSI starts collecting keys and signing records, then DNSSEC will be supported in djbdns. Bernstein has said as much, though he'd rather see a system put in place that does not depend on one centralized key server, which, if compromised, blows the whole system. He says he's developing such a system.
Also, many people use tinydns with a mysql backend. Check out the djbdns mailing list to find out who and how.
One of the hallmarks of tinydns is how flexibly it can be managed. The data file format is very easy for common text manipulation tools to deal with.
...it would kill music as a profession except for a few heavily marketed superstars (Britney Spears, N'Sync, etc) and truly talented groups (Pink Floyd, U2, Metallica, etc) in certain genres who could still make money touring.
Sounds like the market we have today. So what's the big deal?
Re:Too weird. . .a twilight zone dream today.
on
The Challenger
·
· Score: 1
I got you beat, George. I dreamt of a shuttle crash the night of Jan 27, 1986. Not an explosion, but a crash - in my dream, the shuttle tilted on the launch pad and rocketed towards the viewing gallery, where my dream-self was watching with the rest of the crowd.
I was in the US Navy at the time, we were doing exercises off the coast south of San Diego. I remember waking up from the dream about an hour before I had to get up. I was pretty shaken, but it was just a dream and I fell back to sleep quickly to catch a few more winks before I had to go on duty.
Later that day, we heard about what happened, and the ship was steered closer to the coast to pick up the TV signals of the newscasts about the disaster. No one believed me about the dream then, and I don't expect anyone to believe me now. But it was a really strange feeling to watch the explosion on TV, which burned the dream of the previous night into memory along with the TV images.
There will soon be a resolution to this raging controversy. Recent discoveries with the large infrared telescopes that have come on line in the past decade are beginning to show that stellar and planetary objects have a continuous range of sizes and masses, from the largest O-type supergiant stars, to sun-like G-type stars, to brown dwarfs, hot Jupiters and rouge planets travelling freely through space. Where ever we're able to look, we're finding objects in space at all points on the size curve.
What looks to be shaping up is this:
Stellar objects are those that have condensed from galactic gas clouds. This includes ordinary stars, brown dwarfs, and possibly the new rogue planets that have been uncovered far from any parent star
Planetary objects are those that have condensed from the protoplanetary disk surrounding new stellar objects in the early stages of formation
Under these definitions, stars and brown dwarfs are stellar objects (or just "stars"). So are the rogue planets that have been recently found, if it turns out that they condensed directly from interstellar gas and dust. Hot, massive Jupiters, Pluto, other comets and asteroids are planetary objects, and so are their moons, if any (you can call these "planets").
The discovery of the rogue planets turns out to be a recent key to this puzzle. It appears they formed directly from a collapsing interstellar dust/gas cloud, rather than in a protoplanetary disk surrounding a newly formed star. It appears that objects of any size can be formed this way, not just stars and brown dwarfs. To the limits of our ability to see, we are finding smaller and smaller objects that are planet-sized, even Moon-sized, but formed in a completely different environment. We can only see them shortly after they form, while they are still radiating with the heat of collapse.
So size, mass and orbit may turn out to be not so useful in classifying objects as stars or planets. The process by which they formed looks like it will turn out to be the more meaningful way to classify them.
My rhetoric is not outdated. Our Exchange server goes down more frequently than . We have gone through three managers for our NT Team, and a half-dozen line level NT admins, and none of them have been able to run Exchange reliably. Maybe it takes a rocket scientist to run it well - that's what every NT admin that has come through here tells me. Maybe we don't pay our NT admins enough to attract the good talent. I don't know. All I know is that Exchange is unreliable here.
The current batch of clients that support HTML email (include Lookout) do NOT have any such feature, and this would be highly recommended for any further email clients.
But Outlook does allow you to specify whether text or HTML is the default on a per-recipient basis. But the recipient must be in your address book to do this.
Outlook is not the point. Exchange is the point. Samba can replace NT for file and printer sharing. What is there to replace Exchange for email, calendaring, shared address books, and all the rest? Is anybody working on a open source version of MS RPC and Exchange services, compatibile with Outlook?
My company uses Exchange and we all hate it. But everybody loves Outlook. Hell, I like Outlook, but use it in Internet mode, not Exchange native mode, because I can't use IMAP when Outlook is set to use Exchange, though I can set up additional POP3 accounts.
But the server side, Exchange, is a giant piece of bloatware that couldn't stay up for a week if Bill Gate's life depended on it.
You want to hurt Microsoft bad? Come up with a free-as-in-speech, open source, server-side replacement for Exchange, supporting all the features the client, Outlook, wants to use. I haven't got the programming skills to attack this, but I do believe that the route to the desktop is through the server, at least for open source systems.
I think there's a lot to be said for the embrace and extend strategy, and open source should embrace and extend the server side of Microsoft protocols, to get to the client side. As far as I know, reverse engineering to achieve compatibility is still legal in some parts of the world... Is anybody working on this already, and I just never heard about it?
RedHat claims that the wu-ftp bug (RHSA-2000-039-02) only effects RH5.2 and RH6.2
That's because the advisory was issued before RH7 was released. By all accounts, the buggy wu-ftpd still shipped with RH7. It would be rather silly to issue security advisories for releases in the future, wouldn't it?
Why bother with any wu-derivative when there are perfectly good non-wu ftp servers like diku-ftpd from the *BSD neck of the woods. W. Venema even has a tcp-wrapper-ized version that disallows third-party port commands. You can get in his logdaemon package. Works great, is easy to run in a chroot tree, and does not allow anonymous users to read anonymously uploaded files. I don't know how many times 133t kiddies have tried to create hidden directories under my pub tree, only to find that the server sets perms to ---x-rx-r, and they can't cd into it. Snicker.
...they average a power consumption of around 3 watts! This is a relative term of course. I forget if it's per hour...
A watt is a unit measuring power consumption rate and already includes the time element. To speak of watts per hour is as nonsensical as speaking of km/h per second.
Spamcop is useless to the other side. My company sends mass mail to an opt-in list, but every time we run the list, several subscribers forgot they signed up, and send stuff to spamcop, which in turn forwards the complaint to our abuse address, our upsteam's abuse address, our sidestream's abuse address, our neighbor's abuse address, the abuse address for any vendors we buy equipment from, and our CEO's dog's abuse address (a little exaggeration there, but you get the idea:).
Problem is, Spamcop REDACTS the complainant's email address, so we are totally in the dark about who wants to be removed from our mailing list! Fat lot of good that does anybody!
Spamcop messages are now blocked at our incoming relay. They are useless for getting people off of mailing lists who don't want to be there.
There is no constitutional right to privacy in the US. None. Zero. Zip. Nada. There ought to be, but it just isn't there. Sorry Katz. Your fantasy USA may have privacy enumerated in the Bill of Rights, but the real one the rest of us have to live in does not.
I don't know what to make of this, either, but there are plenty of TLDs that have been in operation well before Jan 1, 2000, that these e2p folks probably aren't even aware of.
How are you people getting to the site? The auth NS happen to be lame for salon.com at the moment. I guess everyone but me reads salon.com, and has the A record cached already.
Be prepared for a movie that like Crouching Tiger is nothing like traditional Hollywood fare.
I love it how some of the highest praise that can be slathered on a new movie is how it isn't like anything else Hollywood produces. Kind of makes movie reviewers look like stock analysts in the back pockets of the corporations they cover. When they say Buy it means they want to Sell.
Fortunately, I still believe that most corporations value $$ over everything else, and it will eventually dawn on them that even attempting such protections is against their bottom line.
Not if your company is called AOL-Time Warner-Western Digital-Quantum.
I miss all the platform/side-scrollers. Flashback was devilishly difficult - never actually finished it, but I spent months trying.
Prince of Persia was not so hard, and POP2 - I still play that one! Works fine in a DOS window under '9x. 'Course I can go through it in my sleep now, but it's still a lot of fun.
Another World was great except for being too short, and the joystick didn't work. Had to play with the keyboard. Ugh. But it was still a lot of fun.
Thing is, I am hard-pressed to come up with any other games that these guys influenced. The platform side-scroller pretty much died after POP2.
This really should be on the front page, instead of just YRO. This is a direct challenge to the authority of ICANN to do anything with the domain name system, and could prove to be a bellwether case for the future of the domain name space.
Vixie has (so I hear) declared that BIND will never support multiple roots, FWIW. However, djbdns easily handles different roots for different TLDs.
I don't want to trust them to handle their TLD's and ICANN's TLD's.
No one but ICANN handles delegations for the legacy TLDs. The dot-com zone is still resolved through the ICANN roots. The delegation to the NS for dot-com is given by whichever roots you're using. Once your cache has the glue for dot-com cached, it never has to consult the roots (any roots) again for resolution of a dot-com domain - until the glue expires, of course. A typical client cache with good uptime hits the roots only a few times a week to refresh the glue for the TLDs its clients are making queries for. With glue in cache, recursion all the way to the roots is unnecessary; to resolve a dot-com domain, the cache goes directly to the dot-com servers for which it already has records.
You can also slave an augmented root file to your own client nameserver, instead of installing a root.cache file. This permits you to see first hand what the root zone is delegating to, so you can easily verify its correctness yourself. Your cache won't ever hit the roots, since the root zone loads all the glue it needs.
Slashdot Mirror
Also, many people use tinydns with a mysql backend. Check out the djbdns mailing list to find out who and how.
One of the hallmarks of tinydns is how flexibly it can be managed. The data file format is very easy for common text manipulation tools to deal with.
Sounds like the market we have today. So what's the big deal?
I was in the US Navy at the time, we were doing exercises off the coast south of San Diego. I remember waking up from the dream about an hour before I had to get up. I was pretty shaken, but it was just a dream and I fell back to sleep quickly to catch a few more winks before I had to go on duty.
Later that day, we heard about what happened, and the ship was steered closer to the coast to pick up the TV signals of the newscasts about the disaster. No one believed me about the dream then, and I don't expect anyone to believe me now. But it was a really strange feeling to watch the explosion on TV, which burned the dream of the previous night into memory along with the TV images.
What looks to be shaping up is this:
- Stellar objects are those that have condensed from galactic gas clouds. This includes ordinary stars, brown dwarfs, and possibly the new rogue planets that have been uncovered far from any parent star
- Planetary objects are those that have condensed from the protoplanetary disk surrounding new stellar objects in the early stages of formation
Under these definitions, stars and brown dwarfs are stellar objects (or just "stars"). So are the rogue planets that have been recently found, if it turns out that they condensed directly from interstellar gas and dust. Hot, massive Jupiters, Pluto, other comets and asteroids are planetary objects, and so are their moons, if any (you can call these "planets").The discovery of the rogue planets turns out to be a recent key to this puzzle. It appears they formed directly from a collapsing interstellar dust/gas cloud, rather than in a protoplanetary disk surrounding a newly formed star. It appears that objects of any size can be formed this way, not just stars and brown dwarfs. To the limits of our ability to see, we are finding smaller and smaller objects that are planet-sized, even Moon-sized, but formed in a completely different environment. We can only see them shortly after they form, while they are still radiating with the heat of collapse.
So size, mass and orbit may turn out to be not so useful in classifying objects as stars or planets. The process by which they formed looks like it will turn out to be the more meaningful way to classify them.
My rhetoric is not outdated. Our Exchange server goes down more frequently than . We have gone through three managers for our NT Team, and a half-dozen line level NT admins, and none of them have been able to run Exchange reliably. Maybe it takes a rocket scientist to run it well - that's what every NT admin that has come through here tells me. Maybe we don't pay our NT admins enough to attract the good talent. I don't know. All I know is that Exchange is unreliable here.
No, that's not even close.
My company uses Exchange and we all hate it. But everybody loves Outlook. Hell, I like Outlook, but use it in Internet mode, not Exchange native mode, because I can't use IMAP when Outlook is set to use Exchange, though I can set up additional POP3 accounts.
But the server side, Exchange, is a giant piece of bloatware that couldn't stay up for a week if Bill Gate's life depended on it.
You want to hurt Microsoft bad? Come up with a free-as-in-speech, open source, server-side replacement for Exchange, supporting all the features the client, Outlook, wants to use. I haven't got the programming skills to attack this, but I do believe that the route to the desktop is through the server, at least for open source systems.
I think there's a lot to be said for the embrace and extend strategy, and open source should embrace and extend the server side of Microsoft protocols, to get to the client side. As far as I know, reverse engineering to achieve compatibility is still legal in some parts of the world... Is anybody working on this already, and I just never heard about it?
That's because the advisory was issued before RH7 was released. By all accounts, the buggy wu-ftpd still shipped with RH7. It would be rather silly to issue security advisories for releases in the future, wouldn't it?
Why bother with any wu-derivative when there are perfectly good non-wu ftp servers like diku-ftpd from the *BSD neck of the woods. W. Venema even has a tcp-wrapper-ized version that disallows third-party port commands. You can get in his logdaemon package. Works great, is easy to run in a chroot tree, and does not allow anonymous users to read anonymously uploaded files. I don't know how many times 133t kiddies have tried to create hidden directories under my pub tree, only to find that the server sets perms to ---x-rx-r, and they can't cd into it. Snicker.
You said:
A watt is a unit measuring power consumption rate and already includes the time element. To speak of watts per hour is as nonsensical as speaking of km/h per second.Problem is, Spamcop REDACTS the complainant's email address, so we are totally in the dark about who wants to be removed from our mailing list! Fat lot of good that does anybody!
Spamcop messages are now blocked at our incoming relay. They are useless for getting people off of mailing lists who don't want to be there.
There is no constitutional right to privacy in the US. None. Zero. Zip. Nada. There ought to be, but it just isn't there. Sorry Katz. Your fantasy USA may have privacy enumerated in the Bill of Rights, but the real one the rest of us have to live in does not.
See the Top Level Domain Finder and have fun searching...
Nonsense. Technology does not erode privacy all by itself. People have to misuse it for this to happen.
To paraphrase something ESR might say in a slightly different context: Technology does not kill people's privacy, people kill people's privacy.
- DESQview/X - DOS to the Power of X
- DESQview/X Solves Computing Problems
That's all I can remember off the top of my head. Have to go check the bottom of my dresser drawers...How are you people getting to the site? The auth NS happen to be lame for salon.com at the moment. I guess everyone but me reads salon.com, and has the A record cached already.
Actually, they did have accents from all over, because they were, in fact, from all over. Westerns have it all wrong. :)
I love it how some of the highest praise that can be slathered on a new movie is how it isn't like anything else Hollywood produces. Kind of makes movie reviewers look like stock analysts in the back pockets of the corporations they cover. When they say Buy it means they want to Sell.
Not if your company is called AOL-Time Warner-Western Digital-Quantum.
Prince of Persia was not so hard, and POP2 - I still play that one! Works fine in a DOS window under '9x. 'Course I can go through it in my sleep now, but it's still a lot of fun.
Another World was great except for being too short, and the joystick didn't work. Had to play with the keyboard. Ugh. But it was still a lot of fun.
Thing is, I am hard-pressed to come up with any other games that these guys influenced. The platform side-scroller pretty much died after POP2.
This really should be on the front page, instead of just YRO. This is a direct challenge to the authority of ICANN to do anything with the domain name system, and could prove to be a bellwether case for the future of the domain name space.
I don't want to trust them to handle their TLD's and ICANN's TLD's.
No one but ICANN handles delegations for the legacy TLDs. The dot-com zone is still resolved through the ICANN roots. The delegation to the NS for dot-com is given by whichever roots you're using. Once your cache has the glue for dot-com cached, it never has to consult the roots (any roots) again for resolution of a dot-com domain - until the glue expires, of course. A typical client cache with good uptime hits the roots only a few times a week to refresh the glue for the TLDs its clients are making queries for. With glue in cache, recursion all the way to the roots is unnecessary; to resolve a dot-com domain, the cache goes directly to the dot-com servers for which it already has records.
You can also slave an augmented root file to your own client nameserver, instead of installing a root.cache file. This permits you to see first hand what the root zone is delegating to, so you can easily verify its correctness yourself. Your cache won't ever hit the roots, since the root zone loads all the glue it needs.
I am anti-union.