Text 911, 237 rader
Skriven 2007-05-06 03:37:42 av Maurice Kinal (1:261/38.9)
Kommentar till text 906 av Peter Knapper (3:772/1.10)
Ärende: sln_sf v0.1
====================
Hey Peter!
May 06 09:52 07, Peter Knapper wrote to Maurice Kinal:
PK> Because ftpd is not a Fidonet standard
Nor should it be. Should it? However I don't ever plan to let that stand in
my way.
PK> that and the service prvoider did not provide instructions on HOW to
PK> go about doing that.
I learned long before there was any service prvoiders. The hard way too. It
wasn't hard. Still isn't.
PK> They DID provide instructios on how to use FTP
PK> for Fidonet Mail pickup and deposit, but that was all AND it was
PK> specific to each FTP environment I used. I DID try sending a REQ
PK> once, but that got swallowed so I assumed FREQ wasnt implemented in
PK> anyway..........;-)
Heh, heh. Somehow that doesn't surprise me.
PK> Understanding the logic of how FTP works and its limitations in the
PK> area of Fidonet traffic transfers, means its pretty darned clear to
PK> me why FTP has never become a recognised Fidonet standard.
Right. I could say the same about telnet, zmodem, or any other protocol you
care to mention. You could argue that something like zmodem is a FTN standard
but in reality it isn't. The fact that they call it a FTN standard ought to
raise issues about ALL FTN so-called 'standards'.
PK> saying one specific implementation cannot be crafted to work in a
PK> usable fashion, but I wonder why one would bother doing this when
PK> there are more integrated solutions available (BinkP) that perform
PK> the FIDONET partof the processing in a much easier to implement
PK> solution.
As long as you're happy with it then the above will always be true. However I
find it lacking but do run binkd just for the one uplink and am currently doing
more of my messaging using this point which uses ftp to transfer messages. It
works great and has for years and years.
PK> I consider it like the chap who put a 307 V8 into a Fiat
PK> Bambina to go to the supermarket, a bit of an overkill...
I have it running despite Fido so it makes perfect sense to use the same tools
for everything including Fido messaging. I may even take it further and get
rid of the rest, up to and including this editor. This way anything I do
should work for any type of messaging and will be the same editor I use for all
my editing needs. That makes the most sense to me.
MK>> If you haven't done it there is no way you could know.
PK> That is true, but then I guess that also means I am not a
PK> masochist.....;-)
Heh, heh. Yeah there is that to it. However most of the pain was dealt with
long ago so there is only Fido to bring into sync if it really needs to be
brought into sync.
PK> Nope, it stands no further than simply being YOUR statement, as
PK> no-one else has confirmed its performance based on YOUR criteria
PK> yet.......;-)
Right. Sounds like a Mexican standoff.
PK> Its pointless looking at only HALF the issue, one has to consider the
PK> bigger picture (IE others withn Fidonet).
They're happy with whatever they have. Just like you.
PK> Yes, BASH for OS/2 is availabe on Hobbes (bash-2.0-b264.zip), however
PK> its a little old (1997)...
I have yet to hear and have never seen anyone ever claim to be using it.
PK> Obviously you are not up to date on OS/2 events........;-) Yes, IBM
PK> has stopped marketting of OS/2 (but still supported for selected
PK> paying environments), however it is still being developed and
PK> marketed as eCS (www.ecomstation.com),
I knew that. It isn't really OS/2 though. Also they are porting much from
Unix and were experiencing a few glitches last I checked.
PK> and IBM provided updates to
PK> eCS in Feb 2007. You can pick up a copy of the latest eCS v2.0 Beta
PK> (release 4) while you are there...
No thanks. I've looked and they have nothing I don't already have and lack
much of what I do have and want. What they do have that I don't have I don't
want so it works out great for everyone that I don't have or want eCS. Does
that make sense? It does to me.
PK> So is vsftpd the only FTP server to be considered here?
At the moment since it is the best I've found so far. Do you know of a better
one?
PK> Any idea how
PK> many
PK> Fidonet specific implementations of that are being used?
None. Zero. Nada. Just like everything else. How many Fido specific
implimentations are there that actually belong to Fido at large?
PK> From that it is clearly obvious to me that what you are looking for
PK> are attributes of your selected environment that most Fidoneters have
PK> little interest in.
Looks that way. I am not worried. I asked, offered, whatever. I will
continue doing whatever it is I do whenever it happens to happen.
PK> If the Fidonet S/W environment performs so badly for Fidoneters that
PK> they achieved just 1/3 the throughput that you claim, surely you
PK> would expect to hear something about this? The simple answer is that
PK> "it can't be happening to most Fidoneters that way"...
I wouldn't know. All I know for sure is that none of them are capable of
knowing anything beyond what is considered Fido and most around these parts
don't even know that much. They just point and click and hope for the best.
If something goes wrong, which eventually it does, then they blame it all on
whatever. Keep it simple.
PK> EG: All my Fidonet processing is done on the SMALLEST machine I have
PK> here. Its the smallest machine that I have because when I purchased
PK> the replacment for a failed 486SX-20 motherboard in 2001 the LEAST
PK> powerful machine I could buy new was a Celeron 700 with 64MB RAM!
I still have a 486-33 running. It is the worldly connected machine at the
moment. Running ttylinux in a 8M ramdisk on there. No spinney drives
whatsoever and can do usb1.1 for hotswapping flash disks which is where binkd
is running off of as we speak. Also uses a 12V marine battery as it's main
power source. Definetly a work of art.
PK> That machine has run Warp 4, Maximus, Squish, BinkD, Apache, SyslogD,
PK> a Time server, heaps of Rexx scripts for mail handling for over a
PK> decade (IE it did this on the 486SX-20 with 16MB RAM!).
I believe it. None of that on this particular 486. What for? It has vsftpd.
That is all it wants or needs to make everything happen. The binkd on there is
off system and runs as an upriviledged user so if the flash disk screws up then
no big deal operationally speaking. So far three major power outages and it
hasn't even blinked or sputtered. Cut and paste;
_____________________________________________________________________________
fido@thirtytwo ~ $ uptime
04:15:56 up 61 days, 1:18, load average: 0.05, 0.01, 0.00
_____________________________________________________________________________
It has been up longer then that but I made a change to where it loads it's
ramdisk from so there was a reboot 61 days ago. Before then I am not sure what
it's uptime was. The only reason it ever went down was for me to add or change
something. I am seriously thinking of replicating this on a more beefier cpu,
but not too much beefier. I'd like to keep it fanless whatever it happens to
be.
PK> 1 PSTN line now. All this has run fine for me, however I can assure
PK> you that operational costs are a definite factor to me.
I agree wholeheartedly.
PK> As for performance, there has been near ZERO change in BinkD and FTP
PK> performance for the BBS operations between the 486DX2-66 and the
PK> Celeron.
If you say so. I've seen many improvements in ftp but none to binkd.
PK> Even you must be able to see that if FTP was so wonderful (3 times
PK> faster than BinkP),
Yep. I am being generous to binkd when I say that too. That isn't counting
any additional processing binkd requires to successfully transfer any file but
just the time from start to finish of the actual file transfer. I haven't
rechecked it in about six months so maybe things have changed but I doubt it.
PK> then Fidoneters would flock to it in droves.
Heh, heh. I doubt that very much. I don't think there is a version for
anything but unix based systems. It is the opposite situation of most
Fidoware. Few would ever know of the difference.
PK> reality is that they don't,
They don't do much of anything from what I've noticed. That is why they
require abandonware.
PK> so your perceived "advantage" of using
PK> FTP must be pretty small to most Fidoneters, considering the efforts
PK> put into optimsing things like ZEDZAP and other PSTN protocols.
Only myself. I don't mind.
PK> The Hobby mentality is focused on costs and performance, but by
PK> perfromance I mean "how does it perform its Fidonet functions", and
PK> the answer so far is clearly that the existing Fidonet protocols (IE
PK> BinkP) work fine.
If you say so. That isn't the same on any of the Linux boxes here but I can
compensate, and have been, so it isn't really a big deal.
PK> I dont see how any of us can do this, because its all "caused" by the
PK> internet and that is well outside of our "control".
I suppose. I don't do that much with the internet beyond ftp and even that
isn't all that much. Nowhere near what most people's bandwidth looks like that
is for sure. A bit of emailing, some Fidoing (like now but it isn't online
until I send it ... using ftp too), and that is about it. Occasionally I
browse but haven't really seen that much of interest out there lately.
PK> I dont doubt that you consider there to be a significant performance
PK> benefit, all I am doing is asking is "why have no others seen this
PK> same 3 x speed improvement" that you have, because I certainly don't
PK> see it...
There is on the local networks. I just got wireless spiffied up earlier today
and am waiting for my neighbour to help me test it out. We'll try some stuff
with binkd and ftpd and I will ask him what he thinks is best performnce wise.
He has no prejudices with either ftp or binkd so he'll be a better impartial
judge than I. He mostly likes to browse so neither of these apps will get any
preference.
MK>> We'll talk in a few years from now and compare notes.
PK> If Fidonet continues for that long and we are still around.....;-)
We'll see. We're still here long after most who claimed they would be the last
ones standing have gone MIA. However if Fidonet is still here in two years
it'll be because of stubborn and creative people like me who can compensate for
lazy, no good for nothing OS/2 types. <BFEG>
Life is good,
Maurice
--- Msged/LNX 6.2.0
* Origin: The Pointy Stick Society XXIX - Only one I in teamwork (1:261/38.9)
|