Text 4147, 243 rader
Skriven 2012-09-20 15:59:34 av Roy Witt (1:387/22)
Kommentar till en text av mark lewis (1:3634/12.0)
Ärende: Pvt nodes vs points
===========================
19 Sep 12 14:45, mark lewis wrote to Roy Witt:
RW>>> How do you block DNS from interupting your traffic? That's Denial
RW>>> of Service and not the DNS protocol, of course.
ml>> yo are speaking of (D)DOS instead of DNS, right?
RW>> I was never into symbols representing words that explained what I'm
RW>> speaking of. Denial of Service is known to me as DNS the interupter
ml> you /must/ fix your acronym when talking about Denial Of Service...
ml> it is and always has been DOS... Distributed Denial Of Service is
ml> DDOS...
Sorry, I had DNS frying my brain...yes, I meant DOS...
ml>> simply put, it is the result of too much inbound traffic for the
ml>> link to handle...
RW>> Yeup, as in the DNS that shut down the Fidonet mail link to the
ml> DOS! ----------------^^^
Yes.
RW>> internet...when a certain sysop was ex-commed from the nodelist.
ml> you'll have to explain a bit more on that... as i recall in
ml> conversations with the maintainers of those gateway systems, there
ml> was no DOS at that time... what there was was a lot of spam and other
ml> garbage posts being directed at nodes in fidonet...
Yeup, which constituted a DOS at Burt Juda's gate...
ml> garbage posts that were not supposed to travel via fidonet
ml> pathways... they shut down the gateways so as to prevent fidonet from
ml> being flooded with garbage posts... that is not a DOS... DOS is like
ml> trying to chug a full beer keg from a 2inch pipe mounted 8 feet up...
ml> there's no way to stop the flow on your own and you literally choke
ml> on the flow...
Yeup...I'll let an article published in the Crypt Newsletter entitled
'SONGS OF THE CYBER-DOOMED' speak for itself.
See next msg.
ml> others might argue that knocking down a service is also a DOS...
ml> while i do agree that the loss of that service is constituting a
ml> denial to others of the tasks it performs, it is a completely
ml> different type of DOS than a simple too full pipeline DOS...
Which is exactly what happened to Juda's gate.
ml>> you cannot block (D)DOS at all... you /must/ get your provider
ml>> involved so they can nulroute it in the routers...
RW>> Which everyone learned about c1996 as it pertained to Fidonet and
RW>> Burt Juda's internet/fidonet junction.
ml> incorrect...
LOL! If you say so.
ml>> the extra "D" i've put in parenthesis stands for "Distributed"...
ml>> plain DOS comes from one location where's DDOS comes
ml>> from more than one... both serve the same purpose of filling the
ml>> inbound pipe with more traffic than it can handle...
RW>> 8^)
ml> in the case of the fidonet gateway sites, it wasn't so much a matter
ml> of too much traffic... it was a matter of too much illegitimate
ml> traffic... there is a difference...
Legit or not, it is a DOS in the sense of the meaning of Denial of
Service.
ml>>> but we can thank many others for their leaving and not carrying on
ml>>> with the visions they had for fidonet :( :? :/
RW>>> Souvestre, Bodger, Kohl, Frezburg...yeah, I agree with their exits.
RW>>> Too bad they didn't make it sooner than later.
ml>> they were not developers...
RW>> Maybe not software developers per se' but they had a hand in
RW>> developing software by proxy.
ml> i guess but they were not the ones churning out the code and
ml> compiling the binaries... when THOSE guys left, we ended up with what
ml> we have now that many are calling legacy software... i dare say that
ml> if those developers had not left, fidonet would be a whole lot
ml> different today... these bs arguments about legacy this'n'that and
ml> shim this'n'that and other similar arguments would all be moot
ml> because the software would have been updated to handle these
ml> capabilities... so thanks to the politicos for ruining what we had
ml> and trashing what we could have had :/
OTH, you can't say that their politics ended when they left. Perhaps their
type of politics ended, but Fidonet politics still exists today.
ml>> they were politicians... souvestre might have written something but
ml>> he didn't do much of that for very long as he "contracted" later
ml>> work out... nobogus being the direct result of that...
RW>> And 'Fuck No Bogus' being the resultant reaction to that. OTH for
RW>> instance, the developer of the software that La Costa uses to
RW>> continue his false sense of maintaining an echolist, still supports
RW>> that software, or did the last time I looked into it. At one time
RW>> La Costa asked that it be updated so that it would work in a manner
RW>> that he wished it to work. The resultant software is still
RW>> downloadable on the author's website.
ml> AIR, dana hasn't supported or added any new features to that software
ml> in a very long time... i've been told that more than once and it was
ml> one of the reasons why i offered to write a replacement that actually
ml> worked and worked properly... with its own real database or using an
ml> existing sql type database... attitudes and arguments shut that down
ml> and i've not thought about offering my services since...
I have it here and it works satisfactorily in my view. It's just a matter
of the person USING that package that gets to be a problem. When the man
can't even setup FD, IREX or BINKD (with input and suggestions from
veteren users) or any other software he chooses to handle netmail or
email. If he never gets a new HD or his computer up and running again,
Fidonet will be better off for it.
ml>> [trim]
RW>> I never figured you for a dummy with a big mouth. I respect your
RW>> expertise and that was a compliment to that end.
ml> i thank you again...
RW>> Too bad you never learned how to use caps and lower case though.
ml> [shrug] it doesn't really matter, does it?
It does to me. My dad wrote his autobiography in all caps. He used to
write letters to me in all caps. No matter what I said or asked of him, he
wouldn't change that. In his terms, he loved all caps. I guess that came
with his 10th grade education. IMO, he was a shrewd businessman, but a
poor communicator.
ml> folks can read and understand what i'm saying... and i don't waste a
ml> bunch of energy mashing on some extra keys that don't need to be
ml> mashed on all the time ;)
On your QUERTY keyboard the shift key is well positioned under your left
pinky; moving your pinky off of the A key is not too much excercise, even
for me.
That is, unless you're a hunt and peck typist...which means that holding
down the shift key and typing any letters that the left hand would be used
to type might leave you cross-armed, although there is another shift key
that the right pinky can use, although slightly out of reach by one extra
key. 8^)
ml> [trim]
RW>>> The problem with that is you're trying to tell him what to do, not
RW>>> suggesting what features to fix and what to toss out.
ml>> there again, that's not the voice in my head when i write those
ml>> messages...
RW>> You need a voice for that? If I relied on an internal voice to
RW>> spell it out for me, my brain would go to sleep in boredom.
ml> who said spell? shirley you don't spell every word you read...
No, but I spell evey word I type.
ml> you mentally say it... that's the voice i'm talking about...
I don't mentally say the words I type, I type them from memory...usually
they are correct, but sometimes, on words that are not conventional, I
look up in a dictionary. Of course, one must know how the word is spelled
to begin with, but the dictionary I use takes a possible misspelling into
account.
ml> sometimes folks add "tonal inflections" or other "emotional states"
ml> to those mental words they are reading of someone elses and they take
ml> that as the writer having used a certain "voice" or "attitude" which
ml> they take exception to...
It's all a monotone to me, unless you emphazise words with quotes or all
cap spelliing. It's when I encounter a smilie or a frown that gives me an
idea of how the word should sound, but then I don't normally use those.
RW>> I get really bored when someone's brain can't keep their mouths
RW>> engaged long enough for the words to pass on in real life.
ml> you shouldn't move your lips or say the words outloud when you are
ml> simply reading ;)
I never have. Above, I was speaking in terms of an in-person conversation
taking place in real life.
ml>> when i write a post that provides a method of getting
ml>> around a bug or problem, i give the details of such... when the
ml>> response appears to be a blowoff doe to a misunderstanding, then
ml>> yes, i will attempt to state it again slower so there's no
ml>> mistakes... that others take that as me telling them what to do is
ml>> definitely a mistake on their part because that's not what i have
ml>> done...
RW>> I dislike redundancy too.
ml> sometimes it takes more than once of explaining something for it to
ml> click and the other parties can finally grasp what was being
ml> explained...
Which means that the first explanation wasn't what it should have been.
ml> [trim]
ml>>> right... but you're already using binkd! ;)
RW>>> Not that I'm as aware of as I was with IREX... 8^)
ml>> IREX doesn't use binkd (the binary)... IREX implements an old
ml>> version of the binkP protocol... there is a difference...
RW>> Not much...the end results are the same...they both move mail
RW>> across the internet.
ml> hell, you can do that with plain old telnet or ftp, too... even ftps
ml> or scp if you want to encrypt the pathway the traffic is flowing thru
ml> but that's adding more overhead...
Yeup and not keeping the conversation where it isn't redundant.
R\%/itt
... Mark Owen: "Hey, did you ever hear anything about that beer?
... Fellow SEAL: "You believed that shit, I bet you voted for change too,
... SUCKER."
--- GoldED+/W32-MSVC and D'Bridge 3.82
* Origin: Lone Star Unit - Gulf States Backbone (1:387/22)
|