Shared collision domain? For clients connected to a single WAP style infrastructure, sure...for corporate campuses with APs spaced every 50-100 feet this is not a problem because you're not trying to send data to 25+ wireless clients simultaneously. Any wireless LAN that requires decent data throughput should never have more than 10 clients connected to a single AP. Most people think it is acceptable to buy a wireless router, drop it in their office, and suddenly they have cheap wireless for all 40 of their employees. While this may work when not everyone is using it simultaneously, this is exactly the mentality that the article suggests we move away from.
The idea is that the wireless environment needs to match the wired one in cost and budgeting expenditure at the very least these days to accommodate a host of new tech that is either here or right on the horizon. It is idiotic to say 'if you are a high bandwidth user you need to sit the hell down and stop moving' - this is also the exact same type of mentality. With an appropriate AP distribution and a centralized wireless controller solution any large firm can achieve reliable daily use at current speeds and with future standards beyond N already being explored for gigabit+ wireless speeds, there is no reason to believe that the shared collision domain and high(er) latency issues will not also be addressed. Any organization clinging to the old school thought that wireless and wired users are different classes of users with respect demand and availability requirements is already behind. We in the IT world tend to think of new tech as toys sometimes because we see a kickass device that we would use but everyone else might not necessarily have an interest in. We're not the only ones who like new tech toys anymore, however, and most of them, especially those with wireless capabilities, have already found their way to the workplace in surprisingly (at least to me initially) large numbers.
Whether this is good or bad for company security policies, that can be left to argument...what's certain is that when the CEO and CFO latch on to any of this tech, you're damn sure going to have excellent wireless access around their office. Once they realize the potential of the devices they want to use and once people have argued them into the workplace as productivity tools (iPads and other tablets are a PERFECT example), wireless - actually GOOD wireless - will be a requirement and early adopters of this newer mentaility are going to be ahead of the game.
Information has no wants or desires. Even the most open and honest person doesn't want everything they say and do broadcast to people who they feel are not privy to that information. If I'm meeting up with friends tonight to get shitfaced drunk I would rather that my grandmother not receive that message randomly. It doesn't honestly bother me that my grandmother knows that I curse or that she knows that I get shitfaced drunk on occasion, but I would rather not have that conversation and I would rather not shock her with how I choose to operate in my own PRIVATE life.
Your idiotic response comes from one of two places: You honestly believe that you would be comfortable with every personal thought or communication you have potentially being able to be exposed to any person you know at random or you are just being a dick because you're arguing an obviously idiotic line of reasoning. The former is absolutely silly to anyone with an ounce of reason in their head...I absolutely wish I could bug your house and follow you everywhere you go and send snippets of your conversations at random to the people you work with to see how correct you feel your former statement was...the latter seems the most likely reason, though, so why not stop masturbaitrolling and do something useful for a change?
The formal term is bit/s rather than bps or b/s. The accepted informal abbreviations are bps and b/s. If anyone is in an IT related field and knows the difference between a 'bit' and a 'Byte', I guarantee you that they also know what the word 'per' means.
FYI...just because the unit of measure is capitalized does not mean the data that the article contains is invalid. That's like saying 'Holy shit...I can't believe this article misspelled they're instead of their. I can't read this shit!' Granted, spelling and syntax issues are worth noting, but he clearly states mbps in his article and doing some deductive reasoning one can infer that the graph's numbers, being mentioned in the discussion, are related to the discussion.
Also, he is not necessarily incorrect using M because mbps is frequently written as Mbps due to the fact that the standard format for the prefix 'Mega' in units is a capital M. This is the same for MBps excepting that the B is also capitalized here because it is 'Bytes' instead of 'bits'. Further, I don't quite understand what your problem with bps instead of b/s is. They are both the same thing and neither one is the real formal bit/s. You like to write it b/s, he likes to write it bps.
I don't see that your 'issues' with this article have any merit and certainly neither of your 'issues' is serious enough to say 'OMG editor!! PLZ READ ARTICLES B4 ACCEPTING!!! How can you miss such glaring nonexistent flaws?!?!?!11!!?!@'
Okay...you're looking WAY too deep into this. They are trying to form a standard to avoid another VHS/Betamax, HD DVD/Blu-ray format war. Once they have a standard, they can then **COMPETE** with one another while maintaining interoperability between all devices within the standard which allows consumers to make their purchasing decisions based solely on the quality of each of the competitors' products.
Uhh...the way I read it is that they are coming together to formulate a plan to utilize the whitespace for communications. I think it is more that they are determining how to structure the network so that devices can interoperate with one another or like settling on a standard.
I'm not sure that they are necessarily 'partnering' to form some MSoogle cabal or something....they still pretty much hate each other and want to kill one another. They just need to agree on where and how to fight in the new arena.
Hmm...the prefetch cache is only used when a call is made by commonly used programs. Clearing the prefetch cache is only really useful to rid yourself of extra unnecessary files when you uninstall programs as Windows will simply rebuild the directory.
Since we're trying to diagnose a cause of sudden sluggishness, clearing the prefetch won't really do anything unless the HDD is full. A quick review of the prefetch directory, however, is a good indicator of which programs have been running. I usually take a look to see if I can spot anything out of the ordinary.
Other helpful ideas:
- Disable system restore before you do anything...irritating spyware and virii can hide here and restore themselves
- Download and run X-Ray PC (freeware) and run an online analysis of your processes...will give you a good/bad/unknown triage for some processes and allow you to kill them.
- Start>Run> msconfig.exe and check your startup processes...do a quick google search for anything you don't recognize and if it is not a necessary startup process, kill it. Having a shitload of processes running at startup can bring your system to its knees. Usually, for a desktop XP machine, between 28 and 35 processes is ideal on a fresh boot. For a laptop it can be up to 50...depends on what utilities are required to make your touchpad/buttons/wireless/etc work.
- Start>Run> msconfig.exe and check your services. Check 'hide all Microsoft services' and do a quick scan to make sure no extra junk services are hiding here. If you lose functionality to something on startup that you want, you can either just turn it back on or, if necessary, boot into safe mode and turn it on.
- Download Crap Cleaner and run the registry scan to see how many junk items you have in your registry. Review the causes and fixes to all the issues you find...you're usually okay doing a fix all but I check them just in case (this is your registry after all...never hurts to back it up either.)
- Add/remove any programs that you don't recognize or don't use. All this extra junk does nothing to help you. Additionally, if you can pinpoint one or two programs that were installed around the time your computer started having issues, definitely uninstall them and check your performance after (probably run ccleaner again to ensure they are completely gone).
- Restart your machine and check msconfig and xraypc again to ensure that nothing you killed came back...if it did, you've got a virus or spyware.
- If you still have issues, try running one of many drive fitness test tools to determine whether or not you have bad sectors or possibly a bad HDD altogether. Some tools will even allow you to repair the bad sectors but usually if you've got bad sectors you should start looking at a new HDD soon.
- If you have the option, pull the HDD and hook it up to a test rig and run a Housecall scan on the drive.
- Run Rootkit Revealer to determine whether or not you have a rootkit installed on your machine. Rootkits are nasty as hell but you can usually find additional info via a google search on how to rid yourself of them.
- When all else fails, a clean install is usually the best way to get your system back up to snuff. It is a pain in the fucking ass and no one likes to do it until you remember what it is like having a clean install. Just make a list of your programs, do a backup of your data, and format that sucker.
Hope some of that is helpful...a lot of the other comments I see here are great things to check as well (right below me I see gad zuki! mention netstat -a to check your active connections...also very useful) so bookmark this page and try everything. If nothing else, you'll learn some new tricks.
How is it that the phrase 'all but' is used to mean 'not quite, but almost'? It seems more appropriate that if something were 'all but' it would be basically 'everything except'.
While that may be the case, and yes I will grant you permission to make that assumption, it still doesn't change the fact that the reason you put forth in your previous post that this likely was not the source of the spam was completely wrong and you were being a snide asshat about it.
Okay...I'm going to say this sloooooowwwww. Just because the messages are '...all sent in Dutch,...' has no bearing on the actual destination of those messages. If the sentence said '...all sent in Dutch, to Dutch email addresses...' you would sound a lot smarter right now.
It doesn't matter in the least where the hell the botnet was located when you're talking about teh internets...that's why it is such a popular space; it allows us to act superior and snotty toward one another across entire continents. Seems like you're the one who really needs to go back and do the reading.
I'd be curious to see how well a standard city street sweeper would perform at removing the clogging elements.
In the event that they perform well, the environmental impact due to the production of the titanium dioxide may actually end up being less than the net reduction in pollutants with no extra effort required. Additionally, if the nitrates could be harnessed for use in city beautification projects and parks as fertilizer, this could be very beneficial for city streets. *shrug*
...The problem is, there aren't nearly enough Linux users to make a dent they will notice....
I'm a Windows user but that doesn't change the fact that any motherboard manufacturer who refuses to support Linux still drives me away from that particular brand. I would think the majority of those making purchasing recommendations in any business that actually requires this level of hardware support would generally feel the same way no matter what the primary OS for said system will be.
I can't really see how Foxconn thinks that this is a good decision being that they actually need to sell product to make $$. I purchase or recommend the purchase of approx 100-200 motherboards a year (and I'm a Network Engineer...not even desktop support) and I know that not one of those will be a Foxconn. My company probably makes the purchase of over 1000 motherboards in any given year and, again, not one of those will be Foxconn as soon as I forward this article to our owner.
At the enterprise level, absolutely. I am CCNP so I may have a bit of bias, but I have used and configured (very in-depth) virtually every enterprise level routing & switching equipment from every vendor and I can say with 100% confidence that Cisco is at the very top in performance, scalability, featureset, and reliability.
I do agree that they are nowhere near cheap. For a lot of our small to medium business clients it makes Cisco a cost-prohibitive solution and forces them to use gear from Dell, HP, Extreme, etc. which are more along the lines of 'sufficient'. It would really be nice to see Cisco begin to react to market demand and try to scoop up the smaller business market. Fuck, I end up having to order a few Dell L2 and L3 switches (which are the cheap trashy hookers of the routing & switching world) a week for small business clients because, at a 3-6k price difference, it makes no sense to the customer. Even if Cisco were to come down to within 1.5-3k of their competitors it would start to make sense.
Don't get me wrong here...I am not a Cisco fanboi. I use their equipment primarily because one thing is definitely true...Cisco is still better. (although some vendors out there like Force-10 are showing some serious promise.)
I am almost positive that my brain is now bleeding for having read any portion of your idiotic, mindless hyperbole. You are the societal equivalent of a transient who talks to himself because of his complete loss of comprehension of reality. The only difference between you and this guy that you have somehow maintained enough of your faculties to barely drag yourself through your day-to-day. Your mind operates on the same type of logic abortion that Scientology uses to ensnare its victims.
life0cide?? WHAT THE FUCK IS WRONG WITH YOU???!?!?1111!! (ones added for emphasis)
I just posted this in the face of removing all of my other moderations because I am so astounded. I don't think I'm ever going to moderate again after happening across this drivel reading through the lower threshold. I think this is literally the worst possible way to wake up in the morning. How am I supposed to maintain a good outlook for the day having been reminded that people like this exist? FUCK.
I fully agree with you on this point. It seems to me that the type of candidate that the AFCC is looking for is the one that will be making $100,000+/year in security consulting or enterprise networking by the age of 25 or 30. While some of the younger generation of technophiles may feel the lure of a military career prior to attaining a position like this in the private sector, anyone currently employed in such a position will balk at the suggestion that it may be in their interest to give up a cushy, high paying job that usually allows a significant amount of their own personal freedom. Without provisions in place to lure the most experienced and intelligent people in the industry, I really see the AFCC being a comparatively fledgling operation for at least 6-10 years. Keep in mind that 'fledgling' in this particular case should be taken as a frame of reference to the AFCC's actual potential effectiveness, but even to pull the required resources from any other branch or governmental department to be relevant and effective immediately and to educate and lead the 'future cyberwarriors' seems like a detriment to said branch or department as well as a waste of resources.
The private sector talent pool is available and has had a vastly greater amount of time to develop and grow industry expertise in an environment that requires personal study and an intense, and often rabid, interest in the subject matter at hand. It seems naive to believe that some training, a hierarchy, and organizing willing but green minds to manipulate and configure these incredibly complex and in-depth systems and to not only avoid vulnerability but, even more diffcult, to counter attack penetration attempts and perpetrate so called 'cyber-war' can possibly provide the desired result without those new minds having the benefit of learning from those with such a vast amount of knowledge. That knowledge and experience can only be gained through painful and rigorous mental gymnastics and to expect a trained beginner (or even a lot of trained beginners) to compete with and counter those with the same type of rabid interest in their profession and desire for knowledge that the private sector has is like asking them to write a doctorate thesis on mathematics while they are learning basic algebra.
I know that I would consider doing what I do well (and love to do for that matter) with the added benefit of helping to protect my country to be the nearly ideal career...but what you're asking is the equivalent of asking an officer to become an enlisted soldier and still perform the same duties lacking rank or pay. As much as I'd like there to be a reason for me to join up, there isn't one.
700 Celsius is a balmy summer on Moltor. Whether or not life still remains on this planet is a mystery, however. If memory serves, Moltar was taken captive a while back by some guy with a sissy yellow cape and powerbands that sounds like George Lowe.
I read the grandparent post and literally began to experience physical pain. I'd say a good 60% of every enterprise WAN I configure or interact with on a daily basis is MPLS or is in the process of migrating to MPLS.
The multicast argument was the portion that really brought the pain train, Terry Tate style. I don't even want to begin to discuss why that argument is so wholly retarded. It looks like you had the same opinion so I'll plagarize your comment and say that I, also, "disagree entirely" but I would like to indicate that my lack of agreement should be considered +1 Vehemence.
In the former case, why would a gardening tool on your property be considered your responsibility in the event that someone injures their self? I'm speaking specifically regarding an instance in which you did not permit this person on your property in the first place which, when considered logically, should be considered trespassing. If this were not the case, theoretically landscaping improvements such as trees, boulders, bricks, etc. would cause personal liability as well in the event that an incident occurred involving one of those items. At what point would the boundary be drawn? IANAL either, but it seems the only place that presents an actual definite line where responsibility for an incident could potentially be placed on a property owner's head is outside their property (excepting visitors with permission or course).
Also, in the case of an attractive nuisance, I believe it would be necessary to establish that it was left in place despite a warning by the county or whoever manages the properties in the area for the homeowner's collective or whatever the hell they are called. Without any warning, the homeowner would be able to argue that they were unaware that this item caused any sort of nuisance as they were never informed. Again, IANAL so from a legal perspective I am likely wrong in both of the above examples...which just shows how twisted our laws have become.
Maybe it is time for some sort of legal review committee whose purpose is to review widely disputed laws and provide logical arguments on both sides to set precedent for how the law is applied. Require that the precedent be approved by both committee and judge (or a board of judges) to remove at least some of the potential for abuse and to keep alive the tradition of checks/balances currently enacted by our governmental structure. If this process were kept apart from the actual cases the laws affect it seems like it would provide for an even more impartial judgement based specifically on the wording and potential abuse of said law. Basically a review process designed to strengthen interpretation of law instead of making/changing laws themselves. *shrug* It seems like something needs to be done to give us stronger laws to keep hard-working, responsible citizens from being blindsided by stupid fucking arguments from less scrupulous people just looking to make a buck off of their own idiocy.
Slashdot Mirror
Shared collision domain? For clients connected to a single WAP style infrastructure, sure...for corporate campuses with APs spaced every 50-100 feet this is not a problem because you're not trying to send data to 25+ wireless clients simultaneously. Any wireless LAN that requires decent data throughput should never have more than 10 clients connected to a single AP. Most people think it is acceptable to buy a wireless router, drop it in their office, and suddenly they have cheap wireless for all 40 of their employees. While this may work when not everyone is using it simultaneously, this is exactly the mentality that the article suggests we move away from.
The idea is that the wireless environment needs to match the wired one in cost and budgeting expenditure at the very least these days to accommodate a host of new tech that is either here or right on the horizon. It is idiotic to say 'if you are a high bandwidth user you need to sit the hell down and stop moving' - this is also the exact same type of mentality. With an appropriate AP distribution and a centralized wireless controller solution any large firm can achieve reliable daily use at current speeds and with future standards beyond N already being explored for gigabit+ wireless speeds, there is no reason to believe that the shared collision domain and high(er) latency issues will not also be addressed. Any organization clinging to the old school thought that wireless and wired users are different classes of users with respect demand and availability requirements is already behind. We in the IT world tend to think of new tech as toys sometimes because we see a kickass device that we would use but everyone else might not necessarily have an interest in. We're not the only ones who like new tech toys anymore, however, and most of them, especially those with wireless capabilities, have already found their way to the workplace in surprisingly (at least to me initially) large numbers.
Whether this is good or bad for company security policies, that can be left to argument...what's certain is that when the CEO and CFO latch on to any of this tech, you're damn sure going to have excellent wireless access around their office. Once they realize the potential of the devices they want to use and once people have argued them into the workplace as productivity tools (iPads and other tablets are a PERFECT example), wireless - actually GOOD wireless - will be a requirement and early adopters of this newer mentaility are going to be ahead of the game.
Information has no wants or desires. Even the most open and honest person doesn't want everything they say and do broadcast to people who they feel are not privy to that information. If I'm meeting up with friends tonight to get shitfaced drunk I would rather that my grandmother not receive that message randomly. It doesn't honestly bother me that my grandmother knows that I curse or that she knows that I get shitfaced drunk on occasion, but I would rather not have that conversation and I would rather not shock her with how I choose to operate in my own PRIVATE life.
Your idiotic response comes from one of two places: You honestly believe that you would be comfortable with every personal thought or communication you have potentially being able to be exposed to any person you know at random or you are just being a dick because you're arguing an obviously idiotic line of reasoning. The former is absolutely silly to anyone with an ounce of reason in their head...I absolutely wish I could bug your house and follow you everywhere you go and send snippets of your conversations at random to the people you work with to see how correct you feel your former statement was...the latter seems the most likely reason, though, so why not stop masturbaitrolling and do something useful for a change?
The formal term is bit/s rather than bps or b/s. The accepted informal abbreviations are bps and b/s. If anyone is in an IT related field and knows the difference between a 'bit' and a 'Byte', I guarantee you that they also know what the word 'per' means.
FYI...just because the unit of measure is capitalized does not mean the data that the article contains is invalid. That's like saying 'Holy shit...I can't believe this article misspelled they're instead of their. I can't read this shit!' Granted, spelling and syntax issues are worth noting, but he clearly states mbps in his article and doing some deductive reasoning one can infer that the graph's numbers, being mentioned in the discussion, are related to the discussion. Also, he is not necessarily incorrect using M because mbps is frequently written as Mbps due to the fact that the standard format for the prefix 'Mega' in units is a capital M. This is the same for MBps excepting that the B is also capitalized here because it is 'Bytes' instead of 'bits'. Further, I don't quite understand what your problem with bps instead of b/s is. They are both the same thing and neither one is the real formal bit/s. You like to write it b/s, he likes to write it bps. I don't see that your 'issues' with this article have any merit and certainly neither of your 'issues' is serious enough to say 'OMG editor!! PLZ READ ARTICLES B4 ACCEPTING!!! How can you miss such glaring nonexistent flaws?!?!?!11!!?!@'
In Soviet Russia, engine...does not heat you. :(
If they are smarter then use, they know how stupid war is.
Irony much?
Okay...you're looking WAY too deep into this. They are trying to form a standard to avoid another VHS/Betamax, HD DVD/Blu-ray format war. Once they have a standard, they can then **COMPETE** with one another while maintaining interoperability between all devices within the standard which allows consumers to make their purchasing decisions based solely on the quality of each of the competitors' products.
Uhh...the way I read it is that they are coming together to formulate a plan to utilize the whitespace for communications. I think it is more that they are determining how to structure the network so that devices can interoperate with one another or like settling on a standard. I'm not sure that they are necessarily 'partnering' to form some MSoogle cabal or something....they still pretty much hate each other and want to kill one another. They just need to agree on where and how to fight in the new arena.
Hmm...the prefetch cache is only used when a call is made by commonly used programs. Clearing the prefetch cache is only really useful to rid yourself of extra unnecessary files when you uninstall programs as Windows will simply rebuild the directory.
Since we're trying to diagnose a cause of sudden sluggishness, clearing the prefetch won't really do anything unless the HDD is full. A quick review of the prefetch directory, however, is a good indicator of which programs have been running. I usually take a look to see if I can spot anything out of the ordinary.
Other helpful ideas:
- Disable system restore before you do anything...irritating spyware and virii can hide here and restore themselves
- Download and run X-Ray PC (freeware) and run an online analysis of your processes...will give you a good/bad/unknown triage for some processes and allow you to kill them.
- Start>Run> msconfig.exe and check your startup processes...do a quick google search for anything you don't recognize and if it is not a necessary startup process, kill it. Having a shitload of processes running at startup can bring your system to its knees. Usually, for a desktop XP machine, between 28 and 35 processes is ideal on a fresh boot. For a laptop it can be up to 50...depends on what utilities are required to make your touchpad/buttons/wireless/etc work.
- Start>Run> msconfig.exe and check your services. Check 'hide all Microsoft services' and do a quick scan to make sure no extra junk services are hiding here. If you lose functionality to something on startup that you want, you can either just turn it back on or, if necessary, boot into safe mode and turn it on.
- Download Crap Cleaner and run the registry scan to see how many junk items you have in your registry. Review the causes and fixes to all the issues you find...you're usually okay doing a fix all but I check them just in case (this is your registry after all...never hurts to back it up either.)
- Add/remove any programs that you don't recognize or don't use. All this extra junk does nothing to help you. Additionally, if you can pinpoint one or two programs that were installed around the time your computer started having issues, definitely uninstall them and check your performance after (probably run ccleaner again to ensure they are completely gone).
- Restart your machine and check msconfig and xraypc again to ensure that nothing you killed came back...if it did, you've got a virus or spyware.
- If you still have issues, try running one of many drive fitness test tools to determine whether or not you have bad sectors or possibly a bad HDD altogether. Some tools will even allow you to repair the bad sectors but usually if you've got bad sectors you should start looking at a new HDD soon.
- If you have the option, pull the HDD and hook it up to a test rig and run a Housecall scan on the drive.
- Run Rootkit Revealer to determine whether or not you have a rootkit installed on your machine. Rootkits are nasty as hell but you can usually find additional info via a google search on how to rid yourself of them.
- When all else fails, a clean install is usually the best way to get your system back up to snuff. It is a pain in the fucking ass and no one likes to do it until you remember what it is like having a clean install. Just make a list of your programs, do a backup of your data, and format that sucker.
Hope some of that is helpful...a lot of the other comments I see here are great things to check as well (right below me I see gad zuki! mention netstat -a to check your active connections...also very useful) so bookmark this page and try everything. If nothing else, you'll learn some new tricks.
No way. Finallyfast.com is the way to go. My PC is fast!! FINALLY!!!11!!!
*shoots self in face*
Yeah I hate those sneaky, cheap ass pallies with their bubble and insta.....er wait...what were we talking about again?
How is it that the phrase 'all but' is used to mean 'not quite, but almost'? It seems more appropriate that if something were 'all but' it would be basically 'everything except'.
While that may be the case, and yes I will grant you permission to make that assumption, it still doesn't change the fact that the reason you put forth in your previous post that this likely was not the source of the spam was completely wrong and you were being a snide asshat about it.
Okay...I'm going to say this sloooooowwwww. Just because the messages are '...all sent in Dutch,...' has no bearing on the actual destination of those messages. If the sentence said '...all sent in Dutch, to Dutch email addresses...' you would sound a lot smarter right now. It doesn't matter in the least where the hell the botnet was located when you're talking about teh internets...that's why it is such a popular space; it allows us to act superior and snotty toward one another across entire continents. Seems like you're the one who really needs to go back and do the reading.
I'd be curious to see how well a standard city street sweeper would perform at removing the clogging elements.
In the event that they perform well, the environmental impact due to the production of the titanium dioxide may actually end up being less than the net reduction in pollutants with no extra effort required. Additionally, if the nitrates could be harnessed for use in city beautification projects and parks as fertilizer, this could be very beneficial for city streets. *shrug*
...The problem is, there aren't nearly enough Linux users to make a dent they will notice. ...
I'm a Windows user but that doesn't change the fact that any motherboard manufacturer who refuses to support Linux still drives me away from that particular brand. I would think the majority of those making purchasing recommendations in any business that actually requires this level of hardware support would generally feel the same way no matter what the primary OS for said system will be.
I can't really see how Foxconn thinks that this is a good decision being that they actually need to sell product to make $$. I purchase or recommend the purchase of approx 100-200 motherboards a year (and I'm a Network Engineer...not even desktop support) and I know that not one of those will be a Foxconn. My company probably makes the purchase of over 1000 motherboards in any given year and, again, not one of those will be Foxconn as soon as I forward this article to our owner.
At the enterprise level, absolutely. I am CCNP so I may have a bit of bias, but I have used and configured (very in-depth) virtually every enterprise level routing & switching equipment from every vendor and I can say with 100% confidence that Cisco is at the very top in performance, scalability, featureset, and reliability.
I do agree that they are nowhere near cheap. For a lot of our small to medium business clients it makes Cisco a cost-prohibitive solution and forces them to use gear from Dell, HP, Extreme, etc. which are more along the lines of 'sufficient'. It would really be nice to see Cisco begin to react to market demand and try to scoop up the smaller business market. Fuck, I end up having to order a few Dell L2 and L3 switches (which are the cheap trashy hookers of the routing & switching world) a week for small business clients because, at a 3-6k price difference, it makes no sense to the customer. Even if Cisco were to come down to within 1.5-3k of their competitors it would start to make sense.
Don't get me wrong here...I am not a Cisco fanboi. I use their equipment primarily because one thing is definitely true...Cisco is still better. (although some vendors out there like Force-10 are showing some serious promise.)
"I think they're web server was built..."
You keep using that word...I do not think it means what you think it means...
You might want to get those bumps checked...sounds like herpes to me. I definitely don't want herpes of the protocol stack.
Fucking what the fuck???
I am almost positive that my brain is now bleeding for having read any portion of your idiotic, mindless hyperbole. You are the societal equivalent of a transient who talks to himself because of his complete loss of comprehension of reality. The only difference between you and this guy that you have somehow maintained enough of your faculties to barely drag yourself through your day-to-day. Your mind operates on the same type of logic abortion that Scientology uses to ensnare its victims.
life0cide?? WHAT THE FUCK IS WRONG WITH YOU???!?!?1111!! (ones added for emphasis)
I just posted this in the face of removing all of my other moderations because I am so astounded. I don't think I'm ever going to moderate again after happening across this drivel reading through the lower threshold. I think this is literally the worst possible way to wake up in the morning. How am I supposed to maintain a good outlook for the day having been reminded that people like this exist? FUCK.
I fully agree with you on this point. It seems to me that the type of candidate that the AFCC is looking for is the one that will be making $100,000+/year in security consulting or enterprise networking by the age of 25 or 30. While some of the younger generation of technophiles may feel the lure of a military career prior to attaining a position like this in the private sector, anyone currently employed in such a position will balk at the suggestion that it may be in their interest to give up a cushy, high paying job that usually allows a significant amount of their own personal freedom. Without provisions in place to lure the most experienced and intelligent people in the industry, I really see the AFCC being a comparatively fledgling operation for at least 6-10 years. Keep in mind that 'fledgling' in this particular case should be taken as a frame of reference to the AFCC's actual potential effectiveness, but even to pull the required resources from any other branch or governmental department to be relevant and effective immediately and to educate and lead the 'future cyberwarriors' seems like a detriment to said branch or department as well as a waste of resources.
The private sector talent pool is available and has had a vastly greater amount of time to develop and grow industry expertise in an environment that requires personal study and an intense, and often rabid, interest in the subject matter at hand. It seems naive to believe that some training, a hierarchy, and organizing willing but green minds to manipulate and configure these incredibly complex and in-depth systems and to not only avoid vulnerability but, even more diffcult, to counter attack penetration attempts and perpetrate so called 'cyber-war' can possibly provide the desired result without those new minds having the benefit of learning from those with such a vast amount of knowledge. That knowledge and experience can only be gained through painful and rigorous mental gymnastics and to expect a trained beginner (or even a lot of trained beginners) to compete with and counter those with the same type of rabid interest in their profession and desire for knowledge that the private sector has is like asking them to write a doctorate thesis on mathematics while they are learning basic algebra.
I know that I would consider doing what I do well (and love to do for that matter) with the added benefit of helping to protect my country to be the nearly ideal career...but what you're asking is the equivalent of asking an officer to become an enlisted soldier and still perform the same duties lacking rank or pay. As much as I'd like there to be a reason for me to join up, there isn't one.
700 Celsius is a balmy summer on Moltor. Whether or not life still remains on this planet is a mystery, however. If memory serves, Moltar was taken captive a while back by some guy with a sissy yellow cape and powerbands that sounds like George Lowe.
That's a lot of acronyms...a bit like a scientology convention.
I read the grandparent post and literally began to experience physical pain. I'd say a good 60% of every enterprise WAN I configure or interact with on a daily basis is MPLS or is in the process of migrating to MPLS.
The multicast argument was the portion that really brought the pain train, Terry Tate style. I don't even want to begin to discuss why that argument is so wholly retarded. It looks like you had the same opinion so I'll plagarize your comment and say that I, also, "disagree entirely" but I would like to indicate that my lack of agreement should be considered +1 Vehemence.
In the former case, why would a gardening tool on your property be considered your responsibility in the event that someone injures their self? I'm speaking specifically regarding an instance in which you did not permit this person on your property in the first place which, when considered logically, should be considered trespassing. If this were not the case, theoretically landscaping improvements such as trees, boulders, bricks, etc. would cause personal liability as well in the event that an incident occurred involving one of those items. At what point would the boundary be drawn? IANAL either, but it seems the only place that presents an actual definite line where responsibility for an incident could potentially be placed on a property owner's head is outside their property (excepting visitors with permission or course).
Also, in the case of an attractive nuisance, I believe it would be necessary to establish that it was left in place despite a warning by the county or whoever manages the properties in the area for the homeowner's collective or whatever the hell they are called. Without any warning, the homeowner would be able to argue that they were unaware that this item caused any sort of nuisance as they were never informed. Again, IANAL so from a legal perspective I am likely wrong in both of the above examples...which just shows how twisted our laws have become.
Maybe it is time for some sort of legal review committee whose purpose is to review widely disputed laws and provide logical arguments on both sides to set precedent for how the law is applied. Require that the precedent be approved by both committee and judge (or a board of judges) to remove at least some of the potential for abuse and to keep alive the tradition of checks/balances currently enacted by our governmental structure. If this process were kept apart from the actual cases the laws affect it seems like it would provide for an even more impartial judgement based specifically on the wording and potential abuse of said law. Basically a review process designed to strengthen interpretation of law instead of making/changing laws themselves. *shrug* It seems like something needs to be done to give us stronger laws to keep hard-working, responsible citizens from being blindsided by stupid fucking arguments from less scrupulous people just looking to make a buck off of their own idiocy.