|
|
| Author |
Message |
| 23 new of 125 responses total. |
rtg
|
|
response 103 of 125:
| 
Jan 12 05:03 UTC 1999 |
what interface does the 'modem' present to the PC?
What operating system & software did you use to communicate with it?
--I'm quite interested if there's any hope of talking to it from a Linux
box.
|
hhsrat
|
|
response 104 of 125:
|
Jan 13 03:21 UTC 1999 |
There is an internal card, which connects via cable to the external
modem. I used Win95, and it was set up like a standard modem, it came
with it's own drivers.
|
jshafer
|
|
response 105 of 125:
|
Jan 14 22:49 UTC 1999 |
OK, people. I know it's been a while, but I'm trying to catch up:
what was the outcome of the ICnet debate? I'm sure it's here
somewhere, but it would be nice to have a resolution in
this item...
Thanks...
|
aruba
|
|
response 106 of 125:
|
Jan 14 23:41 UTC 1999 |
After the board voted to drop the link, we debated it a while longer and then
decided to go ahead and do it. We stopped paying ICNET in October.
|
jshafer
|
|
response 107 of 125:
|
Jan 19 04:41 UTC 1999 |
Thanks, Mark.
|
dang
|
|
response 108 of 125:
|
Feb 3 18:14 UTC 1999 |
Re: ADSL: I have ADSL. (I'm connected through them right now) They have
a new modem, that makes no noise what so ever, and has no fan. The
service is very reliable and very fast. The connection to my computer
is via and ATM card (Classical IP over ATM25, to be precise) and it is
not yet available on Linux. It's being worked on. The official OS is
win 95, but Efficient has drivers for 98 and NT as well.
|
hhsrat
|
|
response 109 of 125:
|
Feb 4 01:20 UTC 1999 |
what's the monthly cost? Are you using the Ameritech ADSL service?
|
dang
|
|
response 110 of 125:
|
Feb 4 01:35 UTC 1999 |
~$50 (I don't remember exactly). Yes, I'm using Ameritech. I don't
know of anyone else who is offering ADSL around here at this time, and
it's a lot better, for my purposes, than Cable modem.
|
rtg
|
|
response 111 of 125:
|
Feb 5 13:52 UTC 1999 |
WHat are the data rates coming and going? Will Ameritech provision a
line 'inverted' with a wider bandwidth uplink and a narrower downlink?
I believe there is at least one ATM card driver for Linux. Do they
tell you enough that you could set up a different ATM card, and leave
theirs on the shelf?
|
dang
|
|
response 112 of 125:
|
Feb 5 17:06 UTC 1999 |
1.5 Mbps down, 128 Kbps up. No, the fast link requires special
equipment on the sending end. However, there are other xDSL lines that
have fast both ways. Ameritech isn't offering them at this time, but I
imagine the future will hold them.
Yes, I'm involved in the ATM for linux project. I'm told that people
have gotten the Ameritech ADSL to work with a supported ATM card. I
haven't tried, because I don't want to buy *another* ATM card. I'll
work on a driver for this one. If you can get this card to work with
Linux, you can get any other ATM25 card to work. I don't think you can
get ADSL without buying their card, so you'd have to buy two.
|
scg
|
|
response 113 of 125:
|
Feb 5 18:31 UTC 1999 |
SDSL should also be available in Ann Arbor sometime soon. That's symetrical,
so it could be up to 1.5 Mbps in either direction.
|
steve
|
|
response 114 of 125:
|
Feb 5 22:42 UTC 1999 |
Do you have any other details on that Steve? I heard that too, but
sans useful things--like the cost. ;-)
|
mdw
|
|
response 115 of 125:
|
Feb 6 06:54 UTC 1999 |
If you're considering this for grex, there are some other issues that
mere speed that matter:
(1) grex has roughly equal data rates in both directions. If the
link is much slower in one direction, that will become the
bottleneck and limiting factor in performance.
(2) Does the vendor have provisions for static IP ranges, subnets
and routing? Or do they only support a single dynamic IP address?
(3) What kind of response delay do these other technologies have?
With dial-up PPP, there is a *huge* (20ms+) delay to send
even one really small packet, which means you can't get round-trip
times down much below 40 ms. ISDN doesn't have the delay,
and that's one of the things that makes it better.
(4) how well connected is the vendor? How do they connect to the
rest of the world, and what kind of packet loss rate are we
talking about here?
(5) security. How easy is it for a vandal to snoop on the conversations of
his neighbors? Does he have to go out & tap the wires, or can he
hack into the building and snoop on everyone from his apartment with
a special epromp on his cable modem?
|
lilmo
|
|
response 116 of 125:
|
Feb 6 19:18 UTC 1999 |
>The connection to my computer is via and ATM card
ATM card and via? Wow, that sounds pretty neat.
|
dang
|
|
response 117 of 125:
|
Feb 6 22:26 UTC 1999 |
resp:116 Sorry, that was via ATM. :)
resp:115 I wasn't really suggesting that grex use it, mainly because of
the latency problem. Security, as it's set up now at Ameritech,
wouldn't be a problem. I'm not even connected to Ameritech, I have an
ATM pvc straight to Alter.net. No one else this side of Alter.net,
without direct, privilaged access to the ATM switches at Ameritech,
would be able to snoop. Even then, I don't think they could. ATM is
point to point, and point to multipoint, as far as I know, requires
support on my end.
|
mdw
|
|
response 118 of 125:
|
Feb 7 04:22 UTC 1999 |
Ah yes, uu.net. I know them. They seem awfully friendly to all those
spammers.
|
scg
|
|
response 119 of 125:
|
Feb 7 05:19 UTC 1999 |
UUNet is the world's largest ISP. UUNet has some problems with spammers, but
I doubt you'll find an ISP who doesn't. I get the impression they do cut
people off for spamming, but there are always more where those came from.
I wouldn't call it friendly; maybe just overwhelmed.
|
dang
|
|
response 120 of 125:
|
Feb 7 05:41 UTC 1999 |
I had to sign an agreement stating that if I did anything against their
acceptible use policy (including spamming) I was liable for up to
$25,000 fine. They have far and away the most restrictive anti-spam
policy I've ever seen. Don't know if they enforce it or not, as I
haven't tried spamming anyone, but...
|
steve
|
|
response 121 of 125:
|
Feb 7 05:56 UTC 1999 |
UU.net undoubtedly is huge, but at the same time direct calls to
their people for abuse problems have repeatedly gone unanswered. email
too--I've sent several messages to uu net about Grex problems and I
have never ever gotten a useful reply from them on any issue. Ever.
The same thing for some situations where I was helping others.
|
mdw
|
|
response 122 of 125:
|
Feb 7 07:20 UTC 1999 |
All I know is that whenever I see a spam, 3 times out of 4 it has a
uu.net dialup address.
There's at least one guy who's been sending one spam a day (excepting
weekends?) to a mailing list I'm on, for several months now, always from
a uu.net address. I looked through news.admin.net-abuse.email, and one
person has posted at least 6 copies of that very same spam, and says
he's complained about that spam to uu.net six times since 12/15, as
trouble ticket #UU1175567
Here's a partial log of them:
Jan 28 03:51:15 -0800 1Cust225.tnt24.sfo3.da.uu.net [208.255 ...
Jan 29 07:14:04 -0800 1Cust75.tnt24.sfo3.da.uu.net [208.255 ...
Jan 29 20:53:34 -0800 1Cust119.tnt24.sfo3.da.uu.net [208.255 ...
Feb 1 12:58:10 -0800 1Cust75.tnt24.sfo3.da.uu.net [208.255 ...
Feb 2 20:31:57 +0100 1Cust209.tnt24.sfo3.da.uu.net [208.255 ...
Feb 4 08:12:48 -0800 2Cust6.tnt24.sfo3.da.uu.net [208.255.66.134]
Feb 6 04:06:46 -0800 1Cust12.tnt24.sfo3.da.uu.net [208.255.67.12]
(This is the spam that usually has a subject like "..your web site" and
goes on "We'll Submit Your Site To Over 900 Search Engines...". It used
to be 700.)
I dunno how this guy gets away with it.
Does he actually make money?
|
steve
|
|
response 123 of 125:
|
Feb 7 17:51 UTC 1999 |
I have heard that some mass spammers do actually make money
but they are usually more targeting specific markets. A friend
who is a dog breeder recently started getting dog-specific spam
as an example. She even bought from these spamateers unforunately.
|
keesan
|
|
response 124 of 125:
|
Mar 27 01:19 UTC 1999 |
Is there some way to set pine to reject mail from certain email addresses?
(Our laser fax can be set to not receive from certain other fax numbers to
avoid junk faxes, or set to receive only from certain other numbers).
|
scg
|
|
response 125 of 125:
|
Mar 27 01:28 UTC 1999 |
Type man procmail
|