Hi!
I'm looking for a working sltnet.lk contact.
Please contact me off-list.
Thanks!
Tycho
--
Tycho Eggen (Unix|Network) Engineer
"I wouldn't recommend sex, drugs or insanity for everyone,
but they've always worked for me." - Hunter S. Thompson
( Fear & Loathing in Las Vegas )
p
Ok, let.s return to reality (sorry for moving this thread into the OS
related flame).
First of all, even if OS have not any caveats, it will not protect it from
spyware/adware. if I want to install my 'Cool-Search' into million of
computers, all I need to do is to write fancy game, and offer it '
On Wed, Jul 14, 2004, Michel Py wrote:
> - In exchange for his life, appoint Saddam Hussein to rid us of spyware
> writers. As he's on a roll, let's put spammers in the deal, too. The guy
> has a proven track record, problem is most of us live in a society that
> oppose his methods, so this does
-:)
Excellent!
==
- Declare that using IE is illegal. This literally takes an act of
congress. And, it would be almost impossible to enforce. Anyway, let's
pretend for a moment that congress does outlaw IE _and_ can enforce it,
it still does not do us much
>
> So MS has undocumented 'features', so what? When you install their
software
> you agree to a licence, and that you are using their software bound by
their
O, noo. You click a button 'I agree' which means nothing for 99.99% of
people over the world. Here is a difference. Do not expect people to
> John Underhill wrote:
> [snip long post]
One of the best posts I have seen in a long time; thanks, John.
> So the question remains, what do we do about it?
That's where it gets tough. Let's begin with what we can't do about it:
- Declare that using IE is illegal. This literally takes an act
>>> Fergie (Paul Ferguson) wrote:
>>> "The popularity of file-sharing is costing the largest
>>> Internet service providers $10 million per year each
>>> in bandwidth and network maintenance costs, CacheLogic
>>> said."
>> Michel Py wrote:
>> $10 million a year for the largest ISPs is a drop in t
On Jul 15, 2004, at 12:36 AM, Michel Py wrote:
Fergie (Paul Ferguson)
"The popularity of file-sharing is costing the largest
Internet service providers $10 million per year each
in bandwidth and network maintenance costs, CacheLogic
said."
$10 million a year for the largest ISPs is a drop in the se
> Fergie (Paul Ferguson)
> "The popularity of file-sharing is costing the largest
> Internet service providers $10 million per year each
> in bandwidth and network maintenance costs, CacheLogic
> said."
$10 million a year for the largest ISPs is a drop in the sea; _if_ the
figure is accurate (sou
William,
On Wed, 14 Jul 2004, william(at)elan.net wrote:
> I reforward this email in hopes that it was by simple omission that nobody
> from Verisign is yet to respond to it.
Replying to your original message has been on my to-do list.
> 1. Currently SLD deligation info for .com/.net TLDs seem
I reforward this email in hopes that it was by simple omission that nobody
from Verisign is yet to respond to it. All questions in sections 1 - 3 are
valid and something that directly concerns proposed changes, none of that
had been asked before here in brief nanog discussion after Verisign's
Fergie (Paul Ferguson) wrote:
I was wondering if the NANOG readership-at-large had any experiences
in this regard, concerning any of these statements, since I couldn't
find anything of any real technical substance on CacheLogic's web
page.
If your aggregate traffic is for example 10Gbps and you
This is an interesting article -- not necessarily off-topic, given
snippets such as:
"The popularity of file-sharing is costing the largest Internet
service providers $10 million per year each in bandwidth and network
maintenance costs, CacheLogic said."
and
"It estimates Internet users
> Ok.. but has BSD been attacked on the scale that MS code has? I would argue
> no, not even close. Do you believe BSD is invulnerable to attack? Hardly..
I don't believe anybody is claiming that. However, the BSD code has been
out *and* has been publicly scrutinized for quite a bit longer than
W
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
Hash: SHA1
Christopher,
1) Are your end users using TV's or PC's to view the streams ?
2) When you refer to "WAN" is the entire IP network under your
control ?
3) Are there any restrictions on conditional access or bandwidth
placed upon the implementation by th
> I wanted to make a number of video streams available across an IP WAN
> network, I have a couple of options. Unicast or Multicast. Unicast isn't
> the most efficient method necessarily so my preference would be Multicast.
Depends on the exact nature of what you are doing and the network(s) in
If you have control over the entire network, I would suggest
native multicast. This is used operationally by a number of providers
and is one candidate for the next generation of "cable" TV providers.
If you want to reach arbitrary people across networks, then you will
need to do either unicast or
Ok.. but has BSD been attacked on the scale that MS code has? I would argue
no, not even close. Do you believe BSD is invulnerable to attack? Hardly..
Unless you want to go back to text based browsers and kernals that fit on a
floppy, it is extermely difficult to eliminate all vulnerabilities in t
Hello,
I have a "state of the state" sort of question for you guru's out there. If
I wanted to make a number of video streams available across an IP WAN
network, I have a couple of options. Unicast or Multicast. Unicast isn't
the most efficient method necessarily so my preference would be Mult
>> Sorry, it was a _technical_ question - is MAC OS known as having pests
>> and ad-ware in the comparable numbers (if any)?
* [EMAIL PROTECTED] (John Underhill) [Wed 14 Jul 2004, 19:45 CEST]:
> This is spurious logic. You are suggesting that Mac is a more secure
> operating system, and I would s
> MS do not publish full system specs, and they use undocumented features
> themself.
Ok, say MS puplished their code tomorow, what do you think would happen? All
the crackers and virus writers of the world would join hands and sing 'joy
to the world' and forgive MS for their tresspasses? I sug
Jeff Aitken wrote:
On Tue, Jul 13, 2004 at 10:15:43PM -0400, Patrick W Gilmore wrote:
I forgot (and am not registered for the Washington Post).
See www.bugmenot.com for help here.
If you are using Firefox, there is a BugMeNot extension you can install
which will add a BugMeNot option to a context
On Wed, Jul 14, 2004 at 03:57:26PM +0200, Henk Uijterwaal (RIPE NCC) wrote:
>
> On Tue, 13 Jul 2004, Alex Rubenstein wrote:
>
> >
> >
> > Hello,
> >
> > I am looking for a database that would have BGP inserts/withdrawals from
> > mid 1999 time frame.
>
> www.ripe.net/ris, raw data from 10/1999
On Tue, 13 Jul 2004, Alex Rubenstein wrote:
>
>
> Hello,
>
> I am looking for a database that would have BGP inserts/withdrawals from
> mid 1999 time frame.
www.ripe.net/ris, raw data from 10/1999 onwards,
Henk
>
> Any help is appreciated.
>
>
>
> -- Alex Rubenstein, AR97, K2AHR, [EMAIL PROTE
On Tue, Jul 13, 2004 at 10:15:43PM -0400, Patrick W Gilmore wrote:
> I forgot (and am not registered for the Washington Post).
See www.bugmenot.com for help here.
--Jeff
On Wed, 14 Jul 2004, Joe Maimon wrote:
>
> Sam Stickland wrote:
>
> >On Tue, 13 Jul 2004, Eric Kagan wrote:
> >
> >>There is a WIC-1ADSL for 1700/2600. Not sure about an SDSL WIC. We have
> >>done a few T1/ADSL and ADSL/ISDN setups and it seems to work fairly well. I
> >>also spoke to a compute
Sam Stickland wrote:
On Tue, 13 Jul 2004, Eric Kagan wrote:
Is anyone aware of a WIC card that will work with the lower end Cisco
gear
(1700 or 2600 series) that will allow me to terminate an ADSL or
preferably an SDSL line directly on the router? The idea being that the
router i
On Tue, 13 Jul 2004, Eric Kagan wrote:
>
> > > Is anyone aware of a WIC card that will work with the lower end Cisco
> gear
> > > (1700 or 2600 series) that will allow me to terminate an ADSL or
> > > preferably an SDSL line directly on the router? The idea being that the
> > > router is then a
> Most of the lastest versions appear to install themselves using the
> ByteCode Verifier vulnerability in the Microsoft Virtual Machine.
MS do not publish full system specs, and they use undocumented features
themself.
So, what other companies are doing? Yes, correct, they are experimenting,
se
29 matches
Mail list logo
