On Mon, 14 Aug 2006, Igor Robul wrote:
Hello,
On Sat, Aug 12, 2006 at 11:55:14PM -0300, Marc G. Fournier wrote:
Since this is meant to provide stats for *BSD, not just FreeBSD, I've
setup bsdstats.org as a more 'neutral' site ...
Maybe you need to move data from bsdstats.hub.org to bsdstats
Hello,
On Sat, Aug 12, 2006 at 11:55:14PM -0300, Marc G. Fournier wrote:
>
> Since this is meant to provide stats for *BSD, not just FreeBSD, I've
> setup bsdstats.org as a more 'neutral' site ...
Maybe you need to move data from bsdstats.hub.org to bsdstats.org?
Because now there is bsdstats.h
On Sat, 12 Aug 2006, Jonathan Horne wrote:
* Can we trust Marc to delete them?
Won't be anything to delete ... except for any time I need to debug the
server end, the logs will be set to /dev/null ...
* I thought this was going to be an official FreeBSD project hosted on
freebsd.org?
Si
On Sat, 12 Aug 2006, Daniel Gerzo wrote:
Hello Marc,
Saturday, August 12, 2006, 12:55:13 AM, you wrote:
On Sat, 12 Aug 2006, Daniel Gerzo wrote:
It would be nice to see this in base system, that would help to raise
this number enourmously. And surely it would be nice to see it
somewhere
Hello Marc,
Saturday, August 12, 2006, 12:55:13 AM, you wrote:
> On Sat, 12 Aug 2006, Daniel Gerzo wrote:
>>
>> It would be nice to see this in base system, that would help to raise
>> this number enourmously. And surely it would be nice to see it
>> somewhere under the freebsd.org domain.
> A
On Friday 11 August 2006 22:29, Nikolas Britton wrote:
> On 8/11/06, Matthew Seaman <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> > Marc G. Fournier wrote:
> > > On Fri, 11 Aug 2006, Nikolas Britton wrote:
> > >> Ok... With my new script it took only 158 minutes to compute ALL
> > >> TCP/IP address hashes. I'll rep
On 8/11/06, Matthew Seaman <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
Marc G. Fournier wrote:
> On Fri, 11 Aug 2006, Nikolas Britton wrote:
>
>> Ok... With my new script it took only 158 minutes to compute ALL
>> TCP/IP address hashes. I'll repeat that... I have an md5 hash for
>> every IP address in the world!
On Sat, 12 Aug 2006, Daniel Gerzo wrote:
Hello Garance,
Friday, August 11, 2006, 9:59:41 PM, you wrote:
At 11:49 AM -0500 8/11/06, Paul Schmehl wrote:
I know we are used to dealing in internet-time, where
things happen instantly, but there could be many reasons
that the host count is only
Hello Garance,
Friday, August 11, 2006, 9:59:41 PM, you wrote:
> At 11:49 AM -0500 8/11/06, Paul Schmehl wrote:
> I know we are used to dealing in internet-time, where
> things happen instantly, but there could be many reasons
> that the host count is only 1612. Reasons that have
> nothing to d
On Fri, 11 Aug 2006, Garance A Drosihn wrote:
At 11:49 AM -0500 8/11/06, Paul Schmehl wrote:
I would note that these issues appear to be impacting
the project. As of right now, there are only 1612
systems reporting in, ...
For my part, I've submitted two public hosts. I have
four others I
At 11:49 AM -0500 8/11/06, Paul Schmehl wrote:
I would note that these issues appear to be impacting
the project. As of right now, there are only 1612
systems reporting in, ...
For my part, I've submitted two public hosts. I have
four others I will not submit until I'm certain the
data are
Matthew Seaman wrote:
Paul Schmehl wrote:
1) encrypt the data being fed to your systems by the script - this
should be relatively easy using keys and would ensure that a man in the
middle attack would fail. You can connect using ssh and a unique key
without having to reveal passwords to anyon
Paul Schmehl wrote:
> 1) encrypt the data being fed to your systems by the script - this
> should be relatively easy using keys and would ensure that a man in the
> middle attack would fail. You can connect using ssh and a unique key
> without having to reveal passwords to anyone.
Uh... HTTPS s
Marc G. Fournier wrote:
On Fri, 11 Aug 2006, Nikolas Britton wrote:
Ok... With my new script it took only 158 minutes to compute ALL
TCP/IP address hashes. I'll repeat that... I have an md5 hash for
every IP address in the world! All I need to do is grep your hash and
it will tell me your IP ad
On Fri, Aug 11, 2006 at 02:38:48PM +0100, Matthew Seaman wrote:
>
> He's trying to prevent any possibility of information disclosure about
> his servers. If I wanted to hack into his site, knowing what hosts he
> had running (ie. a bunch of live IP numbers) and what OS etc. each used
> would mean
Marc G. Fournier wrote:
> On Fri, 11 Aug 2006, Nikolas Britton wrote:
>
>> Ok... With my new script it took only 158 minutes to compute ALL
>> TCP/IP address hashes. I'll repeat that... I have an md5 hash for
>> every IP address in the world! All I need to do is grep your hash and
>> it will tell
On Fri, 11 Aug 2006, Nikolas Britton wrote:
Ok... With my new script it took only 158 minutes to compute ALL
TCP/IP address hashes. I'll repeat that... I have an md5 hash for
every IP address in the world! All I need to do is grep your hash and
it will tell me your IP address. yippee! :-)
Can
Nikolas Britton wrote:
> Ok... With my new script it took only 158 minutes to compute ALL
> TCP/IP address hashes. I'll repeat that... I have an md5 hash for
> every IP address in the world! All I need to do is grep your hash and
> it will tell me your IP address. yippee! :-)
>
> Can we please fin
Ok... With my new script it took only 158 minutes to compute ALL
TCP/IP address hashes. I'll repeat that... I have an md5 hash for
every IP address in the world! All I need to do is grep your hash and
it will tell me your IP address. yippee! :-)
Can we please find a new method to track hosts... p
On 8/10/06, Nikolas Britton <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
On 8/9/06, Nikolas Britton <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> On 8/9/06, Marc G. Fournier <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> > On Wed, 9 Aug 2006, Paul Schmehl wrote:
> >
> > > Marc G. Fournier wrote:
> > >> On Wed, 9 Aug 2006, Igor Robul wrote:
> > >>
>
On 8/9/06, Nikolas Britton <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
On 8/9/06, Marc G. Fournier <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> On Wed, 9 Aug 2006, Paul Schmehl wrote:
>
> > Marc G. Fournier wrote:
> >> On Wed, 9 Aug 2006, Igor Robul wrote:
> >>
> >>> On Tue, Aug 08, 2006 at 09:30:42PM -0300, Marc G. Fournier wro
On 8/9/06, Marc G. Fournier <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
On Wed, 9 Aug 2006, Paul Schmehl wrote:
> Marc G. Fournier wrote:
>> On Wed, 9 Aug 2006, Igor Robul wrote:
>>
>>> On Tue, Aug 08, 2006 at 09:30:42PM -0300, Marc G. Fournier wrote:
Could create problems long term .. one thing I will be u
On Wed, Aug 09, 2006 at 03:16:29PM -0400, Bill Moran wrote:
> In response to Matthew Seaman <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>:
>
> > This problem is intractable: any scheme you can think of to generate a
> > unique identifying number on a random host out there on the net will either
> > fail to actually be uniq
At 9:32 AM +1000 8/9/06, Antony Mawer wrote:
What if we improved upon this - if instead of storing
the hostname and IP address, we stored a one-way hash
of this information? OpenSSH in recent versions takes
the same approach with its authorized_keys files...
A scattered list of ideas:
It migh
In response to Matthew Seaman <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>:
> This problem is intractable: any scheme you can think of to generate a
> unique identifying number on a random host out there on the net will either
> fail to actually be unique, or suffer from mutating over time as machine
> configuration chang
Svein Halvor Halvorsen wrote:
> Why not hash just the hostname? Or MAC-address? Of course these could
Disregard this. I see that the discussion has moved on. I'm with Matthew
Seaman's suggested server generated id-string.
Svein Halvor
signature.asc
Description: OpenPGP digital signatu
Nikolas Britton wrote:
> I still like my idea the best for unique keys. It's a better way to
> detect hosts behind NATs, here it is again, four versions to pick
> from:
>
> # ifconfig | sha256
> cbcc2f55a340c248af7e8a10871150d827af11d7051bbc782eefa04b0603248b
> # ifconfig | sha1
> b607b9d45e6ad40c
Marc G. Fournier wrote:
> On Wed, 9 Aug 2006, Howard Jones wrote:
>
>> Marc G. Fournier wrote:
>>
>>> Right, and the bad thing is if yu alias another IP on that device, the
>>> hash totally changes, so we see that one host now as being two different
>>> ones :) That's why we disqualified using if
On Wed, 9 Aug 2006, Howard Jones wrote:
Marc G. Fournier wrote:
Right, and the bad thing is if yu alias another IP on that device, the
hash totally changes, so we see that one host now as being two different
ones :) That's why we disqualified using ifconfig right at the
beginning ...
But di
Marc G. Fournier wrote:
> Right, and the bad thing is if yu alias another IP on that device, the
> hash totally changes, so we see that one host now as being two different
> ones :) That's why we disqualified using ifconfig right at the
> beginning ...
But didn't you say that you effectively wip
On Tue, 8 Aug 2006, [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
--On August 9, 2006 9:32:18 AM +1000 Antony Mawer <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
wrote:
On 9/08/2006 9:16 AM, Marc G. Fournier wrote:
Can you tell me exactly what you do with those two pieces of data? Is
there any way that information would be accessible fr
On Tuesday 08 August 2006 9:17 am, Marc G. Fournier wrote:
> But, there is no such ting as an 'index number' ... when everyone reports
> in next month, for instance, there is no 'number' that will be re-used
> for them that matches something used this month ...
What about:
indexnumber=$(md5
On Wed, 9 Aug 2006, Howard Jones wrote:
Marc G. Fournier wrote:
The uniqueness is a combination of IP+hostname ... again, as one pointed
out with PCBSD, this isn't always necessarily the case, but, IMHO, that
is a flaw of PCBSD having all hosts on the same network using the same
hostname ...
Marc G. Fournier wrote:
> The uniqueness is a combination of IP+hostname ... again, as one pointed
> out with PCBSD, this isn't always necessarily the case, but, IMHO, that
> is a flaw of PCBSD having all hosts on the same network using the same
> hostname ...
That's the nice thing with the 'ifco
With minor mods, committed ... I moved bsdstats.hub.org to a variable, and
added an 'echo' for when the stats, or a part of them, is disabled, that
way if this ever does get into the base system, ppl reading monthly run
output will know that they exist, and how to turn it on ...
thx ...
On
On Wed, 9 Aug 2006, Vahan Yerkanian wrote:
Marc G. Fournier wrote:
If that's the case, those numbers should come back again in Sept ... but,
the hostnames for the "odd ones" were all:
"http://www.domain.am";
with the quotes included, which seemed a really odd value for 'hostname' to
hav
On Wed, 9 Aug 2006, Paul Schmehl wrote:
Igor Robul wrote:
The only down side is it still can be faked, just like everything else.
IP from which connection is made cannot be faked, at least I dont know
how to fake it. So there is at least one "unfakable" part of key. But
there is no real need
On Wed, 9 Aug 2006, Paul Schmehl wrote:
Marc G. Fournier wrote:
On Wed, 9 Aug 2006, Igor Robul wrote:
On Tue, Aug 08, 2006 at 09:30:42PM -0300, Marc G. Fournier wrote:
Could create problems long term .. one thing I will be using the
IPs to do is:
SELECT ip, count(1) FROM systems GROUP BY ip
Igor Robul wrote:
The only down side is it still can be faked, just like everything else.
IP from which connection is made cannot be faked, at least I dont know
how to fake it. So there is at least one "unfakable" part of key. But
there is no real need to keep real IP in database, for privacy
Marc G. Fournier wrote:
On Wed, 9 Aug 2006, Igor Robul wrote:
On Tue, Aug 08, 2006 at 09:30:42PM -0300, Marc G. Fournier wrote:
Could create problems long term .. one thing I will be using the
IPs to do is:
SELECT ip, count(1) FROM systems GROUP BY ip ORDER BY count DESC;
to look for any 'ab
Someone mentioned having output from the script so you would know it was
running. This patch would do that, if you want to add that functionality.
--- 300.statistics.orig Wed Aug 9 09:49:35 2006
+++ 300.statistics Wed Aug 9 09:54:17 2006
@@ -44,6 +44,7 @@
SYS=`/usr/bin/uname -r`
On 8/9/06, Nikolas Britton <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
On 8/9/06, Igor Robul <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> On Tue, Aug 08, 2006 at 09:30:42PM -0300, Marc G. Fournier wrote:
> > Could create problems long term .. one thing I will be using the
> > IPs to do is:
> >
> > SELECT ip, count(1) FROM system
On Wed, Aug 09, 2006 at 05:41:55AM -0500, Nikolas Britton wrote:
> # ifconfig | sha256
> cbcc2f55a340c248af7e8a10871150d827af11d7051bbc782eefa04b0603248b
> # ifconfig | sha1
> b607b9d45e6ad40c02ab20800e0d70245ab6db68
> # ifconfig | md5
> 22a2a3eca61166fb113f1a688b3dd842
> # ifconfig | cksum
> 39770
On Wed, Aug 09, 2006 at 05:54:26AM -0300, Marc G. Fournier wrote:
> Except that you are disclosing that each and every time you send out an
> email, or hit a web site ... :)
Original poster concerned about this because he does not normaly use his
servers for this kind of work, if I had understood
On 8/9/06, Igor Robul <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
On Tue, Aug 08, 2006 at 09:30:42PM -0300, Marc G. Fournier wrote:
> Could create problems long term .. one thing I will be using the
> IPs to do is:
>
> SELECT ip, count(1) FROM systems GROUP BY ip ORDER BY count DESC;
>
> to look for any 'abnormal
Marc G. Fournier wrote:
If that's the case, those numbers should come back again in Sept ...
but, the hostnames for the "odd ones" were all:
"http://www.domain.am";
with the quotes included, which seemed a really odd value for 'hostname'
to have produced :)
Looks like a directadmin host
On Wed, 9 Aug 2006, jan gestre wrote:
/usr/local/etc/periodic/monthly/300.statistics
btw is the syntax correct?
monthly_statistics_enable=yes
monthly_statistics_report_devices=yes
or should the yes be "YES" ?
syntax is correct, and you are now on the countries list :)
thx
Marc G. Fou
On Wed, 9 Aug 2006, Igor Robul wrote:
On Tue, Aug 08, 2006 at 09:30:42PM -0300, Marc G. Fournier wrote:
Could create problems long term .. one thing I will be using the
IPs to do is:
SELECT ip, count(1) FROM systems GROUP BY ip ORDER BY count DESC;
to look for any 'abnormalities' like todays
On Wed, 9 Aug 2006, Garrett Cooper wrote:
Also, maybe that person from Armenia installed the script in a
distribution that's included in a virtual image (vmware comes to mind),
and he's loading it on a bunch of different machines behind a (virtual)
NAT or something... just a thought to conside
On 8/9/06, Chris <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
Nikolas Britton wrote:
> On 8/6/06, Marc G. Fournier <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>>
>> I've now committed v2.0 of the 300.statistics periodic script ... this
>> one
>> adds the device reporting that we'd talked about previously, and the
>> summary repor
On Tue, Aug 08, 2006 at 09:30:42PM -0300, Marc G. Fournier wrote:
> Could create problems long term .. one thing I will be using the
> IPs to do is:
>
> SELECT ip, count(1) FROM systems GROUP BY ip ORDER BY count DESC;
>
> to look for any 'abnormalities' like todays with Armenia ...
>
> hashing
On Aug 8, 2006, at 5:30 PM, Marc G. Fournier wrote:
On Wed, 9 Aug 2006, Antony Mawer wrote:
On 9/08/2006 9:16 AM, Marc G. Fournier wrote:
Can you tell me exactly what you do with those two pieces of
data? Is there any way that information would be accessible
from the internet?
Absolutely
On Wed, 9 Aug 2006, Antony Mawer wrote:
On 9/08/2006 1:49 PM, Marc G. Fournier wrote:
On Tue, 8 Aug 2006, Nikolas Britton wrote:
PCBSD# uname -a
FreeBSD PCBSD.localhost 6.1-RELEASE-p2 FreeBSD 6.1-RELEASE-p2 #0: Fri
Jun 16 09:21:34 PDT 2006
[EMAIL PROTECTED]:/usr/obj/usr/src/sys/PCBSDv1.11 i38
On 9/08/2006 1:49 PM, Marc G. Fournier wrote:
On Tue, 8 Aug 2006, Nikolas Britton wrote:
PCBSD# uname -a
FreeBSD PCBSD.localhost 6.1-RELEASE-p2 FreeBSD 6.1-RELEASE-p2 #0: Fri
Jun 16 09:21:34 PDT 2006
[EMAIL PROTECTED]:/usr/obj/usr/src/sys/PCBSDv1.11 i386
Unfortunately, if they are *all* the s
On Tue, 8 Aug 2006, Nikolas Britton wrote:
On 8/8/06, Marc G. Fournier <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
On Tue, 8 Aug 2006, Matthew Seaman wrote:
> Anyhow, how about the following little enhancement. This lists the CPUs
> on the system pretending they are CPU0, CPU1, ... devices. The URI
> escape
--On August 9, 2006 9:32:18 AM +1000 Antony Mawer
<[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
On 9/08/2006 9:16 AM, Marc G. Fournier wrote:
Can you tell me exactly what you do with those two pieces of data? Is
there any way that information would be accessible from the internet?
Absolutely nothing else we d
On 8/8/06, Marc G. Fournier <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
On Tue, 8 Aug 2006, Matthew Seaman wrote:
> Anyhow, how about the following little enhancement. This lists the CPUs
> on the system pretending they are CPU0, CPU1, ... devices. The URI
> escape stuff should be automatically decoded by PHP
On Tue, 8 Aug 2006, Matthew Seaman wrote:
Anyhow, how about the following little enhancement. This lists the CPUs
on the system pretending they are CPU0, CPU1, ... devices. The URI
escape stuff should be automatically decoded by PHP without any extra
coding required.
Perfect, added to scr
On Wed, 9 Aug 2006, Antony Mawer wrote:
On 9/08/2006 9:16 AM, Marc G. Fournier wrote:
Can you tell me exactly what you do with those two pieces of data? Is
there any way that information would be accessible from the internet?
Absolutely nothing else we do with it ... it just gives us a uniqu
On 9/08/2006 9:16 AM, Marc G. Fournier wrote:
Can you tell me exactly what you do with those two pieces of data? Is
there any way that information would be accessible from the internet?
Absolutely nothing else we do with it ... it just gives us a unique key
to work with ... in fact, assuming
On Tue, 8 Aug 2006, Nikolas Britton wrote:
Also why not track the ones with no driver attached... you should still
be able to tell what the device is.
I was looking at it from a 'what drivers / hardware is in use' not 'what
hardware is available' ...
Marc G. Fournier Hub.Org
On Tue, 8 Aug 2006, Nikolas Britton wrote:
How about some uptime stats as well?
No. We agreed we would not track people.
Again, if we add uptime states, it would be a *seperate* opt-in option ...
the only quasi-not-opt-in (you still have to tell it to run the script) is
the uname informat
On Wed, 9 Aug 2006, Vahan Yerkanian wrote:
Paul Schmehl wrote:
Finally, it looks like your number one problem is going to be maintainence.
Right now you're showing a ".x" and a "F.x" release. Not sure if that's
tampering or what, but it's obviously not legit. You also have a sudden
influx o
On Wed, 9 Aug 2006, Vahan Yerkanian wrote:
Paul Schmehl wrote:
Finally, it looks like your number one problem is going to be maintainence.
Right now you're showing a ".x" and a "F.x" release. Not sure if that's
tampering or what, but it's obviously not legit. You also have a sudden
influx o
On 8/8/06, Chris <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
Nikolas Britton wrote:
> On 8/6/06, Marc G. Fournier <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>>
>> I've now committed v2.0 of the 300.statistics periodic script ... this
>> one
>> adds the device reporting that we'd talked about previously, and the
>> summary report
On Tue, 8 Aug 2006, Paul Schmehl wrote:
Marc, I have a couple of questions.
You use hostname and IP as a unique identifier for each host. For that
reason, I have not submitted any of our systems. We use FreeBSD for
sensitive security-related tasks, and we're loath to reveal that information
Nikolas Britton wrote:
> On 8/6/06, Marc G. Fournier <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>>
>> I've now committed v2.0 of the 300.statistics periodic script ... this
>> one
>> adds the device reporting that we'd talked about previously, and the
>> summary reports now reflect the driver(s) in use for those d
On 8/6/06, Marc G. Fournier <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
I've now committed v2.0 of the 300.statistics periodic script ... this one
adds the device reporting that we'd talked about previously, and the
summary reports now reflect the driver(s) in use for those deciding to
report ...
This Phase of
Vahan Yerkanian wrote:
Paul Schmehl wrote:
Finally, it looks like your number one problem is going to be
maintainence. Right now you're showing a ".x" and a "F.x" release.
Not sure if that's tampering or what, but it's obviously not legit.
You also have a sudden influx of hosts from Armenia
Vahan Yerkanian wrote:
Paul Schmehl wrote:
Finally, it looks like your number one problem is going to be
maintainence. Right now you're showing a ".x" and a "F.x" release.
Not sure if that's tampering or what, but it's obviously not legit.
You also have a sudden influx of hosts from Armenia
Paul Schmehl wrote:
Finally, it looks like your number one problem is going to be
maintainence. Right now you're showing a ".x" and a "F.x" release. Not
sure if that's tampering or what, but it's obviously not legit. You
also have a sudden influx of hosts from Armenia. Again, don't know if
Paul Schmehl wrote:
Finally, it looks like your number one problem is going to be
maintainence. Right now you're showing a ".x" and a "F.x" release. Not
sure if that's tampering or what, but it's obviously not legit. You
also have a sudden influx of hosts from Armenia. Again, don't know if
Marc, I have a couple of questions.
You use hostname and IP as a unique identifier for each host. For that
reason, I have not submitted any of our systems. We use FreeBSD for
sensitive security-related tasks, and we're loath to reveal that
information. (When I submit or update ports, I alwa
On Tue, 8 Aug 2006, Gerhard Schmidt wrote:
On Mon, Aug 07, 2006 at 12:42:27AM -0300, Marc G. Fournier wrote:
I've now committed v2.0 of the 300.statistics periodic script ... this one
adds the device reporting that we'd talked about previously, and the
summary reports now reflect the driver(s)
On Tue, 8 Aug 2006, Karol Kwiatkowski wrote:
On 07/08/2006 05:42, Marc G. Fournier wrote:
I've now committed v2.0 of the 300.statistics periodic script ... this
one adds the device reporting that we'd talked about previously, and the
summary reports now reflect the driver(s) in use for those d
Marc G. Fournier wrote:
> On Tue, 8 Aug 2006, Matthew Seaman wrote:
>
>> Marc G. Fournier wrote:
>>> On Mon, 7 Aug 2006, Matthew Seaman wrote:
>>>
I think it would help uptake if when the bsdstats job is first run, it
issues you with a 'registered system number' -- then all of the folks
On 07/08/2006 05:42, Marc G. Fournier wrote:
>
> I've now committed v2.0 of the 300.statistics periodic script ... this
> one adds the device reporting that we'd talked about previously, and the
> summary reports now reflect the driver(s) in use for those deciding to
> report ...
>
> This Phase o
On Tue, 8 Aug 2006, David Schulz wrote:
cool yes, now i see it also, but it wasn't there before right after i
executed my script. is there maybe some sort of delay before the data
appears?
Yup, but only as the database grows ... I'm using the pear GeoIP module to
determine country, of course
On Tue, 8 Aug 2006, Matthew Seaman wrote:
Marc G. Fournier wrote:
On Mon, 7 Aug 2006, Matthew Seaman wrote:
I think it would help uptake if when the bsdstats job is first run, it
issues you with a 'registered system number' -- then all of the folks
with low numbered systems get bragging right
On Tuesday 08 August 2006 04:22, David Schulz wrote:
> cool yes, now i see it also, but it wasn't there before right after i
> executed my script. is there maybe some sort of delay before the data
> appears?
>
> On Aug 8, 2006, at 4:01 PM, Marc G. Fournier wrote:
> > On Tue, 8 Aug 2006, David Schul
On Mon, Aug 07, 2006 at 12:42:27AM -0300, Marc G. Fournier wrote:
>
> I've now committed v2.0 of the 300.statistics periodic script ... this one
> adds the device reporting that we'd talked about previously, and the
> summary reports now reflect the driver(s) in use for those deciding to
> repo
Hello,
I think there is at least one error in country naming:
should be Kazakhstan instead of Kazakstan. Our friends from Kazakhstan
of course can correct me.
___
freebsd-questions@freebsd.org mailing list
http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/free
Marc G. Fournier wrote:
> On Tue, 8 Aug 2006, Mikhail Goriachev wrote:
>
>> Marc G. Fournier wrote:
>>> On Mon, 7 Aug 2006, Chris wrote:
>>>
Just my .02 worth - that Sparc64 listing Is mine Wheee!
>>> There are two Sparc64 listings ... both yours?
>>>
>>> The 8 in Panama are all mine :)
cool yes, now i see it also, but it wasn't there before right after i
executed my script. is there maybe some sort of delay before the data
appears?
On Aug 8, 2006, at 4:01 PM, Marc G. Fournier wrote:
On Tue, 8 Aug 2006, David Schulz wrote:
Hello,
i have started to run this script , but
On Tue, 8 Aug 2006, David Schulz wrote:
Hello,
i have started to run this script , but for some reason i dont show up in the
list. or maybe i do, but at least not the country from which i am submitting,
china, has still zero entries. how can this be? my ip does resolve to a host
in china whe
On Tue, 8 Aug 2006, Mikhail Goriachev wrote:
Marc G. Fournier wrote:
On Mon, 7 Aug 2006, Chris wrote:
Just my .02 worth - that Sparc64 listing Is mine Wheee!
There are two Sparc64 listings ... both yours?
The 8 in Panama are all mine :)
Where's Chile? I just added 4 boxes and they'
Hello,
i have started to run this script , but for some reason i dont show
up in the list. or maybe i do, but at least not the country from
which i am submitting, china, has still zero entries. how can this
be? my ip does resolve to a host in china when using some geoip
lookup service...
Marc G. Fournier wrote:
> On Mon, 7 Aug 2006, Chris wrote:
>
>> Just my .02 worth - that Sparc64 listing Is mine Wheee!
>
> There are two Sparc64 listings ... both yours?
>
> The 8 in Panama are all mine :)
Where's Chile? I just added 4 boxes and they're not listed.
Excellent job Marc!
Marc G. Fournier wrote:
> On Mon, 7 Aug 2006, Matthew Seaman wrote:
>
>> I think it would help uptake if when the bsdstats job is first run, it
>> issues you with a 'registered system number' -- then all of the folks
>> with low numbered systems get bragging rights...
>
> Actually, there is no "r
On 8/08/2006 1:56 PM, David Schulz wrote:
Ok i love the Idea of this, and will have all my machines running that
in no time. Just make the Site look more sleek :)
I will be hopefully the first one representing China on that list as
well (brag :-)
I'm working on it -- unfortunately have been ve
On Tue, 8 Aug 2006, Tuc at T-B-O-H.NET wrote:
To enable the port, edit or create /etc/periodic.conf and add this line:
monthly_statistics_enable=yes
Shouldn't it be /etc/periodic.conf.local since its not part
of the base? Thats where I've put other things that install periodic
On Tue, 8 Aug 2006, andrew clarke wrote:
On Mon, Aug 07, 2006 at 04:14:50PM -0300, Marc G. Fournier wrote:
right now, we are at ~200 hosts checking in, from various time zones (see
http://bsdstats.hub.org/bsd_statistics.php for countries that have checked
in so far) ... so, even at month end,
On Mon, Aug 07, 2006 at 04:14:50PM -0300, Marc G. Fournier wrote:
> right now, we are at ~200 hosts checking in, from various time zones (see
> http://bsdstats.hub.org/bsd_statistics.php for countries that have checked
> in so far) ... so, even at month end, taking into consideration time zones,
>
>
> To enable the port, edit or create /etc/periodic.conf and add this line:
> monthly_statistics_enable=yes
>
Shouldn't it be /etc/periodic.conf.local since its not part
of the base? Thats where I've put other things that install periodics
that aren't part of the base.
Ok i love the Idea of this, and will have all my machines running
that in no time. Just make the Site look more sleek :)
I will be hopefully the first one representing China on that list as
well (brag :-)
On Aug 8, 2006, at 4:42 AM, Pat Maddox wrote:
On 8/6/06, Marc G. Fournier <[EMAIL PROT
On Mon, 7 Aug 2006, Scott Sipe wrote:
+ UP=`/usr/bin/uptime | /usr/bin/grep -o "up [^,]*,[^,]*,"`
Is there a way of getting this consistently in seconds? I've checked
sysctl, and 6.x seems to have some of the information there, but 4.x
definitely doesn't ...
And, uptime would definit
Done, thanks ...
On Tue, 8 Aug 2006, Boris Samorodov wrote:
On Mon, 7 Aug 2006 00:42:27 -0300 (ADT) Marc G. Fournier wrote:
I've now committed v2.0 of the 300.statistics periodic script ... this
one adds the device reporting that we'd talked about previously, and
the summary reports now refl
On Mon, 7 Aug 2006, Chris wrote:
Daniel Bye wrote:
On Mon, Aug 07, 2006 at 05:22:04PM -0300, Marc G. Fournier wrote:
On Mon, 7 Aug 2006, Chris wrote:
Just my .02 worth - that Sparc64 listing Is mine Wheee!
There are two Sparc64 listings ... both yours?
No - the other one is mine!
Ni
On Mon, 7 Aug 2006, Daniel Bye wrote:
On Mon, Aug 07, 2006 at 05:22:04PM -0300, Marc G. Fournier wrote:
On Mon, 7 Aug 2006, Chris wrote:
Just my .02 worth - that Sparc64 listing Is mine Wheee!
There are two Sparc64 listings ... both yours?
No - the other one is mine!
Nice work, scra
On Mon, 7 Aug 2006, Matthew Seaman wrote:
I think it would help uptake if when the bsdstats job is first run, it
issues you with a 'registered system number' -- then all of the folks
with low numbered systems get bragging rights...
Actually, there is no "registered system number", as there is
1 - 100 of 129 matches
Mail list logo
