Re: Linux: concerns over systemd adoption and Debian's decision to switch
On Tue, 21 Oct 2014 14:44:57 +0900, Randy Bush said: systemd is insanity. one would have hoped that deb and others would know better. sigh. It started as a replacement init system. I suspected it had jumped the shark when it sprouted an entirely new DHCP and NTP service. And this was confirmed when I saw this: Leading up to this has been cursor rendering support, keyboard mapping support, screen renderer, DRM back-end, input interface, and dozens of other commits. http://www.phoronix.com/scan.php?page=news_itempx=MTgwNzQ When your init system is worrying about cursor rendering, you have truly fallen victim to severe feature bloat. I guess Jamie Zawinski was right: Every program attempts to expand until it can read mail. pgpxTemQfE9sT.pgp Description: PGP signature
Re: Linux: concerns over systemd adoption and Debian's decision to switch
valdis.kletni...@vt.edu wrote: On Tue, 21 Oct 2014 14:44:57 +0900, Randy Bush said: systemd is insanity. one would have hoped that deb and others would know better. sigh. It started as a replacement init system. I suspected it had jumped the shark when it sprouted an entirely new DHCP and NTP service. And this was confirmed when I saw this: Leading up to this has been cursor rendering support, keyboard mapping support, screen renderer, DRM back-end, input interface, and dozens of other commits. http://www.phoronix.com/scan.php?page=news_itempx=MTgwNzQ When your init system is worrying about cursor rendering, you have truly fallen victim to severe feature bloat. I guess Jamie Zawinski was right: Every program attempts to expand until it can read mail. Actually - this kind of sums it all up: http://www.muylinux.com/wp-content/uploads/2014/08/funny-systemd.gif Good for a morning laugh. Miles Fidelman -- In theory, there is no difference between theory and practice. In practice, there is. Yogi Berra
Re: ISP Shaping Hardware
Procera is probably the best product for real DPI. The key is the signatures. It matches everything so granular it's simply fantastic. Right down to what update you're grabbing for your iPhone. As was said, you'll be paying for it. Josh Luthman Office: 937-552-2340 Direct: 937-552-2343 1100 Wayne St Suite 1337 Troy, OH 45373 On Oct 21, 2014 1:00 AM, Carlos Alcantar car...@race.com wrote: The platforms I¹ve seen used for large scale dpi is procera I¹ve heard rave reviews, but also comes with the price tag. http://www.proceranetworks.com Carlos Alcantar Race Communications / Race Team Member 1325 Howard Ave. #604, Burlingame, CA. 94010 Phone: +1 415 376 3314 / car...@race.com / http://www.race.com http://www.race.com/ On 10/19/14, 9:55 PM, Skeeve Stevens skeeve+na...@eintellegonetworks.com wrote: Hey all, Just wondering what/if people are using any shaping hardware/appliances these days, and if so, what. I have a client which has thousands of customers on Satellite and needs to restrict some users who are doing a lot. So I wanted to see what the current popular equipment out there is. ...Skeeve *Skeeve Stevens - *eintellego Networks Pty Ltd ske...@eintellegonetworks.com ; www.eintellegonetworks.com Phone: 1300 239 038; Cell +61 (0)414 753 383 ; skype://skeeve facebook.com/eintellegonetworks ; http://twitter.com/networkceoau linkedin.com/in/skeeve experts360: https://expert360.com/profile/d54a9 twitter.com/theispguy ; blog: www.theispguy.com The Experts Who The Experts Call Juniper - Cisco - Cloud - Consulting - IPv4 Brokering
[DHCP Relay agent] send packets to different dhcp servers based on client options
Hello Folks, I looking for an opensource project (can be a modification of the original isc-relay agent), which able to send packets to different DHCP servers based on DHCP options such as: The Vendor Class Identifier (Option 60) Vendor Class Identifier (Option 60) can be used by DHCP clients to identify the vendor and functionality of a DHCP client. The information is a variable length string of characters or octets which has a meaning specified by the vendor of the DHCP client. If my vendor class identifier contains lets say: motorola.fw0512.5112 string, send it to DHCP server 1 on ip 192.168.1.1 cisco.fw06411.111string, send it to DHCP server 2 on ip 172.16.15.44 The existent relay agents (isc-relay, dhcp-helper) send a copy of all the dhcp servers of the dhcpdiscover message. This is definitely not what I want. Thanks!
Re: ISP Shaping Hardware
We've used a few over the years. We had Packeteer Packetshapers originally but they became way too expensive once Bluecoat acquired them. $50,000 for an appliance to shape a 1 gig pipe. IIRC,$10,000 per year on maintenance at the time. These prices are after discount.We looked at the following to replace them. NetEqualizer Procera Exinda We went with Exinda and I like the solution. These days, I rely on it more for reporting and traffic/protocol analysis than for shaping, but the shaping does work as advertised. Keep in mind, these solutions can't shape on asymmetric traffic since they need to see the entire flow. If you have a pair of links, you'll need to cluster a pair of shapers so they can share flow information. I also have tested out the traffic shaping on PFSense VMs and it works. I never pushed production traffic through them but my home firewall is a PFSense VM and the shaping works there. Not sure how it would handle a large number of clients though. On 10/20/2014 12:55 AM, Skeeve Stevens wrote: Hey all, Just wondering what/if people are using any shaping hardware/appliances these days, and if so, what. I have a client which has thousands of customers on Satellite and needs to restrict some users who are doing a lot. So I wanted to see what the current popular equipment out there is. ...Skeeve *Skeeve Stevens - *eintellego Networks Pty Ltd ske...@eintellegonetworks.com ; www.eintellegonetworks.com Phone: 1300 239 038; Cell +61 (0)414 753 383 ; skype://skeeve facebook.com/eintellegonetworks ; http://twitter.com/networkceoau linkedin.com/in/skeeve experts360: https://expert360.com/profile/d54a9 twitter.com/theispguy ; blog: www.theispguy.com The Experts Who The Experts Call Juniper - Cisco - Cloud - Consulting - IPv4 Brokering
Re: send packets to different dhcp servers based on client options
On 10/21/14 12:52 +0200, Stephan Alz wrote: If my vendor class identifier contains lets say: motorola.fw0512.5112 string, send it to DHCP server 1 on ip 192.168.1.1 cisco.fw06411.111string, send it to DHCP server 2 on ip 172.16.15.44 The existent relay agents (isc-relay, dhcp-helper) send a copy of all the dhcp servers of the dhcpdiscover message. This is definitely not what I want. For ISC DHCP servers, turning off the 'authoritative' statement will prevent the server from issuing DHCPNAKs, and should essentially allow each server to ignore requests from unknown clients. See dhcpd.conf(5). -- Dan White
Re: Why is .gov only for US government agencies?
On Oct 20, 2014, at 10:18 PM, Barry Shein b...@world.std.com wrote: Not that anyone is looking for a solution but I suppose one possible solution would be to use the two-letter cctld then gov like parliament.uk.gov or parliament.ca.gov etc. No doubt there would be some collisions but probably not too serious. Folks outside of the US have issues with the US government having a role in the administration of the root, even if that role is to ensure ICANN does screw the pooch. Having country governments use country code.GOV would, assuming .GOV was still managed by the USG, give the US government vastly greater and more direct control of the country's government's websites (not to mention a lovely source of metadata associated with lookups of those websites). Moving .GOV away from USG control is both wildly unlikely and pointless, particularly in a world of 400+ (and counting) TLDs. AFAIK, reasons why the FNC decided to assert GOV and MIL were to be US-only were probably because the USG had already been using it, the operational value of switching would be low while the cost would've been high, some other governments were already using sub-domains within their ccTLDs, and/or it was seen as a good thing to encourage more ccTLD delegations and the use of those ccTLDs. The fact that it gives some political folk ammunition to complain about how the Internet is controlled by the USG is merely a side benefit (to them). Regards, -drc signature.asc Description: Message signed with OpenPGP using GPGMail
Re: Why is .gov only for US government agencies?
On 10/21/14 8:08 AM, David Conrad wrote: Folks outside of the US have issues with the US government having a role in the administration of the root, even if that role is to ensure ICANN does screw the pooch. Freudian slip, David? :) Doug
Re: Linux: concerns over systemd adoption and Debian's decision to switch
I was actually not aware of this. I've been told that systemd also includes fsck's functionality (or is planning to?). That just seems absurd to me. I didn't really have a strong opinion on either side of this yet. Seeing the replies from other people here, though, and reading some more about it, this seems to be a very bad idea. The binary logs for example worry me, especially corruption issues: http://www.reddit.com/r/linux/comments/1y6q0l/systemds_binary_logs_and_corruption/ https://bbs.archlinux.org/viewtopic.php?id=169966 On 21-10-2014 14:40, valdis.kletni...@vt.edu wrote: On Tue, 21 Oct 2014 14:44:57 +0900, Randy Bush said: systemd is insanity. one would have hoped that deb and others would know better. sigh. It started as a replacement init system. I suspected it had jumped the shark when it sprouted an entirely new DHCP and NTP service. And this was confirmed when I saw this: Leading up to this has been cursor rendering support, keyboard mapping support, screen renderer, DRM back-end, input interface, and dozens of other commits. http://www.phoronix.com/scan.php?page=news_itempx=MTgwNzQ When your init system is worrying about cursor rendering, you have truly fallen victim to severe feature bloat. I guess Jamie Zawinski was right: Every program attempts to expand until it can read mail. signature.asc Description: OpenPGP digital signature
Re: Why is .gov only for US government agencies?
On 10/20/14 10:44 PM, Jared Mauch wrote: I’ve had operational issues introduced by *TLD operators and choices they made. When that happens, report them to ICANN's SSAC. They take the Stability part of their name seriously. That said, new TLDs are not going away, so operations needs to take that into account. Doug
Re: Why is .gov only for US government agencies?
The fact that you think I'm commenting about you at all is illuminating :) On 10/20/14 9:52 PM, Eric Brunner-Williams wrote: i won't comment on your experience, having no direct knowledge. why you comment on mine is uninteresting. -e On 10/20/14 9:03 PM, Doug Barton wrote: On 10/20/14 7:47 PM, Eric Brunner-Williams wrote: having written the technical portion of winning proposal to ntia for the .us zone, i differ. The plan I outlined was discussed about 2 years after Neustar took over management, and TMK was never actually discussed with Neustar. as i recall, having done the research, in the year prior to the ntia's tender some six people held some 40% of the major metro area subordinate namespaces. to my chagrin, relieved by a notice of termination days before my stock in the company vested, the winner adopted a orange-black model, deprecating the namespace's existing hierarchical registration model for a flat registration model. Yes, but the locality-based name space still exists. I used to hold some names under it, but gave them up when I moved out of state. Meanwhile, several states actively use their name space. But ... the registration process model for .us is dissimilar to the registration process models of .edu, .mil and .gov, as are the contractors to the government. ... none of this is relevant to the proposal at hand. Neustar manages the domain on behalf of the USG. There is nothing preventing them from changing the way it is used, and the 10 year period I proposed takes runout of existing contracts into account (since EDU, GOV, and MIL would need continued operation during that period anyway). Doug
Re: Why is .gov only for US government agencies?
On Oct 21, 2014, at 11:08 AM, David Conrad d...@virtualized.org wrote: On Oct 20, 2014, at 10:18 PM, Barry Shein b...@world.std.com wrote: Not that anyone is looking for a solution but I suppose one possible solution would be to use the two-letter cctld then gov like parliament.uk.gov or parliament.ca.gov etc. No doubt there would be some collisions but probably not too serious. Folks outside of the US have issues with the US government having a role in the administration of the root, even if that role is to ensure ICANN does screw the pooch. I'm thinking there's a not missing here. --Sandy signature.asc Description: Message signed with OpenPGP using GPGMail
Re: Why is .gov only for US government agencies?
On 10/21/2014 01:33 PM, Sandra Murphy wrote: On Oct 21, 2014, at 11:08 AM, David Conrad d...@virtualized.org wrote: On Oct 20, 2014, at 10:18 PM, Barry Shein b...@world.std.com wrote: Not that anyone is looking for a solution but I suppose one possible solution would be to use the two-letter cctld then gov like parliament.uk.gov or parliament.ca.gov etc. No doubt there would be some collisions but probably not too serious. Folks outside of the US have issues with the US government having a role in the administration of the root, even if that role is to ensure ICANN does screw the pooch. I'm thinking there's a not missing here. --Sandy Depends on whether we're talking about the nominal or effective role of government... ;) - Peter
Re: Why is .gov only for US government agencies?
On Oct 21, 2014, at 10:33 AM, Sandra Murphy sa...@tislabs.com wrote: Folks outside of the US have issues with the US government having a role in the administration of the root, even if that role is to ensure ICANN does screw the pooch. I'm thinking there's a not missing here. For the numerous people who have suggested similar, both publicly and privately: yes, I did accidentally leave out a teensy little word. I honestly wasn't making a comment about my current (perhaps until my boss reads the post) employer. Really. No, really. That'll teach me to post pre-coffee. Regards, -drc signature.asc Description: Message signed with OpenPGP using GPGMail
Re: Linux: concerns over systemd adoption and Debian's decision to switch
Perhaps they could make a desktop version with systemd if the devs want it that bad, but it'd be a shame if they ruined it for everyone that uses Debian as a server as well. Haven't installed x on Debian since Etch... o.O On Tue, Oct 21, 2014 at 12:44 AM, Randy Bush ra...@psg.com wrote: systemd is insanity. one would have hoped that deb and others would know better. sigh. vmlinux.el here we come! randy
Re: Linux: concerns over systemd [OT]
I've done a fair amount of hand-to-hand combat with systemd. When it's good it's good, tho not always apparent why it's good. But for example some of my servers boot in seconds. When it's bad it can be painful and incredibly opaque and a huge time sink. Googling for suggestions I've found several threads where the co-author (Poettering) jumps in usually to be annoyingly arrogant (I'm sure he's very bright and good to children and pets and overworked) responding with comments like why don't you just read your logs and not bother this list or similar (that was paraphrased.) The logs are, in my experience, almost always useless or nearly so, mumble failed to start basically. I'm not the only one: http://www.muktware.com/2014/04/linus-torvalds-happy-systemd-author-kay-sievers/25151 It also resists tools like strace because it tends to do things by IPC. In one extreme case I just reworked an /etc/init.d script to avoid systemd (not use the various /etc/rc.foo files), mostly just hit it with a sledgehammer and put fixing that on my TODO list. Unfortunately I am mortal and have limited time on this earth. My experience as I said is mixed, hard cases are very hard where they really seem like they shouldn't be (just tell me roughly what you're trying to do rather than just fail, eg, via some debug enable), most are just your usual oops it wants this or that situations. I don't think I'd want to revert to sysvinit, systemd seems architecturally superior. But it needs a lot more transparency and some attempt to gather common problems -- like why is it hanging asking for a password on the console when I can't see why it thinks it needs one? -- and FAQ them with real answers or add some code/configuration to fix that (never ask for a password in this script OK? And no --no-ask-password isn't fixing this so stop repeating that answer!) -- -Barry Shein The World | b...@theworld.com | http://www.TheWorld.com Purveyors to the Trade | Voice: 800-THE-WRLD| Dial-Up: US, PR, Canada Software Tool Die| Public Access Internet | SINCE 1989 *oo*
Re: Linux: concerns over systemd adoption and Debian's decision to switch
On Tue, 21 Oct 2014 01:44:57 -0400, Randy Bush ra...@psg.com wrote: systemd is insanity. one would have hoped that deb and others would know better. sigh. This is exactly the type of shit one gets by letting non-technical people make technical decisions. systemd should never have even been on the table. If you want a MacOSX style launcher, then build one; it doesn't need to replace init or be pid 1.
Re: Linux: concerns over systemd adoption and Debian's decision to switch
On Tue, Oct 21, 2014 at 4:40 PM, valdis.kletni...@vt.edu wrote: http://www.phoronix.com/scan.php?page=news_itempx=MTgwNzQ When your init system is worrying about cursor rendering, you have truly fallen victim to severe feature bloat. I guess Jamie Zawinski was right: Every program attempts to expand until it can read mail. I think systemd wants to become the next Emacs ;))
Re: Linux: concerns over systemd adoption and Debian's decision to switch
On Tue, Oct 21, 2014 at 3:41 PM, Eugeniu Patrascu eu...@imacandi.net wrote: I think systemd wants to become the next Emacs ;)) Or the next user activity collection point. Systemd really is a black hole to 99.9% of the people who will use/deploy it... seems perfect for lots of things. -Jim P.
Re: Linux: concerns over systemd adoption and Debian's decision to switch
Wait… Let me see if I understand this correctly… 1. Move fsck functionality into systemd 2. Have it generate opaque binary logs 3. If your filesystem is corrupted in a way that systems can’t repair, you can’t even read the logs of what systemd saw or did? Yeah, that sounds like a very definite “bad thing”. Owen On Oct 21, 2014, at 10:17 AM, Israel G. Lugo israel.l...@lugosys.com wrote: I was actually not aware of this. I've been told that systemd also includes fsck's functionality (or is planning to?). That just seems absurd to me. I didn't really have a strong opinion on either side of this yet. Seeing the replies from other people here, though, and reading some more about it, this seems to be a very bad idea. The binary logs for example worry me, especially corruption issues: http://www.reddit.com/r/linux/comments/1y6q0l/systemds_binary_logs_and_corruption/ https://bbs.archlinux.org/viewtopic.php?id=169966 On 21-10-2014 14:40, valdis.kletni...@vt.edu wrote: On Tue, 21 Oct 2014 14:44:57 +0900, Randy Bush said: systemd is insanity. one would have hoped that deb and others would know better. sigh. It started as a replacement init system. I suspected it had jumped the shark when it sprouted an entirely new DHCP and NTP service. And this was confirmed when I saw this: Leading up to this has been cursor rendering support, keyboard mapping support, screen renderer, DRM back-end, input interface, and dozens of other commits. http://www.phoronix.com/scan.php?page=news_itempx=MTgwNzQ When your init system is worrying about cursor rendering, you have truly fallen victim to severe feature bloat. I guess Jamie Zawinski was right: Every program attempts to expand until it can read mail.
Re: Linux: concerns over systemd [OT]
On Tue, Oct 21, 2014 at 03:11:55PM -0400, Barry Shein wrote: But for example some of my servers boot in seconds. One is reminded of a mail, included in the Preface to _The UNIX-HATERS Handbook_, available at http://www.art.net/~hopkins/Don/unix-haters/preface.html. Apparently, things really are going to get a lot worse before they get worse. Best regards, A -- Andrew Sullivan Dyn, Inc. asulli...@dyn.com v: +1 603 663 0448
Re: Linux: concerns over systemd adoption and Debian's decision to switch
I have been working with developing systems that boot with Linux for a number of years on a multitude of distributions and I never saw a problem with the tools or the process. Purely the lack of standards. It seems stubborn at the least to propose an opaque software solution when a simple standards organization for how to structure the init system is all that is required. Why not write high level code to manage standardized scripts rather than replace them with binary darkness. The only reason we have desktop Linux is due to the flexibility of the Unix architecture, seems silly to abandon that now. The pure fact of it is that developers hate messing with text because its unpredictable and prone to bugs. However with standards and possibly a decent meta format (I look towards YML, XML, JSON) that can be consumed and produced with scripts there should be no issues. The final fact is that bash itself is a dirty language that developers hate and system administrators love. Its a gross blend of programming functionality mixed with command line awareness and its unpredictable, especially at the code generation level. Its also too sensitive to text formatting and line endings. In conclusion, we will continue to deploy our scripts to a number of Linux distributions and have came to the conclusion that it is simply cheaper to have a human deal with the actual deployment of the system rather than write host of deployment code to cover every system. End users know how to use their system and we rely on that. Finally, why not focus on creating and maintaining collaborative unbiased standards rather than parading egos and hurting communities. On Tue, Oct 21, 2014 at 1:55 PM, Owen DeLong o...@delong.com wrote: Wait… Let me see if I understand this correctly… 1. Move fsck functionality into systemd 2. Have it generate opaque binary logs 3. If your filesystem is corrupted in a way that systems can’t repair, you can’t even read the logs of what systemd saw or did? Yeah, that sounds like a very definite “bad thing”. Owen On Oct 21, 2014, at 10:17 AM, Israel G. Lugo israel.l...@lugosys.com wrote: I was actually not aware of this. I've been told that systemd also includes fsck's functionality (or is planning to?). That just seems absurd to me. I didn't really have a strong opinion on either side of this yet. Seeing the replies from other people here, though, and reading some more about it, this seems to be a very bad idea. The binary logs for example worry me, especially corruption issues: http://www.reddit.com/r/linux/comments/1y6q0l/systemds_binary_logs_and_corruption/ https://bbs.archlinux.org/viewtopic.php?id=169966 On 21-10-2014 14:40, valdis.kletni...@vt.edu wrote: On Tue, 21 Oct 2014 14:44:57 +0900, Randy Bush said: systemd is insanity. one would have hoped that deb and others would know better. sigh. It started as a replacement init system. I suspected it had jumped the shark when it sprouted an entirely new DHCP and NTP service. And this was confirmed when I saw this: Leading up to this has been cursor rendering support, keyboard mapping support, screen renderer, DRM back-end, input interface, and dozens of other commits. http://www.phoronix.com/scan.php?page=news_itempx=MTgwNzQ When your init system is worrying about cursor rendering, you have truly fallen victim to severe feature bloat. I guess Jamie Zawinski was right: Every program attempts to expand until it can read mail. -- eSited LLC (701) 390-9638
Re: Linux: concerns over systemd adoption and Debian's decision to switch
Why not write it in Emacs? Joe McGuckin ViaNet Communications j...@via.net 650-207-0372 cell 650-213-1302 office 650-969-2124 fax On Oct 21, 2014, at 12:41 PM, Eugeniu Patrascu eu...@imacandi.net wrote: On Tue, Oct 21, 2014 at 4:40 PM, valdis.kletni...@vt.edu wrote: http://www.phoronix.com/scan.php?page=news_itempx=MTgwNzQ When your init system is worrying about cursor rendering, you have truly fallen victim to severe feature bloat. I guess Jamie Zawinski was right: Every program attempts to expand until it can read mail. I think systemd wants to become the next Emacs ;))
Re: Linux: concerns over systemd [OT]
On Tue, Oct 21, 2014 at 4:10 PM, Andrew Sullivan asulli...@dyn.com wrote: On Tue, Oct 21, 2014 at 03:11:55PM -0400, Barry Shein wrote: But for example some of my servers boot in seconds. One is reminded of a mail, included in the Preface to _The UNIX-HATERS Handbook_, available at it's really not clear to me that 'reboots in seconds' is a thing to optimize... I suppose the win is: Is the startup/shutdown process clear, conscise and understandable at 3am local time? followed by: Can I adjust my startup processes to meet my needs easily and without finding a phd in unix? If systemd is simply a change in how I think about /etc/init.d/* and /etc/rc?.d/* cool, if it's more complexity and less EASY flexibility then it's a fail. -chris
Re: Linux: concerns over systemd adoption and Debian's decision to switch
systemd is insanity. see also smit.
Re: Linux: concerns over systemd adoption and Debian's decision to switch
Often presented with an alternate spelling from those of us who had to live with it. On Tue, Oct 21, 2014 at 01:44:17PM -0700, Eric Brunner-Williams wrote: systemd is insanity. see also smit.
Re: Linux: concerns over systemd [OT]
Christopher Morrow wrote: On Tue, Oct 21, 2014 at 4:10 PM, Andrew Sullivan asulli...@dyn.com wrote: On Tue, Oct 21, 2014 at 03:11:55PM -0400, Barry Shein wrote: But for example some of my servers boot in seconds. One is reminded of a mail, included in the Preface to _The UNIX-HATERS Handbook_, available at it's really not clear to me that 'reboots in seconds' is a thing to optimize... I suppose the win is: Is the startup/shutdown process clear, conscise and understandable at 3am local time? followed by: Can I adjust my startup processes to meet my needs easily and without finding a phd in unix? If systemd is simply a change in how I think about /etc/init.d/* and /etc/rc?.d/* cool, if it's more complexity and less EASY flexibility then it's a fail. You guys REALLY don't want to wade into the swamp on debian-users -- the place is full of systemd fanboys and apologists, and anybody who raises real operational concerns resulting from the switch in default init systems. I'm really pining for a LISP Machine right about now. Miles Fidelman -- In theory, there is no difference between theory and practice. In practice, there is. Yogi Berra
Re: Linux: concerns over systemd adoption and Debian's decision to switch
Could someone comment on why they chose systemd over upstart (other than the Canonical CLA)? Or point to an article on it?
Re: Linux: concerns over systemd adoption and Debian's decision to switch
Philip Dorr wrote: Could someone comment on why they chose systemd over upstart (other than the Canonical CLA)? Or point to an article on it? If you want to wade into the mess, the archives of the Debian Tech. Committee (https://lists.debian.org/debian-ctte/), for Dec 2013-March 2014, make for some interesting reading (if you have a Baroque sense of what's interesting). The voting is documented here: https://bugs.debian.org/cgi-bin/bugreport.cgi?bug=727708 (I think - Debian decision making is incredibly convoluted.) This article has some background that's reasonably accurate: http://www.zdnet.com/debian-inches-towards-new-init-system-decision-amid-fallout-726128/ I seem to recall a summary document comparing the various available init systems, and how systemd came out on top - but I'll be damned if I can find it now. Some of the position statements are linked from here: https://wiki.debian.org/Debate/initsystem Miles Fidelman -- In theory, there is no difference between theory and practice. In practice, there is. Yogi Berra
Re: Linux: concerns over systemd [OT]
The thing that I don't understand about systemd is how it managed to get *EVERY SINGLE DISTRIBUTION'S RELEASE MANAGER* on board in less than a year, given how thoroughly it violates the Unix philosophy, and how poorly documented it is -- to the point where you can't even run sysvinit anymore unless you're willing to build initscripts by hand, since packages don't even include them anymore. Does Poettering have compromising photographs of all these guys in a puppy pile at a Linuxcon somewhere? Cheers, -- jra - Original Message - From: Barry Shein b...@world.std.com To: Israel G. Lugo israel.l...@lugosys.com Cc: nanog@nanog.org Sent: Tuesday, October 21, 2014 3:11:55 PM Subject: Re: Linux: concerns over systemd [OT] I've done a fair amount of hand-to-hand combat with systemd. When it's good it's good, tho not always apparent why it's good. But for example some of my servers boot in seconds. When it's bad it can be painful and incredibly opaque and a huge time sink. Googling for suggestions I've found several threads where the co-author (Poettering) jumps in usually to be annoyingly arrogant (I'm sure he's very bright and good to children and pets and overworked) responding with comments like why don't you just read your logs and not bother this list or similar (that was paraphrased.) The logs are, in my experience, almost always useless or nearly so, mumble failed to start basically. I'm not the only one: http://www.muktware.com/2014/04/linus-torvalds-happy-systemd-author-kay-sievers/25151 It also resists tools like strace because it tends to do things by IPC. In one extreme case I just reworked an /etc/init.d script to avoid systemd (not use the various /etc/rc.foo files), mostly just hit it with a sledgehammer and put fixing that on my TODO list. Unfortunately I am mortal and have limited time on this earth. My experience as I said is mixed, hard cases are very hard where they really seem like they shouldn't be (just tell me roughly what you're trying to do rather than just fail, eg, via some debug enable), most are just your usual oops it wants this or that situations. I don't think I'd want to revert to sysvinit, systemd seems architecturally superior. But it needs a lot more transparency and some attempt to gather common problems -- like why is it hanging asking for a password on the console when I can't see why it thinks it needs one? -- and FAQ them with real answers or add some code/configuration to fix that (never ask for a password in this script OK? And no --no-ask-password isn't fixing this so stop repeating that answer!) -- -Barry Shein The World | b...@theworld.com | http://www.TheWorld.com Purveyors to the Trade | Voice: 800-THE-WRLD | Dial-Up: US, PR, Canada Software Tool Die | Public Access Internet | SINCE 1989 *oo* -- Jay R. Ashworth Baylink j...@baylink.com Designer The Things I Think RFC 2100 Ashworth Associates http://www.bcp38.info 2000 Land Rover DII St Petersburg FL USA BCP38: Ask For It By Name! +1 727 647 1274
Re: Linux: concerns over systemd [OT]
- Original Message - From: Capi c...@lugosys.com On 10/21/2014 11:29 PM, Jay Ashworth wrote: The thing that I don't understand about systemd is how it managed to get *EVERY SINGLE DISTRIBUTION'S RELEASE MANAGER* on board in less than a year, given how thoroughly it violates the Unix philosophy, and how poorly documented it is Not *every single* distribution... I had meant to put an asterisk on that. I'm glad to be using Gentoo Linux at home for the last 10 years... They've adopted OpenRC, which is much less invasive, works with an existing init (possibly sysv) and uses the friendly shell scripts we're all used to. Ok, but how does it handle providing initscripts? I gather any upstreams which used to provide them aren't anymore... Cheers, -- jra -- Jay R. Ashworth Baylink j...@baylink.com Designer The Things I Think RFC 2100 Ashworth Associates http://www.bcp38.info 2000 Land Rover DII St Petersburg FL USA BCP38: Ask For It By Name! +1 727 647 1274
Re: Linux: concerns over systemd [OT]
On 21/10/14 23:55, Jay Ashworth wrote: Ok, but how does it handle providing initscripts? I gather any upstreams which used to provide them aren't anymore... It's Gentoo: You should write your own is the most likely answer. -- Tom
Re: Linux: concerns over systemd [OT]
Probably a lot of it has to do with: - we're merging udev and a bunch of other things into systemd - you want GNOME to work, you'd better use systemd - Canonical (Ubuntu) DIDN'T commit to udev until Debian made the decision - they would have kept going with upstart, but when Debian committed, they decided they didn't want to support a now-orphaned init system - Gentoo supports systemd as an option, it's fork funtoo doesn't - Slackware doesn't Miles Fidelman Jay Ashworth wrote: The thing that I don't understand about systemd is how it managed to get *EVERY SINGLE DISTRIBUTION'S RELEASE MANAGER* on board in less than a year, given how thoroughly it violates the Unix philosophy, and how poorly documented it is -- to the point where you can't even run sysvinit anymore unless you're willing to build initscripts by hand, since packages don't even include them anymore. Does Poettering have compromising photographs of all these guys in a puppy pile at a Linuxcon somewhere? Cheers, -- jra - Original Message - From: Barry Shein b...@world.std.com To: Israel G. Lugo israel.l...@lugosys.com Cc: nanog@nanog.org Sent: Tuesday, October 21, 2014 3:11:55 PM Subject: Re: Linux: concerns over systemd [OT] I've done a fair amount of hand-to-hand combat with systemd. When it's good it's good, tho not always apparent why it's good. But for example some of my servers boot in seconds. When it's bad it can be painful and incredibly opaque and a huge time sink. Googling for suggestions I've found several threads where the co-author (Poettering) jumps in usually to be annoyingly arrogant (I'm sure he's very bright and good to children and pets and overworked) responding with comments like why don't you just read your logs and not bother this list or similar (that was paraphrased.) The logs are, in my experience, almost always useless or nearly so, mumble failed to start basically. I'm not the only one: http://www.muktware.com/2014/04/linus-torvalds-happy-systemd-author-kay-sievers/25151 It also resists tools like strace because it tends to do things by IPC. In one extreme case I just reworked an /etc/init.d script to avoid systemd (not use the various /etc/rc.foo files), mostly just hit it with a sledgehammer and put fixing that on my TODO list. Unfortunately I am mortal and have limited time on this earth. My experience as I said is mixed, hard cases are very hard where they really seem like they shouldn't be (just tell me roughly what you're trying to do rather than just fail, eg, via some debug enable), most are just your usual oops it wants this or that situations. I don't think I'd want to revert to sysvinit, systemd seems architecturally superior. But it needs a lot more transparency and some attempt to gather common problems -- like why is it hanging asking for a password on the console when I can't see why it thinks it needs one? -- and FAQ them with real answers or add some code/configuration to fix that (never ask for a password in this script OK? And no --no-ask-password isn't fixing this so stop repeating that answer!) -- -Barry Shein The World | b...@theworld.com | http://www.TheWorld.com Purveyors to the Trade | Voice: 800-THE-WRLD | Dial-Up: US, PR, Canada Software Tool Die | Public Access Internet | SINCE 1989 *oo* -- In theory, there is no difference between theory and practice. In practice, there is. Yogi Berra
Re: Linux: concerns over systemd [OT]
On 10/21/2014 11:55 PM, Jay Ashworth wrote: - Original Message - From: Capi c...@lugosys.com Whoops, used the wrong alias to reply. Not *every single* distribution... I had meant to put an asterisk on that. My remark was meant to be tongue-in-cheek :) Ok, but how does it handle providing initscripts? I gather any upstreams which used to provide them aren't anymore... The Gentoo devs take care of that. I presume they reuse what they can from upstream... They do a lot of hard work (sometimes more work than they have the manpower for, unfortunately). I remember, for example, back in KDE 3.5 days they were already dividing the upstream KDE mega packages (kde-games, kde-office) into individual packages, so you could choose specific programs instead of 300 MB bundles.
Re: Linux: concerns over systemd [OT]
On Tue, 21 Oct 2014 18:29:44 -0400, Jay Ashworth j...@baylink.com wrote: The thing that I don't understand about systemd is how it managed to get *EVERY SINGLE DISTRIBUTION'S RELEASE MANAGER* on board... It's spelled Red Hat. Add in GNOME and debian (et. al.) is backed into a corner. Red Hat is soo f'ing big, pretty much every project under the sun is going to stop maintaining scripts in favor of systemd.
Re: Linux: concerns over systemd [OT]
On 10/21/2014 11:59 PM, Tom Hill wrote: On 21/10/14 23:55, Jay Ashworth wrote: Ok, but how does it handle providing initscripts? I gather any upstreams which used to provide them aren't anymore... It's Gentoo: You should write your own is the most likely answer. Actually, not at all; although I realize that's a very common misconception. Gentoo Linux is, unfortunately, often associated with the whole gcc -O9000 -msuperfast -fwtf wow-look-at-me crowd. It's true that some people who use Gentoo go on and rave about how many nanoseconds they were able to shave off of their boot time, or how many obscure undocumented GCC options they managed to squeeze in without a compile error. I suppose the flexible nature of Gentoo is appealing to those who like to look cool and show off how they can watch the compiler do its thing. However, that's not at all what the distribution is about. Gentoo is about flexibility and choice. It's got a steepish learning curve, yes, but the documentation is very good; sadly, much of it was lost a few years ago, due to a bad mishap on the community Gentoo Wiki server, apparently without any backups. Back in the day, if I wanted to learn about Samba, I'd Google howto linux samba and Gentoo's Wiki would usually be among the first 3 hits. Their devs take stability very seriously; it's a rolling distro, but there is still a reasonable stabilization period for each package as new versions come out, during which any open bugs may hold up the package until they're fixed. It's all about choice. In my view, Gentoo is no better or worse than Debian, Red Hat, or Ubuntu. Different species, they all make for a better ecosystem.
Re: Linux: concerns over systemd [OT]
Israel G. Lugo wrote: On 10/21/2014 11:59 PM, Tom Hill wrote: On 21/10/14 23:55, Jay Ashworth wrote: Ok, but how does it handle providing initscripts? I gather any upstreams which used to provide them aren't anymore... It's Gentoo: You should write your own is the most likely answer. Actually, not at all; although I realize that's a very common misconception. Gentoo Linux is, unfortunately, often associated with the whole gcc -O9000 -msuperfast -fwtf wow-look-at-me crowd. It's true that some people who use Gentoo go on and rave about how many nanoseconds they were able to shave off of their boot time, or how many obscure undocumented GCC options they managed to squeeze in without a compile error. I suppose the flexible nature of Gentoo is appealing to those who like to look cool and show off how they can watch the compiler do its thing. However, that's not at all what the distribution is about. Gentoo is about flexibility and choice. It's got a steepish learning curve, yes, but the documentation is very good; sadly, much of it was lost a few years ago, due to a bad mishap on the community Gentoo Wiki server, apparently without any backups. Back in the day, if I wanted to learn about Samba, I'd Google howto linux samba and Gentoo's Wiki would usually be among the first 3 hits. Their devs take stability very seriously; it's a rolling distro, but there is still a reasonable stabilization period for each package as new versions come out, during which any open bugs may hold up the package until they're fixed. It's all about choice. In my view, Gentoo is no better or worse than Debian, Red Hat, or Ubuntu. Different species, they all make for a better ecosystem. Given the state of things, though, I'm more-and-more considering Linux from Scratch. I find that I install enough from upstream source that packaging systems (and out-of-date packages) are less and less useful. Probably easier to set up Chef or Puppet and Jenkins to just keep the overall system current - and the heck with all this distro nonsense. Cheers, Miles Fidelman -- In theory, there is no difference between theory and practice. In practice, there is. Yogi Berra
Re: Linux: concerns over systemd adoption and Debian's decision to switch
On Tue, Oct 21, 2014 at 8:40 AM, valdis.kletni...@vt.edu wrote: [snip] It started as a replacement init system. I suspected it had jumped the shark when it sprouted an entirely new DHCP and NTP service. And this Yikes. What's next? Built-in DNS server + LDAP/Hesiod + Kerberos + SMB/Active Directory client and server + Solitaire + Network Neighborhood functionality built into the program ? I would like to note, that I prefer Upstart as in RHEL 6. The all-in-one approach of systemd might have a place on some specialized desktop distros, but outside that niche its' IMO a terrible idea. The proper fix is probably a go back to Upstart or SysVInit and rewrite systemd, so all the pieces are separated and exist as a higher layer on top of init. Nothing wrong with having a concept such as a systemd-desktop-program-launcher application that the real init system runs. was confirmed when I saw this: Leading up to this has been cursor rendering support, keyboard mapping support, screen renderer, DRM back-end, input interface, and dozens of other commits. -- -JH
Re: Linux: concerns over systemd [OT]
On 22/10/14 00:57, Israel G. Lugo wrote: Gentoo is about flexibility and choice. It's got a steepish learning curve, yes, but the documentation is very good; sadly, much of it was lost a few years ago, due to a bad mishap on the community Gentoo Wiki server, apparently without any backups. Back in the day, if I wanted to learn about Samba, I'd Google howto linux samba and Gentoo's Wiki would usually be among the first 3 hits. Their devs take stability very seriously; it's a rolling distro, but there is still a reasonable stabilization period for each package as new versions come out, during which any open bugs may hold up the package until they're fixed. I certainly remember this, and miss it. The Gentoo documentation, and indeed the experience of compiling everything, was excellent. I still miss some of the tools that Gentoo had in Debian/CentOS (and the stage3 live CD is still my goto 'system rescue tool' :)) But.. I don't use it any more for anything serious. It's too much upkeep, and when the the included/maintained rc scripts for some package do inevitably fail to catch a corner case -- far more likely if you're using an overlay -- then you're left with little choice but to start modifying/writing your own. It's all about choice. In my view, Gentoo is no better or worse than Debian, Red Hat, or Ubuntu. Different species, they all make for a better ecosystem. I was mildly unfair in the way my response was worded, but I do hold that the Gentoo way of doing things is much simpler than that of other distributions. This was, in my experience, a double-edged sword. YMMV, etc. -- Tom
Re: Linux: concerns over systemd [OT]
- Original Message - From: Ricky Beam jfb...@gmail.com On Tue, 21 Oct 2014 18:29:44 -0400, Jay Ashworth j...@baylink.com wrote: The thing that I don't understand about systemd is how it managed to get *EVERY SINGLE DISTRIBUTION'S RELEASE MANAGER* on board... It's spelled Red Hat. Add in GNOME and debian (et. al.) is backed into a corner. Red Hat is soo f'ing big, pretty much every project under the sun is going to stop maintaining scripts in favor of systemd. GNOME is probably the linchpin. But it's not just RH. It's Debian, and by extension *buntu, and SuSE, and at least one other major independent parent distro that I can't think of just now... And as far as I know, it's done; SuSE packages already largely don't even include initscripts. Cheers, -- jra -- Jay R. Ashworth Baylink j...@baylink.com Designer The Things I Think RFC 2100 Ashworth Associates http://www.bcp38.info 2000 Land Rover DII St Petersburg FL USA BCP38: Ask For It By Name! +1 727 647 1274
Re: Linux: concerns over systemd adoption and Debian's decision to switch
On Tue, Oct 21, 2014 at 09:40:30AM -0400, valdis.kletni...@vt.edu wrote: On Tue, 21 Oct 2014 14:44:57 +0900, Randy Bush said: systemd is insanity. one would have hoped that deb and others would know better. sigh. It started as a replacement init system. I suspected it had jumped the shark when it sprouted an entirely new DHCP and NTP service. And this was confirmed when I saw this: Leading up to this has been cursor rendering support, keyboard mapping support, screen renderer, DRM back-end, input interface, and dozens of other commits. http://www.phoronix.com/scan.php?page=news_itempx=MTgwNzQ When your init system is worrying about cursor rendering, you have truly fallen victim to severe feature bloat. I guess Jamie Zawinski was right: Every program attempts to expand until it can read mail. Ooooh... /me submits a patch to systemd to provide localhost:25 and //usr/sbin/sendmail emulation... - Matt -- The real art of conversation is not only to say the right thing at the right place but to leave unsaid the wrong thing at the tempting moment. -- Dorothy Nevill
Re: Linux: concerns over systemd adoption and Debian's decision to switch
On Tue, Oct 21, 2014 at 07:20:12PM -0500, Jimmy Hess wrote: On Tue, Oct 21, 2014 at 8:40 AM, valdis.kletni...@vt.edu wrote: [snip] It started as a replacement init system. I suspected it had jumped the shark when it sprouted an entirely new DHCP and NTP service. And this Yikes. What's next? Built-in DNS server + LDAP/Hesiod + Kerberos + SMB/Active Directory client and server + Solitaire + Network Neighborhood functionality built into the program ? You missed font renderer. https://technet.microsoft.com/library/security/ms14-058 - Matt -- A friend is someone you can call to help you move. A best friend is someone you can call to help you move a body.
Re: Linux: concerns over systemd adoption and Debian's decision to switch
On Tue, Oct 21, 2014 at 09:40:30AM -0400, valdis.kletni...@vt.edu wrote: On Tue, 21 Oct 2014 14:44:57 +0900, Randy Bush said: systemd is insanity. one would have hoped that deb and others would know better. sigh. It started as a replacement init system. I suspected it had jumped the shark when it sprouted an entirely new DHCP and NTP service. And this was confirmed when I saw this: Leading up to this has been cursor rendering support, keyboard mapping support, screen renderer, DRM back-end, input interface, and dozens of other commits. http://www.phoronix.com/scan.php?page=news_itempx=MTgwNzQ When your init system is worrying about cursor rendering, you have truly fallen victim to severe feature bloat. I guess Jamie Zawinski was right: Every program attempts to expand until it can read mail. So which comes first: - systemd-emacs or - emacs-systemd-mode ? :-) -- In theory, there is no difference between theory and practice. In practice, there is. Yogi Berra
Jared Mauch
I don't remember seeing mention of this here: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=69-qhoS9sSw h/t Suresh Ramasubramian on Facebook. (I didn't copy and paste any names--hope I got them right.) -- The unique Characteristics of System Administrators: The fact that they are infallible; and, The fact that they learn from their mistakes. Quis custodiet ipsos custodes
Re: ISP Shaping Hardware
I haven't heard of a Virtual Appliance for Allot. We have used the appliance for quite some time already but I am looking forward in replacing it (as soon as possible) due to the poor support in our region. -nathan On 10/21/2014 5:34 AM, Skeeve Stevens wrote: What I'd really love is a vAppliance. Some of these hardware solutions are VERY expensive for offering only an average solution. I'd also rather not rely on their hardware, but servers with VMware (or whatever) that we can design our own redundancy. Does anyone know if Allot does a Virtual Appliance? I've also heard that pfSense is an interesting option... That could easily be virtualised I would assume. ...Skeeve *Skeeve Stevens - *eintellego Networks Pty Ltd ske...@eintellegonetworks.com ; www.eintellegonetworks.com Phone: 1300 239 038; Cell +61 (0)414 753 383 ; skype://skeeve facebook.com/eintellegonetworks ; http://twitter.com/networkceoau linkedin.com/in/skeeve experts360: https://expert360.com/profile/d54a9 twitter.com/theispguy ; blog: www.theispguy.com The Experts Who The Experts Call Juniper - Cisco - Cloud - Consulting - IPv4 Brokering On 20 October 2014 22:31, Nurul Islam Roman nu...@apnic.net wrote: Used following two product to shape traffic on packet level (L3). Had no issue with several thousand customer. Allot http://www.allot.com/netenforcer.html ET http://www.etinc.com/ Found Allot is very popular for satellite based Internet specially in south pacific island countries. -R On 20/10/14 2:55 PM, Skeeve Stevens skeeve+na...@eintellegonetworks.com wrote: Hey all, Just wondering what/if people are using any shaping hardware/appliances these days, and if so, what. I have a client which has thousands of customers on Satellite and needs to restrict some users who are doing a lot. So I wanted to see what the current popular equipment out there is. ...Skeeve *Skeeve Stevens - *eintellego Networks Pty Ltd ske...@eintellegonetworks.com ; www.eintellegonetworks.com Phone: 1300 239 038; Cell +61 (0)414 753 383 ; skype://skeeve facebook.com/eintellegonetworks ; http://twitter.com/networkceoau linkedin.com/in/skeeve experts360: https://expert360.com/profile/d54a9 twitter.com/theispguy ; blog: www.theispguy.com The Experts Who The Experts Call Juniper - Cisco - Cloud - Consulting - IPv4 Brokering
Re: Why is .gov only for US government agencies?
Instead of multiple govs trying to use .gov or .mil, the best idea would be to collapse .gov under .gov.us and .mil under .mil.us (Much like how other countries already work). I don't see that happening as long as the US gov has a say in the matter. I think .su will be decommissioned long before .gov or .mil are. --- -ITG (ITechGeek) i...@itechgeek.com https://itg.nu/ GPG Keys: https://itg.nu/contact/gpg-key Preferred GPG Key: Fingerprint: AB46B7E363DA7E04ABFA57852AA9910A DCB1191A Google Voice: +1-703-493-0128 / Twitter: ITechGeek / Facebook: http://fb.me/Jbwa.Net On Tue, Oct 21, 2014 at 2:17 PM, David Conrad d...@virtualized.org wrote: On Oct 21, 2014, at 10:33 AM, Sandra Murphy sa...@tislabs.com wrote: Folks outside of the US have issues with the US government having a role in the administration of the root, even if that role is to ensure ICANN does screw the pooch. I'm thinking there's a not missing here. For the numerous people who have suggested similar, both publicly and privately: yes, I did accidentally leave out a teensy little word. I honestly wasn't making a comment about my current (perhaps until my boss reads the post) employer. Really. No, really. That'll teach me to post pre-coffee. Regards, -drc
Re: Jared Mauch (Good News!)
It has been brought to my attention that once again I have done a poor job of developing a good Subject: line*. The clip contains good news and I thought a possibly welcome review of the work involved. The subject and content made me think this was a video on the horrible way he had died or something. *It doesn't look that hard to do! -- The unique Characteristics of System Administrators: The fact that they are infallible; and, The fact that they learn from their mistakes. Quis custodiet ipsos custodes
Re: Why is .gov only for US government agencies?
it was at ietf-9, while jon and i were discussing the {features|flaws}
of iso3166-1, that another contributor approached us and ... spoke to
the unfairness, as argued by that contributor, of the armed forces of
the united kingdom being excluded from the use (as registrants) of the
.mil namespace.
i suggest the question is asked and answered, and as i offered slightly
obliquely earlier, the policy of an agency of government committed to
commercial deregulation (since the second clinton administration), in
particular use of .us, may not be the policy of the government in
general, nor the policy of an agency of government otherwise tasked,
e.g., the department of defense.
On 10/21/14 10:25 PM, ITechGeek wrote:
Instead of multiple govs trying to use .gov or .mil, the best idea would be
to collapse .gov under .gov.us and .mil under .mil.us
could we now put a good night kiss on the forehead of this sleepy child
and let him or her dream of candy and ponies?
-e
