Haven't experienced this. I directly manage about 150 linux servers (and more VMs)
I'd say we're up to about 40% RHEL7 (xfs + systemd), the rest RHEL6.
I have noticed that recovery with xfs is a fucking nightmare, but I haven't noticed it being more frequent than with ext4. Are you sure you don't have some poorly thought out caching enabled, like write-back?
I'm responsible a lot of production systems (somewhere around a thousand VMs, it varies), so of course I worry about CPU use, memory use, I/O, etc. I have never, ever, in decades of sysadmin'ing, worried about how much of the above ifconfig or netstat take. (It's not like what's in/proc are actual files, after all;/proc a kernel interface.)
Yet as someone responsible for that much, you didn't switch to iproute2 for network stack management a decade ago?
I had to. If you're still administrating linux with ifconfig, route, and netstat, you're just a kid. In your case, a kid with a significant amount of responsibility, but you're still building with legos. Here in the big kid world, we have policy routing, vrf, differently scoped addresses and a myriad of other complicated network requirements.
ifconfig as a command is less functional than the iproute2 equivalents. It is however a lot simpler to use if you need a very limited subset of the information that can exist.
That's one of many examples of why you need iproute2 for advanced networking. In general, people who don't know why aren't very sophisticated network engineers/administrators.
If the old tools were adequate for the current networking stack in Linux, there would also be no problem.
They're not, as pointed out in the article (and I can point out even more ways).
Eh. The author of the article is correct, though.
ifconfig, route, and netstat are insufficient for an actual view of reality within the networking stack.
This isn't a good argument for *getting rid of* those tools, by any means (and I still install them all on any RHEL7 machine I'm deploying) but iproute2 is necessary for any kind of advanced networking.
The problem with your logic is those 99% of people who don't have the brains or motivation to do real damage aren't slowed down by this stuff, either. They're slowed down long before that, when their script kiddie toolkit failed to own some apache server in your network.
No.
Things like this don't slow down "hackers" with even a modicum of network knowledge inside of a functioning network.
What they do slow down is your ability to troubleshoot network problems.
Breaking into a network is a slow process. Slow and precise. Trying to fix problems is a fast reactionary process. Who do you really think you're hurting?
Yes another example of how ignorant opinions can become common sense.
You have no fucking idea what you're talking about. I run a multi-regional network with over 130 peers. Nobody "disables ICMP". IP breaks without it.
Some folks, generally the dimmer of us, will disable echo responses or TTL expiration notices thinking it is somehow secure (and they are very fucking wrong) but nobody blocks all ICMP, except for very very dim witted humans, and only on endpoint nodes.
I didn't bother speculating on the why given the obviously impossibility of the how, but you're right. It's a little weird to point your proposed Dr. Evil space weapon at an embassy... in Cuba. Particularly with how trivial it is for any advanced country to turn a satellite into debris at will.
Sounds like we don't actually disagree, I was just adding nuance.
I maintain the Germans were already done, even if the Soviets had never gone west of Poland. The fight in the USSR/Poland combined with overwhelming allied air superiority and carpet bombing in Germany proper completely depleted their war machine's production capacity.
Definitely not an impossibility. Just would have taken longer.
The western allies had air superiority, and the number of German cities that still had functioning war production was dropping every day. In the end, it was an economic fight that they could not win. I'm not banging the 'Murica drum here- the fact is simply that we had more money and people and production. We weren't going to lose the war of attrition, they were.
We could inflict losses on them faster than they could replace them, they could not do the same. Not even close.
The eastern front sped things up, but it didn't save us from a stalemate.
Ultimately, though, I said the eastern front is what helped- not the push into Germany. By the time the Soviets pushed into Germany, the Germans were well and fully fucked and their military capacity was collapsing at an irreversible rate.
The most efficient momentum transfer is to either loop around the planet parabolically head on, or from behind. Head on if you want the planet's momentum, from behind if you want to give it some of yours.
It isn't helpful to think of the asteroid's acceleration. Instead, there is math to determine what the resulting momentum changes will be. Where you're getting caught up is trying to figure out what the asteroid's acceleration will be in the frame of reference in the planet, which is not useful. It will end up being a no-op. All that matters is the asteroid's momentum when it interfaces with Earth's reference frame, Earth's momentum, and the angle of attack.
For example, in a sling shot, the most ideal interface is entering the planet's gravity at as close to parallel as you can with its angle of motion around the sun.
The planet's local gravity does not matter, only the angles and momentums. There is no acceleration limit in the Sun's frame of reference. If you slingshot around a planet with a perfectly parallel angle of attack, you will end up with that planet's solar orbital velocity added to your own, which is obviously quite impossible to do with only 1G of acceleration.
:|
I don't have the words to really articulate the dumbfounded look on my face right now.
Yes, we know for sure it couldn't be a satellite-based attack.
There is no satellite emitter that is going to cause sonic waves to travel further than the collimated radiation that creates them via its interaction with the atmosphere (if such a thing is even possible).
Basically, you have to pump out a *lot* of laser light or microwave energy to affect the atmosphere in any appreciable way. I posit that enough to cause sonic waves to hit the ground from space is enough to vaporize whatever the fuck is on the other end of that radiation emission.
Without Stalin's push into Germany the war would probably have raged on for some time
Not sure I agree with you, there.
While I do agree that it would have gone on for some time without an eastern front, by the time the Soviets pushed into Germany, the writing was on the wall for the Germans, and it was simply a race between which front would slam into Berlin first.
That could work, but there's a pretty hard limit to how fast you could slingshot around the Earth: an explosively hard maximum of less than 1g acceleration at the tightest point of its turn.
That was the point of my discussion, in case you missed that. I'm unsure how there is an "explosively hard maximum acceleration of less than 1g at the tightest point of its turn", and in this frame, it isn't relevant who is accelerating who.
The tightness of its turn is irrelevant to anything. It's a consequence of the momentum it transfers to the earth. There's nothing explosive about it. Curving around a gravity well isn't riding the edge of a race car track or something, it's not going to fly apart.
Yes, but a slingshot changes the momentum of the asteroid uniformly (again, minus tidal effects)
It's the same as free fall.
When you're in orbit, you don't feel the pull toward the earth, but it is there.
If you stopped moving, you wouldn't feel the pull of the earth as you quickly accelerated toward it... until you hit the atmosphere, of course.
With a slingshot, the planet is giving some of its orbital momentum to the asteroid's inertial frame... The asteroid should feel no stress from the maneuver, I'm pretty sure.
It became so when the President, the executive, a branch of our government used it as such.
That's one of the weird things about being President. A president cannot leak classified information- if he speaks of it publicly, he de facto declassifies it.
If he uses a privately owned public commenting service to communicate government policy, it then meets the public forum analysis definition of a designated public forum.
Your ignorance of the law doesn't make your opinion a fact. You don't get to put your fingers in your ears and decry shit you don't like because "reasons".
If a private corporation violates rights, the government is precluded from permitting that;
That's not quite the case, though you're correct in a way-
The courts interpret this as two conflicting rights, the private corporation's right to kick you the fuck off of their land because they don't like you, and your right to free speech.
Generally speaking, the private entities right to kick you off their land supersedes your right to speak your mind. When the government is the controller, then they are barred from acting, due to the specific restriction in the Constitution.
So, what i'm hearing is that you believe _EVERYONE_ is entitled to a seat and the ability to shout back? that access control to any forum the president uses is illegal.
How the hell did you get that from me?
It's illegal for the *government* to silence political speech, period, full stop.
he cannot under any circumstances deny someone their "right" to yell at him? constitutionally?
He cannot, under any circumstances, censor their public speech.
that means filtering news agencies from the white house news room is unconstitutional?
Nope. That's some twisted logic to arrive at that conclusion. Are news agencies attempting to engage in political speech in a public forum in the press briefing room?
blocking people from attending political rallies who are there to protest is unconstitutional?
Potentially. There we get into the gray area of "Free Speech Zones"
blocking people from white house tours, access control for meet and greets and photo ops.
Why the fuck do you keep diverting off topic to construct straw men? I'm beginning to think it's fucking pathological.
What you guys are saying is that no matter who wants to scream at him, they must be given a seat at the table.
Nope. What we, (and the Judge, and the first amendment of the constitution as interpreted by the Supreme Court in more than one instance) are saying is that he cannot censor someone who is speaking negatively about him in public.
And that's just not right. Add to that, the fact that twitter is an international forum?
This is not relevant. The US constitution is absolutely empowered to restrict how our government acts extranationally, as well.
No, this just isn't right.
Yes... yes it fucking is.
He's a branch of the goddamn government. That protection is there for *your* sake. It restricts him, not you.
current single mode fibre optic tops out at 10 Gbps
That's a big negative. Common single-lane PHY rates of 10,25,50 and uncommonly- 100 (I think just Juniper, and a draft spec).
Multi-lane (WDM) solutions are more common though, they're cheaper. Multi-lane 100Gbps is commodity now.
telling him that on this specific forum he _Must_ read your statements is idiocy at it's finest.
That is truly rich coming from you.
He is in no way required to read input from someone in a public form. He is constitutionally barred (quite fucking obviously, I might add) from preventing someone from speaking publicly, which a public Twitter account easily passes Public Forum Analysis as.
As a nicety, the Judge went out of time to mention to the fucktard that he was still allowed to mute those nasty plebian dissenters. He just can't stop them from speaking, because... Fuck it. I feel stupider for having to have explained this to you.
Slashdot Mirror
Haven't experienced this. I directly manage about 150 linux servers (and more VMs)
I'd say we're up to about 40% RHEL7 (xfs + systemd), the rest RHEL6.
I have noticed that recovery with xfs is a fucking nightmare, but I haven't noticed it being more frequent than with ext4. Are you sure you don't have some poorly thought out caching enabled, like write-back?
I'm responsible a lot of production systems (somewhere around a thousand VMs, it varies), so of course I worry about CPU use, memory use, I/O, etc. I have never, ever, in decades of sysadmin'ing, worried about how much of the above ifconfig or netstat take. (It's not like what's in /proc are actual files, after all; /proc a kernel interface.)
Yet as someone responsible for that much, you didn't switch to iproute2 for network stack management a decade ago?
I had to. If you're still administrating linux with ifconfig, route, and netstat, you're just a kid. In your case, a kid with a significant amount of responsibility, but you're still building with legos. Here in the big kid world, we have policy routing, vrf, differently scoped addresses and a myriad of other complicated network requirements.
ifconfig as a command is less functional than the iproute2 equivalents. It is however a lot simpler to use if you need a very limited subset of the information that can exist.
Correction, (your (Lisp())
phone)
That's one of many examples of why you need iproute2 for advanced networking. In general, people who don't know why aren't very sophisticated network engineers/administrators.
If the old tools were adequate for the current networking stack in Linux, there would also be no problem.
They're not, as pointed out in the article (and I can point out even more ways).
Eh. The author of the article is correct, though.
ifconfig, route, and netstat are insufficient for an actual view of reality within the networking stack.
This isn't a good argument for *getting rid of* those tools, by any means (and I still install them all on any RHEL7 machine I'm deploying) but iproute2 is necessary for any kind of advanced networking.
The problem with your logic is those 99% of people who don't have the brains or motivation to do real damage aren't slowed down by this stuff, either. They're slowed down long before that, when their script kiddie toolkit failed to own some apache server in your network.
No.
Things like this don't slow down "hackers" with even a modicum of network knowledge inside of a functioning network.
What they do slow down is your ability to troubleshoot network problems.
Breaking into a network is a slow process. Slow and precise. Trying to fix problems is a fast reactionary process. Who do you really think you're hurting?
Yes another example of how ignorant opinions can become common sense.
It does.
You have no fucking idea what you're talking about. I run a multi-regional network with over 130 peers. Nobody "disables ICMP". IP breaks without it.
Some folks, generally the dimmer of us, will disable echo responses or TTL expiration notices thinking it is somehow secure (and they are very fucking wrong) but nobody blocks all ICMP, except for very very dim witted humans, and only on endpoint nodes.
I didn't bother speculating on the why given the obviously impossibility of the how, but you're right. It's a little weird to point your proposed Dr. Evil space weapon at an embassy... in Cuba. Particularly with how trivial it is for any advanced country to turn a satellite into debris at will.
And of course the world's biggest aircraft carrier stationed right off of Europe- Britain
Sounds like we don't actually disagree, I was just adding nuance.
I maintain the Germans were already done, even if the Soviets had never gone west of Poland. The fight in the USSR/Poland combined with overwhelming allied air superiority and carpet bombing in Germany proper completely depleted their war machine's production capacity.
Definitely not an impossibility. Just would have taken longer.
The western allies had air superiority, and the number of German cities that still had functioning war production was dropping every day. In the end, it was an economic fight that they could not win. I'm not banging the 'Murica drum here- the fact is simply that we had more money and people and production. We weren't going to lose the war of attrition, they were.
We could inflict losses on them faster than they could replace them, they could not do the same. Not even close.
The eastern front sped things up, but it didn't save us from a stalemate.
Ultimately, though, I said the eastern front is what helped- not the push into Germany. By the time the Soviets pushed into Germany, the Germans were well and fully fucked and their military capacity was collapsing at an irreversible rate.
The most efficient momentum transfer is to either loop around the planet parabolically head on, or from behind. Head on if you want the planet's momentum, from behind if you want to give it some of yours.
It isn't helpful to think of the asteroid's acceleration. Instead, there is math to determine what the resulting momentum changes will be. Where you're getting caught up is trying to figure out what the asteroid's acceleration will be in the frame of reference in the planet, which is not useful. It will end up being a no-op. All that matters is the asteroid's momentum when it interfaces with Earth's reference frame, Earth's momentum, and the angle of attack.
For example, in a sling shot, the most ideal interface is entering the planet's gravity at as close to parallel as you can with its angle of motion around the sun.
The planet's local gravity does not matter, only the angles and momentums. There is no acceleration limit in the Sun's frame of reference. If you slingshot around a planet with a perfectly parallel angle of attack, you will end up with that planet's solar orbital velocity added to your own, which is obviously quite impossible to do with only 1G of acceleration.
:|
I don't have the words to really articulate the dumbfounded look on my face right now.
Yes, we know for sure it couldn't be a satellite-based attack.
There is no satellite emitter that is going to cause sonic waves to travel further than the collimated radiation that creates them via its interaction with the atmosphere (if such a thing is even possible).
Basically, you have to pump out a *lot* of laser light or microwave energy to affect the atmosphere in any appreciable way. I posit that enough to cause sonic waves to hit the ground from space is enough to vaporize whatever the fuck is on the other end of that radiation emission.
Without Stalin's push into Germany the war would probably have raged on for some time
Not sure I agree with you, there.
While I do agree that it would have gone on for some time without an eastern front, by the time the Soviets pushed into Germany, the writing was on the wall for the Germans, and it was simply a race between which front would slam into Berlin first.
That could work, but there's a pretty hard limit to how fast you could slingshot around the Earth: an explosively hard maximum of less than 1g acceleration at the tightest point of its turn.
That was the point of my discussion, in case you missed that. I'm unsure how there is an "explosively hard maximum acceleration of less than 1g at the tightest point of its turn", and in this frame, it isn't relevant who is accelerating who.
The tightness of its turn is irrelevant to anything. It's a consequence of the momentum it transfers to the earth. There's nothing explosive about it. Curving around a gravity well isn't riding the edge of a race car track or something, it's not going to fly apart.
Or was what you were saying a clever way of saying, "the maximum momentum transfer it can achieve is slamming into the planet?"
Yes, but a slingshot changes the momentum of the asteroid uniformly (again, minus tidal effects)
It's the same as free fall.
When you're in orbit, you don't feel the pull toward the earth, but it is there.
If you stopped moving, you wouldn't feel the pull of the earth as you quickly accelerated toward it... until you hit the atmosphere, of course.
With a slingshot, the planet is giving some of its orbital momentum to the asteroid's inertial frame... The asteroid should feel no stress from the maneuver, I'm pretty sure.
It became so when the President, the executive, a branch of our government used it as such.
That's one of the weird things about being President. A president cannot leak classified information- if he speaks of it publicly, he de facto declassifies it.
If he uses a privately owned public commenting service to communicate government policy, it then meets the public forum analysis definition of a designated public forum.
Your ignorance of the law doesn't make your opinion a fact. You don't get to put your fingers in your ears and decry shit you don't like because "reasons".
If a private corporation violates rights, the government is precluded from permitting that;
That's not quite the case, though you're correct in a way-
The courts interpret this as two conflicting rights, the private corporation's right to kick you the fuck off of their land because they don't like you, and your right to free speech.
Generally speaking, the private entities right to kick you off their land supersedes your right to speak your mind. When the government is the controller, then they are barred from acting, due to the specific restriction in the Constitution.
So, what i'm hearing is that you believe _EVERYONE_ is entitled to a seat and the ability to shout back? that access control to any forum the president uses is illegal.
How the hell did you get that from me?
It's illegal for the *government* to silence political speech, period, full stop.
he cannot under any circumstances deny someone their "right" to yell at him? constitutionally?
He cannot, under any circumstances, censor their public speech.
that means filtering news agencies from the white house news room is unconstitutional?
Nope. That's some twisted logic to arrive at that conclusion. Are news agencies attempting to engage in political speech in a public forum in the press briefing room?
blocking people from attending political rallies who are there to protest is unconstitutional?
Potentially. There we get into the gray area of "Free Speech Zones"
blocking people from white house tours, access control for meet and greets and photo ops.
Why the fuck do you keep diverting off topic to construct straw men? I'm beginning to think it's fucking pathological.
What you guys are saying is that no matter who wants to scream at him, they must be given a seat at the table.
Nope. What we, (and the Judge, and the first amendment of the constitution as interpreted by the Supreme Court in more than one instance) are saying is that he cannot censor someone who is speaking negatively about him in public.
And that's just not right. Add to that, the fact that twitter is an international forum?
This is not relevant. The US constitution is absolutely empowered to restrict how our government acts extranationally, as well.
No, this just isn't right.
Yes... yes it fucking is.
He's a branch of the goddamn government. That protection is there for *your* sake. It restricts him, not you.
current single mode fibre optic tops out at 10 Gbps
That's a big negative. Common single-lane PHY rates of 10,25,50 and uncommonly- 100 (I think just Juniper, and a draft spec).
Multi-lane (WDM) solutions are more common though, they're cheaper. Multi-lane 100Gbps is commodity now.
telling him that on this specific forum he _Must_ read your statements is idiocy at it's finest.
That is truly rich coming from you.
He is in no way required to read input from someone in a public form. He is constitutionally barred (quite fucking obviously, I might add) from preventing someone from speaking publicly, which a public Twitter account easily passes Public Forum Analysis as.
As a nicety, the Judge went out of time to mention to the fucktard that he was still allowed to mute those nasty plebian dissenters. He just can't stop them from speaking, because... Fuck it. I feel stupider for having to have explained this to you.