I see. Either way, I'd bet that a firewall in front of the web server can throw that information off.
On Fri, 2003-04-25 at 13:55, Shannon Roddy wrote: > I think they do a bit more than just say a ping check, web page > availability, etc to get the uptime. They actually depend on the OS > to provide uptime information. From the FAQ: > > > > What is 'Uptime' ? > > > ______________________________________________________________________ > > The 'uptime' as presented in these reports is the "time since last > reboot" of the front end computer or computers that are hosting a > site. We can detect this by looking at the data that we record when we > sample a site. We can detect how long the responding computer(s) > hosting a web site has been running, and by recording these samples > over a long period of time we can plot graphs that show this as a > line. Note that this is not the same as the availability of a site. > > > > > Which operating systems provide uptime information ? > > > ______________________________________________________________________ > > Operating systems we can usually work out uptimes for are: > > * BSD/OS > * FreeBSD [but not the default configuration in versions 3 to > 4.3] > * HP-UX [recent versions] > * IRIX > * Linux 2.1 kernel and later, except on Alpha processor based > systems > * Solaris 2.6 and later > * Windows 2000 > * Windows Server 2003 > * Windows XP > > > Operating systems that do not provide uptime information include; > > * AIX > * AS/400 > * Compaq Tru64 > * DG/UX > * MacOS > * MacOSX > * NT3/Windows 95 > * NT4/Windows 98 > * NetBSD/OpenBSD > * NetWare > * OS/2 > * OS/390 > * SCO UNIX > * SunOS 4 > * VM > Additionally HP-UX, Linux, Solaris and recent releases of FreeBSD > cycle back to zero after 497 days, exactly as if the machine had been > rebooted at that precise point. Thus it is not possible to see a > HP-UX, Linux or Solaris system with an uptime measurement above 497 > days. > > Shannon > > Tim Fournet wrote: > > If I understand them correctly, Netcraft measures uptime by uptime of > > the site in question. If you've got a cluster of web servers all > > responding for the same web site, the site will be up as long as there > > is a server to respond for it, even if individual cluster members fail. > > > > On Fri, 2003-04-25 at 13:22, Shannon Roddy wrote: > > > > > What I want to know is how in the hell Verio is getting >1000 days > > > uptime on Win2k/IIS5???? There must be something going on that lies??? > > > They must have had to reboot at some point to put in patches??? This > > > just doesn't make sense to me. Either that or their system must be > > > vulnerable as hell? ANyone have clue? > > > > > > If the numbers are real I hope they are paying that sysadmin >100k a > > > year, because he has performed a feat I thought was not possible! > > > > > > Shannon > > > > > > John Hebert wrote: > > > > > > > > > > "We're seeing crazy uptime numbers now, like three months, six months. I > > > > fully expect we'll see a year of uptime when Windows Server 2003 is > > > > finished," said Jeff Stucky, senior systems engineer on the > > > > Microsoft.com > > > > operations team on this Microsoft page . > > > > > > > > Uptimes of three months is crazy? Then Unix must be absolutely > > > > stark-raving-mad-running-in-traffic insane: > > > > > > > > http://uptime.netcraft.com/up/today/top.avg.html > > > > > > > > John Hebert > > > > > > > > -----Original Message----- > > > > From: Glenn Rumfellow > > > > To: Technical Group > > > > Sent: 4/25/03 7:36 AM > > > > Subject: Ballmer users in Windows 2003 Server > > > > > > > > I especially liked the last few paragraphs: > > > > > > > > http://www.theregister.co.uk/content/4/30395.html > > > > <<The Register.url>> > > > > > > > > _______________________________________________ > > > > General mailing list > > > > [email protected] > > > > http://brlug.net/mailman/listinfo/general_brlug.net > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > _______________________________________________ > > > General mailing list > > > [email protected] > > > http://brlug.net/mailman/listinfo/general_brlug.net > > > > > > > _______________________________________________ > > General mailing list > > [email protected] > > http://brlug.net/mailman/listinfo/general_brlug.net > > > >
