Jeff et al.,
I want to clarify my response a little bit. I was not speaking as an
employee of MCLX, nor was I commenting on the specifics of what would be
needed for this particular machine/network. I was speaking on my
opinion, which, in it's simplest terms is: Someone wants to give us free
equipment. TAKE IT BEFORE THEY CHANGE THEIR MINDS!!! ;-)
I cannot comment publicly (or privatly, for that matter) on behalf of
MCLX. I also cannot say exactly what can or cannot be done, or what will
need to be done on the network side. I was merely saying that ownership
of a box is not total control.
Kenny
Jeffry Smith wrote:
>
> "Kenneth E. Lussier" wrote:
> >
> [snip a bunch of stuff that I'm not commenting on]
> > This isn't 100% true. Sure, you can own the box and put whatever
> > software on it that you want, but that doesn't mean that you can "do
> > whatever we want". No matter who put's out the cash for the hardware,
> > there are still going to be restrictions as to what the box can be used
> > for. Some of the things that you mention above are extreamly intensive
> > on resources other than just the box itself (IRC and LDAP can tax a
> > network), and some of them may violate basic network security policies
> > (FTP). These things would require changes to firewalls and possably
> > network infrastructure.
> >
> I know for the tuxbiz.org, I was hoping to make the RPMs that were
> built available via anonymous FTP (passive mode), as demo businesses /
> starting points. Do we need a second box configured just for FTP? I
> thought we could set up anon FTP, passive, in a chroot jail on the
> machine.
>
> jeff smith
> ---------------------------------------------------------------------------------
> thought for the day: Humor in the Court:
> Q. Mrs. Jones, is your appearance this morning pursuant to a
> deposition
> notice which I sent to your attorney?
> A. No. This is how I dress when I go to work.
