Linux-Advocacy Digest #744, Volume #31 Fri, 26 Jan 01 12:13:05 EST
Contents:
Re: Microsoft is fired. (Milton)
Re: Best way to learn Linux? (Salvador Peralta)
Re: NT is Most Vulnerable Server Software (T. Max Devlin)
Linux Desktop ( Was: Re: Whistler predictions... ) (Salvador Peralta)
Re: Microsoft is fired. (.)
Re: Microsoft is fired. (.)
Re: Microsoft is fired. (.)
Re: Whistler predictions... (.)
Re: Whistler, the greatest jump forward in the evolution of computing... (.)
Re: Why can't Microsoft keep their web servers up?
Re: Why can't Microsoft keep their web servers up? (.)
Re: Linux 2.4 Major Advance ([EMAIL PROTECTED])
Re: I am preparing to teach a Linux class and I am soliciting advice
([EMAIL PROTECTED])
Re: Comparison: Installing W2K and Linux 2.4 ([EMAIL PROTECTED])
Re: Whistler predictions... ("JS/PL")
Re: Getting first W2K server (Craig Kelley)
Re: New Microsoft Ad :-) (chrisv)
Re: (OT) linux ftp clients (was re: linux is crude and inconsistent) (Kevin Ford)
Re: Why can't Microsoft keep their web servers up? (Kevin Ford)
Re: New Microsoft Ad :-) (chrisv)
Re: Why can't Microsoft keep their web servers up? (Kevin Ford)
----------------------------------------------------------------------------
From: Milton <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Crossposted-To: comp.os.nt.advocacy
Subject: Re: Microsoft is fired.
Date: Fri, 26 Jan 2001 10:07:49 -0500
On Fri, 26 Jan 2001 04:13:39 -0600, "Erik Funkenbusch" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
wrote:
>"Bobby D. Bryant" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote in message
>news:[EMAIL PROTECTED]...
>> Erik Funkenbusch wrote:
>>
>> > "Bobby D. Bryant" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>
>> I wonder what it will be tomorrow.
>
>Actually, it was quite easy to figure out that this was a DDoS attack.
>Traceroutes to microsoft IP addresses showed massive latency and dropped
>packets even before entering MS's routers.
"If the company had in fact been using "routers" (as opposed to "a
router") as it claims, and ones properly distributed as is ought, it's
unlikely that the attack could have been as effective as it was."
http://www.theregister.co.uk/content/6/16381.html
That whole organization *reeks* of incompetence.
>From the top executive, to the lowliest programmer and that includes the
army of MSCEs that are employed to run this three-ring circus.
--
���������������������������������������������������
Milton B. Hewitt
CAUCE Member - http://www.cauce.org
Proud supporter of the Microsoft Boycott Campaign
http://www.vcnet.com/bms/
���������������������������������������������������
------------------------------
From: Salvador Peralta <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Subject: Re: Best way to learn Linux?
Date: Fri, 26 Jan 2001 07:24:04 -0800
[EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
>
> ound out most effective way was the so-
> called Socratic method of question/answer. So, put together a website
> www.foo.com to explore this approach to teaching Open Source.
The best way to learn linux is to put it on your desktop and explore
your system. I never fully realized how out the the loop I was until a
put linux on my desktop.
--
Salvador Peralta
http://www.erg.abdn.ac.uk/users/gorry/course/
------------------------------
From: T. Max Devlin <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Crossposted-To: alt.destroy.microsoft
Subject: Re: NT is Most Vulnerable Server Software
Reply-To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Date: Fri, 26 Jan 2001 15:34:38 GMT
Said Erik Funkenbusch in alt.destroy.microsoft on Thu, 25 Jan 2001 \
>"T. Max Devlin" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote in message
>news:[EMAIL PROTECTED]...
>> Said Erik Funkenbusch in alt.destroy.microsoft on Thu, 25 Jan 2001
>> >"Stuart Fox" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote in message
>> >news:94os4d$cp$[EMAIL PROTECTED]...
>> >> > As they say, a little knowledge is a dangerous thing. It is clear you
>> >> > have read a little but have not implemented any of it. Is it no
>> >> > wonder that the teaching profession has such a bad name these days
>> >> > especially in your neck of the woods. Try making your classes a bit
>> >> > more practical. Then the teacher may learn something.
>> >> >
>> >> Perhaps you should look in some of the RFC's for T. Max Devlin. A
>> >> hint, you'll probably find his name in some of the SNMP ones...
>> >
>> >Hmm.. which ones are those? The name Devlin doesn't appear at all in the
>> >index of RFC's at: http://rfc.net/rfc-index.html
>> >
>> >Also, going through all the basic SNMP RFC's, his name doesn't appear
>> >either.
>>
>> No, it won't be in any index; it was merely an acknowledgement. One of
>> more than a dozen names of people who contributed in greater or lesser
>> amounts. Mine was surely lesser, but it is there, in all of the SNMPv3
>> standards. It is yet another startling reminder to my humility that
>> nobody actually uses the SNMPv3 standards.
>
>Which one? I went through every RFC listed that even mentions SNMP in the
>index, and nowhere in any of them is the name Devlin.
Which one*s*; there are three related RFCs that make up the SNMPv3
standard; 2573, 2574, and 2575 (also the 'old' versions, 2273, 2274, and
2275, IIRC). Apparently, you're not looking hard enough. ;-)
--
T. Max Devlin
*** The best way to convince another is
to state your case moderately and
accurately. - Benjamin Franklin ***
------------------------------
From: Salvador Peralta <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Crossposted-To: comp.os.ms-windows.advocacy,comp.os.ms-windows.nt.advocacy
Subject: Linux Desktop ( Was: Re: Whistler predictions... )
Date: Fri, 26 Jan 2001 07:52:59 -0800
Charlie Ebert wrote:
> No copyrights! No lawsuit threats! No software police!
> No bluescreens! No unexplainable lockups! No throwing
> away that GOOD PC of your just so you can upgrade to the
> next Microsoft product/s.
Plus, linux tools are simply smarter. Instead of building monolithic
applications that try and do your thinking for you and don't do it very
well. (eg. Word ), the unix ethos behind creating light, extensible,
interoperable tools has made its way onto the linux desktop.
--
Salvador Peralta
http://164.67.27.112/ for at least the next 30-45 minutes
------------------------------
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] (.)
Subject: Re: Microsoft is fired.
Date: 26 Jan 2001 15:54:01 GMT
Erik Funkenbusch <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> "Bobby D. Bryant" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote in message
> news:[EMAIL PROTECTED]...
>> Erik Funkenbusch wrote:
>>
>> > Hmm.. according to the press release, it was a configuration error.
>>
>> Hmmm... They're having trouble again today. It sure takes MS a long time
> to
>> fix configuration errors.
> Today's problem was a DDoS attack on their routers. Apparently, some script
> kiddies wanted to make MS look even worse, never mind the fact that this is
> the sort of attack that crippled companies like Yahoo and AT&T not too long
> ago.
Again, there is no excuse to let a DOS attack do that to your routers.
Network engineering isnt rocket science. But I would expect nothing less
than absolute idiocy from the morons that apparantly have access to microsoft's
border.
=====.
------------------------------
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] (.)
Crossposted-To: comp.os.nt.advocacy
Subject: Re: Microsoft is fired.
Date: 26 Jan 2001 15:58:05 GMT
Milton <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> On Fri, 26 Jan 2001 04:13:39 -0600, "Erik Funkenbusch" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
> wrote:
>>"Bobby D. Bryant" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote in message
>>news:[EMAIL PROTECTED]...
>>> Erik Funkenbusch wrote:
>>>
>>> > "Bobby D. Bryant" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>>
>>> I wonder what it will be tomorrow.
>>
>>Actually, it was quite easy to figure out that this was a DDoS attack.
>>Traceroutes to microsoft IP addresses showed massive latency and dropped
>>packets even before entering MS's routers.
> "If the company had in fact been using "routers" (as opposed to "a
> router") as it claims, and ones properly distributed as is ought, it's
> unlikely that the attack could have been as effective as it was."
> http://www.theregister.co.uk/content/6/16381.html
Absolutely. Theres this thing called 'filtering' that routers do, see.
=====.
------------------------------
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] (.)
Subject: Re: Microsoft is fired.
Date: 26 Jan 2001 16:00:23 GMT
Erik Funkenbusch <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> "." <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote in message
> news:94q1bm$13p$[EMAIL PROTECTED]...
>> > Hmm.. according to the press release, it was a configuration error. Of
>> > course they would all fail at once, since they were all updated at the
> same
>> > time. Being on different networks has nothing to do with it (you DO
> realize
>> > that DNS servers talk to each other and exchange their data, right?)
>>
>> It said that it was a router configuration error. It was not a DNS
> configuration
>> error. ROUTER configuration error. If you can knock out all of your DN
>> servers with A ROUTER CONFIGURATION ERROR, youve set up your network
> wrong.
> My appolgies, I did read that a little too fast.
>> Period. This is what I have been saying from the beginning.
> No, you claim the DNS servers are on the same segment. The article says
> that MS's border router was misconfigured. No matter how many subnets you
> put your DNS servers, they all have to go through the border router unless
> you physically seperate them in different geographical places, like one in
> New York and one in Seattle and one in Dallas and one in Chicago.
Physically, yes. Not topologically. You can set them up anyway you want,
unless of course you plug whatever is uplinking their segment into ONE
interface on the router. That reins you in a bit as far as what you can
do to not have this kind of thing happen. But you can still divide things
up by IP; although this is a dirty and terrible way of doing things, its
much better than what microsoft did.
>> >> This is *very* basic networking knowledge. I'm not at all surprised
> that
>> >> no one at microsoft has any idea about how the rest of the world does
> IP
>> >> networking; as quick perusal of the average MCSE study book shows
> beyond
>> >> the shadow of a doubt that they have it all wrong.
>>
>> > I don't think you've even looked at an MCSE study book, since the
> official
>> > MS study books actually say the things you claim they don't.
>>
>> Get some experience, then argue.
> You're the one making claims about having read the MCSE book and claiming
> there is info in there which isn't.
Forget everything you learned about TCP/IP from your MCSE study books, because
most of it is incorrect.
=====.
------------------------------
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] (.)
Crossposted-To: comp.os.ms-windows.advocacy,comp.os.ms-windows.nt.advocacy
Subject: Re: Whistler predictions...
Date: 26 Jan 2001 16:04:32 GMT
In comp.os.linux.advocacy JS/PL <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> "Charlie Ebert" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote in message
> news:[EMAIL PROTECTED]...
>> When whistler finally hit's market I predict the following.
>>
>> It will be a year after the release before any serious sales
>> are made on the OS.
>>
>> Corporations will repel from the idea of having their installed
>> base of software show up on Microsoft corporate registers
>> for the viewing of *OTHERS* interested in prosecuting violators!
>>
>> Home users will FEAR Whistler and it's ability to report
>> to Microsoft about the applications found on your machine
>> and they will resist upgrade.
> You don't know what the hell your talking about.
>> The home user based community will begin the FEEL the pain of
>> having to pay the extremely HIGH price for this OS.
> You've seen the price MS will be charging? You must have ESP. Can you email
> me next weeks winning powerball numbers.
>> They will not have fixed their instability problems and will
>> have mounted additional issues to be resolved as discovered
>> by the dwindling user base.
> What instability problems are present in NT5? I haven't run accross any in
> 11 months. Since whistler is NT5.x what is there to resolve? The user base
> is growing by leaps and bounds. And will continue.
>>
>> But this isn't anything new for Microsoft. They have
>> doubled the problems and the price of EVERY release
>> of their Windows OS.
> Problems doubled?? Get your head out of your ass and half your problems are
> instantly solved.
> The price is double?? I think the price of WinME with inflation factored is
> cheaper than any OS Microsoft has ever sold in their 25 year history.
>>
>> And you can avoid all of this right now by going to this
>> website and installing an OS on your computer tonight!
>>
>> http://www.debian.org
> And reformatting and re-installing Windows tommorow when you find out half
> your hardware won't run.
You know, its actually pretty hilarious when people take comments on their
operating system of choice so personally that they actually get mad.
Whats the matter, JS? Someone cheating on you or something?
=====.
------------------------------
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] (.)
Subject: Re: Whistler, the greatest jump forward in the evolution of computing...
Date: 26 Jan 2001 16:06:12 GMT
bAckline <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> Microsoft Windows 2001, code-name whistler, said to be the
> greatest jump forward in the evolution of computing and
> information technology, since the advent of the
> drop-shadowed mouse cursor. Windows 2001 will be easier
> to use, faster, more reliable, more advanced and better
> looking than any other computing platform currently available
> to man.
Hmmm. Windows95 was supposed to be "more like macos" (bill's
words). I guess whistler is supposed to be "more like MacX".
Too bad it too will fall far short.
=====.
------------------------------
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] ()
Crossposted-To: comp.os.ms-windows.advocacy
Subject: Re: Why can't Microsoft keep their web servers up?
Date: Fri, 26 Jan 2001 16:15:55 -0000
On Fri, 26 Jan 2001 00:04:54 -0600, Erik Funkenbusch <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>"Joseph T. Adams" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote in message
>news:94qcc1$9qg$[EMAIL PROTECTED]...
>> In comp.os.linux.advocacy Erik Funkenbusch <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>> : Yes, they do. But it seems that someone is DoSing all their DNS
>servers, or
>> : spoofing them, or something. This has always been a severe weakness of
>the
>> : internet, and has accounted for many problems. I remember a while back
>> : someone hijacked Network Solutions DNS and was rerouting people to his
>own
>> : site that were trying to go to NSI.
>>
>> If Microsoft would show even the slightest inclination to use its
>> dominant position on the desktop for good, and to start building
>> robust support for *standard-compliant* IPv6 and IPSec into its
>> software, it could make a BIG contribution to solving this and many of
>> today's other Internet security problems.
>
>Are you not aware that IPSec is built into Win2k?
It is also specificially not intended for the general
desktop market. Also, the fact that it is still a
marginal platform (despite being from Microsoft) means
that this is about as relevant as if Apple were doing it.
>
>Also, MS provides complete source to it's IPv6 implementation at:
Then why didn't/couldn't you point to the WinME version,
or better yet: the Win98 version?
--
The ability to type
./configure
make
make install
does not constitute programming skill. |||
/ | \
------------------------------
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] (.)
Crossposted-To: comp.os.ms-windows.advocacy
Subject: Re: Why can't Microsoft keep their web servers up?
Date: 26 Jan 2001 16:19:38 GMT
In comp.os.linux.advocacy Erik Funkenbusch <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> "." <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote in message
> news:94q1ke$13p$[EMAIL PROTECTED]...
>> In comp.os.linux.advocacy Erik Funkenbusch <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>> > "." <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote in message
>> > news:94prgo$oe$[EMAIL PROTECTED]...
>> >> In comp.os.linux.advocacy Erik Funkenbusch <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>> >> > "." <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote in message
>> >> > news:94p8ob$s02$[EMAIL PROTECTED]...
>> >> >> In comp.os.linux.advocacy Erik Funkenbusch <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>> >> >>
>> >> >> > MS's 4 DNS servers were at:
>> >> >>
>> >> >> > DNS4.cp.msft.net internet address 207.46.138.11
>> >> >> > DNS5.cp.msft.net internet address 207.46.138.12
>> >> >> > DNS6.cp.msft.net internet address 207.46.138.20
>> >> >> > DNS7.cp.msft.net internet address 207.46.138.21
>> >> >>
>> >> >> > Now, think of what a netmask of 255.255.255.240 (or /28) does to
>> > those
>> >> > IP's.
>> >> >>
>> >> >> Tell me, do you even understand why its bad to put all your domain
>> >> >> servers on the same subnet?
>> >>
>> >> > So in other words, you have no idea what a netmask of .240 or /28
> does.
>> >>
>> >> I do, erik, because I have practical experience.
>> >>
>> >> You however, do not. You have alot of books though, im sure.
>>
>> > Then how come you're the one that insists they're on the same subnet,
>> > despite no proof?
>>
>> Sweetheart, how do you think a bad router config *only* affected
> microsofts
>> DNS machines and *disabled all of them*?
> So, their DNS servers are all behind the same border router. That's not the
> same thing as them being on the same subnet.
You missed the point.
Microsoft said that ONLY their DNS machines were effected, and only THOSE FOUR.
They also said that it was a router configuration error.
The scenereo in which this is a possibility is that all four of those machines
exist *only* on the *same* interface on the router, topologically. If they
all route through the same interface ALWAYS and ONLY (which is the case in this
scenereo, since otherwise the fix would have taken about a second and a half),
it wouldnt MATTER if they were switched out from eachother or not; they would
be behaving as if they were on the same subnet anyway.
So the point is moot. Theyre on the same subnet.
> They're not geographically seperated, and probably should be. But, a DDoS
> against their DNS or against their primary routers to their servers is about
> the same thing.
Thats what theyre saying TODAY. I wonder if either story was true?
>> This would mean that they would HAVE to be on the same /24. (well, almost
>> have to be, there are a few ways to get around that, but then breaking
>> the router wouldnt have crapped out all of them at the same time).
> No, it means that upstream they're behind the same border router. That
> could be a Class C or a Class B or a Class A for that matter.
IF the DOS story is true. I'm talking about the router configuration story.
If someone had fucked the config of a border router, MUCH MORE would have
broken than just 4 DNS machines.
> Hint: Much of the traffic for the east coast goes through a few central
> routers. DDoSing those routers would cut off access to the entire west
> coast from the mountains on over.
It seems that microsoft's DNS machines were the only things affected by
this DOS.
Sounds fishy. Id be happy to do some spin-doctoring for microsoft (hell,
ive done it for other people) in exchange for a competative hourly rate;
say around 175.
=====.
------------------------------
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Crossposted-To: comp.os.ms-windows.nt.advocacy
Subject: Re: Linux 2.4 Major Advance
Date: 26 Jan 2001 16:22:43 GMT
In comp.os.linux.advocacy Chad Myers <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> "J Sloan" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote in message news:[EMAIL PROTECTED]...
>> Chad Myers wrote:
>>
>> > P.S.- sponsoring an independant benchmark does not necessarily
>> > taint the findings.
>>
>> Hint: "sponsored" and "independent" clash.
> Then you have no idea how the scientific world works. All studies
> are sponsored by someone, but it doesn't affect the outcome of
> the study.
Then you have never been involved in the 'scientific world'.
I have. I was involved in radon research in the late 80s-early90s
in northeastern pennsylvania.
I can tell you that under no uncertian terms, sponsorship absolutely
affects the outcome of these studies.
.-----
------------------------------
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Crossposted-To: comp.os.linux,comp.os.linux.questions,comp.os.linux.admin
Subject: Re: I am preparing to teach a Linux class and I am soliciting advice
Date: Fri, 26 Jan 2001 16:16:51 GMT
I just completed a Linux Administration Class. Our text was Linux
Administration Made Easy by Steve Frampton available at the LDP
(www.linuxdoc.org). It focuses on using Red Hat Linux, probably the
easiest distribution to use for Linux newbies. Other websites that are
extremely useful are www.linuxapps.org, www.penguincomputing.com, and
rpmfind.net
Good Luck
Sent via Deja.com
http://www.deja.com/
------------------------------
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Subject: Re: Comparison: Installing W2K and Linux 2.4
Reply-To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Date: Fri, 26 Jan 2001 16:42:04 GMT
On Fri, 26 Jan 2001 05:23:02 GMT, [EMAIL PROTECTED] (Charlie
Ebert) wrote:
>Then why do you post here day and night badmouthing Linux.
>If what you say is TRUE then why is Linux the fastest growing
>OS since the invention of the computer?
Because it isn't.
You've answered your own question Charlie.
Flatfish
Why do they call it a flatfish?
Remove the ++++ to reply.
------------------------------
From: "JS/PL" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Crossposted-To: comp.os.ms-windows.advocacy,comp.os.ms-windows.nt.advocacy
Subject: Re: Whistler predictions...
Date: Fri, 26 Jan 2001 11:45:21 -0500
"." <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote in message
news:94s76g$11i$[EMAIL PROTECTED]...
> In comp.os.linux.advocacy JS/PL <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>
> > "Charlie Ebert" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote in message
> > news:[EMAIL PROTECTED]...
> >> When whistler finally hit's market I predict the following.
> >>
> >> It will be a year after the release before any serious sales
> >> are made on the OS.
> >>
> >> Corporations will repel from the idea of having their installed
> >> base of software show up on Microsoft corporate registers
> >> for the viewing of *OTHERS* interested in prosecuting violators!
> >>
> >> Home users will FEAR Whistler and it's ability to report
> >> to Microsoft about the applications found on your machine
> >> and they will resist upgrade.
>
> > You don't know what the hell your talking about.
>
> >> The home user based community will begin the FEEL the pain of
> >> having to pay the extremely HIGH price for this OS.
>
> > You've seen the price MS will be charging? You must have ESP. Can you
email
> > me next weeks winning powerball numbers.
>
> >> They will not have fixed their instability problems and will
> >> have mounted additional issues to be resolved as discovered
> >> by the dwindling user base.
>
> > What instability problems are present in NT5? I haven't run accross any
in
> > 11 months. Since whistler is NT5.x what is there to resolve? The user
base
> > is growing by leaps and bounds. And will continue.
> >>
> >> But this isn't anything new for Microsoft. They have
> >> doubled the problems and the price of EVERY release
> >> of their Windows OS.
>
> > Problems doubled?? Get your head out of your ass and half your problems
are
> > instantly solved.
> > The price is double?? I think the price of WinME with inflation factored
is
> > cheaper than any OS Microsoft has ever sold in their 25 year history.
>
> >>
> >> And you can avoid all of this right now by going to this
> >> website and installing an OS on your computer tonight!
> >>
> >> http://www.debian.org
>
> > And reformatting and re-installing Windows tommorow when you find out
half
> > your hardware won't run.
>
> You know, its actually pretty hilarious when people take comments on their
> operating system of choice so personally that they actually get mad.
>
> Whats the matter, JS? Someone cheating on you or something?
And yet others get mad when their lies are extinguished as quickly as they
see the light of day.
The cheating thing sounds like a Freudian slip on your part. Don't worry
pal, let it pass, theres plenty of fish in the sea.
------------------------------
From: Craig Kelley <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Subject: Re: Getting first W2K server
Date: 26 Jan 2001 09:48:14 -0700
[EMAIL PROTECTED] (Perry Pip) writes:
> On Wed, 24 Jan 2001 23:52:04 -0600,
> Bobby D. Bryant <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>
> >I should have also said in my other post ("not just Microsoft"), that if your
> >company buys the wrong thing and it doesn't work as advertised, standard
> >practice is to blame the technical staff for sabotaging it.
> >
>
> Now that's funny....look who Microsoft is blaming for their own web site woes:
>
> http://www.cnn.com/2001/TECH/computing/01/25/microsoft.web.sites.reut/index.html
>
> "It was an operational error and not the result of any issue with
> Microsoft or third-party products nor the security of our networks,"
> Microsoft said in a statement released late on Wednesday.
So it wasn't DDoS as the Windows people have been saying?
Hmm, the last time I checked, having your website down for 24 hours is
a *major* security hole. Especially since windowsupdate was down, as
were all the service packs, people's e-mail and such.
(This could happen to anyone, though)
--
The wheel is turning but the hamster is dead.
Craig Kelley -- [EMAIL PROTECTED]
http://www.isu.edu/~kellcrai finger [EMAIL PROTECTED] for PGP block
------------------------------
From: chrisv <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Crossposted-To: alt.destroy.microsoft,comp.os.ms-windows.nt.advocacy
Subject: Re: New Microsoft Ad :-)
Date: Fri, 26 Jan 2001 16:55:07 GMT
"Aaron R. Kulkis" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>Under normal usage, a crashing app will crash ALL of Windows as well.
Change will to can and you would be correct.
------------------------------
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] (Kevin Ford)
Subject: Re: (OT) linux ftp clients (was re: linux is crude and inconsistent)
Date: Fri, 26 Jan 2001 14:41:50 +0000
Reply-To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Mart van deWege once wrote:
>T. Max Devlin wrote:
>
>
>> TBH, five bucks on a $1800 computer is so little that, if I planned to
>>
>> use StarOffice, I just might pay them simply to have it pre-installed.
>>
>> But I don't mind waiting, either (or didn't, when I had Gozilla; does
>>
>> RH7's ftp client support resume?)
>>
>>
>>
>> [...]
>
>Max,
>
>To be fair, the default linux ftp client is just the good old
>UNIX ftp command, it doesn't support resume. However, if you get
>the full set of RH7 you might get lucky and get gFTP included, a
>Gnome-based grapical client, and one of the best around.
>Otherwise it is available in RPM format so you can download and
>install it without a hassle.
>If you have more questions, fire away. I am no linux guru, but
>I've taken my knocks and I know a fair bit about both RH and
>Debian, so I may be of some assistance.
>
wget -c
no logging in or anything needed. Just an URL.
------------------------------
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] (Kevin Ford)
Crossposted-To: comp.os.ms-windows.advocacy
Subject: Re: Why can't Microsoft keep their web servers up?
Date: Fri, 26 Jan 2001 15:02:18 +0000
Reply-To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Des Herriott once wrote:
>On 25 Jan 2001 13:12:43 GMT, [EMAIL PROTECTED] <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>> In comp.os.linux.advocacy Erik Funkenbusch <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>>
>> > MS's 4 DNS servers were at:
>>
>> > DNS4.cp.msft.net internet address 207.46.138.11
>> > DNS5.cp.msft.net internet address 207.46.138.12
>> > DNS6.cp.msft.net internet address 207.46.138.20
>> > DNS7.cp.msft.net internet address 207.46.138.21
>>
>> > Now, think of what a netmask of 255.255.255.240 (or /28) does to those IP's.
>>
>> Tell me, do you even understand why its bad to put all your domain
>> servers on the same subnet?
>
>Not that I'm normally a Microsoft advocate, but you really need to go
>and read a book about CIDR. Then go back & read Erik's post and try to
>understand the point he's making, rather than conveniently ignore it.
>
>Hint: those addresses are not necessarily on the same subnet.
>
If they are on the internet they are.
------------------------------
From: chrisv <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Crossposted-To: alt.destroy.microsoft,comp.os.ms-windows.nt.advocacy
Subject: Re: New Microsoft Ad :-)
Date: Fri, 26 Jan 2001 17:01:33 GMT
"ono" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>That's why I run ms stuff only on my pc's (with very few exceptions).
That's no panacea. About a year back on my Win98 box at home, Word
and Excel suddenly decided that they could not open up existing files.
Appearently, 128M was "Insuffient memory" to open up a 20k Word doc.
With no idea on how to fix it, it was time for a complete re-install
of Windows.
------------------------------
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] (Kevin Ford)
Crossposted-To: comp.os.ms-windows.advocacy
Subject: Re: Why can't Microsoft keep their web servers up?
Date: Fri, 26 Jan 2001 15:05:00 +0000
Reply-To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Erik Funkenbusch once wrote:
>"Joseph T. Adams" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote in message
>news:94qcc1$9qg$[EMAIL PROTECTED]...
>> In comp.os.linux.advocacy Erik Funkenbusch <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>> : Yes, they do. But it seems that someone is DoSing all their DNS
>servers, or
>> : spoofing them, or something. This has always been a severe weakness of
>the
>> : internet, and has accounted for many problems. I remember a while back
>> : someone hijacked Network Solutions DNS and was rerouting people to his
>own
>> : site that were trying to go to NSI.
>>
>> If Microsoft would show even the slightest inclination to use its
>> dominant position on the desktop for good, and to start building
>> robust support for *standard-compliant* IPv6 and IPSec into its
>> software, it could make a BIG contribution to solving this and many of
>> today's other Internet security problems.
>
>Are you not aware that IPSec is built into Win2k?
>
>Also, MS provides complete source to it's IPv6 implementation at:
>
>http://research.microsoft.com/msripv6/
>
Just when you thought things were going to be stable.... along comes ipv6
Come on guys Unix has had this installed by default for years.
------------------------------
** FOR YOUR REFERENCE **
The service address, to which questions about the list itself and requests
to be added to or deleted from it should be directed, is:
Internet: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
You can send mail to the entire list by posting to comp.os.linux.advocacy.
Linux may be obtained via one of these FTP sites:
ftp.funet.fi pub/Linux
tsx-11.mit.edu pub/linux
sunsite.unc.edu pub/Linux
End of Linux-Advocacy Digest
******************************
