You are not logged in. Login Now
 0-24   12-36   37-61   62-86   87-111   112-136   137-161   162-176   
 
Author Message
25 new of 176 responses total.
carson
response 37 of 176: Mark Unseen   Apr 21 08:36 UTC 2001

resp:34

(I wouldn't go so far as to say that you're that much aware of what's
going on re: M-Net than I am.  having kept myself abreast of the system
ever since the Salcedo incident, I'm one of the few people you *can't*
accuse of not being familiar with both M-Net and Grex.  plus, I've held
a "position of responsibility" on M-Net more recently than you have.)

(if you think my comment about M-Net not having much worth reading was 
meant to offend you, so be it.  the fact is that M-Net has newer 
hardware, a faster net connection, and more disk space, all for naught.
it's ready for a big boom that isn't likely to happen.)

(seriously, why bother pointing out M-Net?  *Chinet* [which has been
around even longer than any permutation of M-Net has] has newer hardware
than M-Net does, will have its own T-1 in a matter of days, and has
unreasonable amounts of disk space [mostly used for games].  it also has
maybe 12 users.  I can post an item or enter a response there very
quickly; the wait is in a response from someone else.)

(here's my theory:  newer hardware, faster net connections, and oodles of
disk space have *zilch* to do with building a community.  all that speed
is only good for allowing inane users to post inane responses insanely
fast.  seriously, what's the speed supposed to be used for?  people can
only read and type so fast.  whether you're connected to Grex by phone or
by port, it's usually at the speed of type or faster.  the only difference
is when using Backtalk, and that's mostly in retrieval, and *still* as
fast as any database I use on the internet.  ever tried to do a search on
cnnsi.com?)

(I'm reminded of janc's comments on why he doesn't speed when he travels:
at some point, the increase in speed isn't worth the time gained.  think
of it as diminishing returns.)

(you're patently wrong about the ease of replacing hardware.  last I
checked, Grex had plenty of spare CPUs laying around the Pumpkin, ready 
to go.  M-Net, as last summer showed, obviously doesn't.  which would
be cheaper to replace, again?)

(I'd also be curious to see how well M-Net's current set-up might handle
the sort of traffic Grex sees on a regular basis.  I'm unlikely to see
that experiment anytime soon, as M-Net has pissed away its userbase and
seems xenophobic about expanding it.  [*cough*allocatedtelnetports*cough]
that's fine by me.  while M-Net continues to attract users that detract
from the system, I'm happy to suffer through a few thousand script-kiddies
if it means I'll see a few more users on a regular basis.  it weren't for
Chinet, M-Net could be the fastest system no one uses.) 

(I'm all for a discussion of expenses and cost-saving measures, but I'd
hate to see it focus on "improving" a resource that won't necessarily
produce a benefit.)

keesan
response 38 of 176: Mark Unseen   Apr 21 15:07 UTC 2001

Lynx runs about twice as fast on mnet as it does on grex, and the modems are
also faster.  I don't see how this affects the conferences, but it is nice
when you are browsing or downloading files.  The conferences are used by
different people for different purposes (more for socializing than for
exchanging information).  Obviously the M-Net users think that the responses
on M-Net are worth reading and many of them don't think the same for grex.
I don't see the point of name-calling.  I hope both systems continue to exist.
jp2
response 39 of 176: Mark Unseen   Apr 21 18:13 UTC 2001

This response has been erased.

jp2
response 40 of 176: Mark Unseen   Apr 21 18:22 UTC 2001

This response has been erased.

scg
response 41 of 176: Mark Unseen   Apr 21 23:53 UTC 2001

Grex's network connectivity shouldn't be measurably worse than M-Net's.  DSL
connections are pretty low latency, and WWNet and Voyager both have
connectivity to the rest of the Net that's decent but could use some
improvement.  I think Voyager's is somewhat better than WWNet's at the moment.
Traceroutes from M-Net to Grex currently go through New York, so neither of
them is buying connectivity from providers that have very good peering with
eachother.  If M-Net's connectivity is considerably better than Grex, it's
more likely because Grex's DSL line is filling up than anything else.
jp2
response 42 of 176: Mark Unseen   Apr 22 01:00 UTC 2001

This response has been erased.

jep
response 43 of 176: Mark Unseen   Apr 26 14:02 UTC 2001

Using Backtalk, it does take a very long time (30-60 seconds) to go from 
one item to the next, or to post a response or a new item.  Resp #37 
refers to diminishing returns for speed.  I start doing something on 
Grex every day which takes too long, and so I go to do something else, 
and then the thing I was doing doesn't get done.  This isn't a trivial 
problem, and I don't think it's an unsolvable one.
jp2
response 44 of 176: Mark Unseen   Apr 26 17:45 UTC 2001

This response has been erased.

carson
response 45 of 176: Mark Unseen   Apr 27 00:32 UTC 2001

resp:44

(you're joking, right?)
jp2
response 46 of 176: Mark Unseen   Apr 27 02:10 UTC 2001

This response has been erased.

gull
response 47 of 176: Mark Unseen   Apr 27 02:38 UTC 2001

It doesn't normally take 30 seconds for me to move from one item to 
another in Backtalk.  The speed of web browsing on Grex is about what 
I've come to expect from other sites.  Maybe I'm just too used to my 
28.8 modem connection, and when I've had more bandwidth for a while I'll 
start to get annoyed with sites that don't load instantaneously.
scott
response 48 of 176: Mark Unseen   Apr 27 11:10 UTC 2001

With Backtalk you're probably also seeing processing delays.
carson
response 49 of 176: Mark Unseen   Apr 27 12:55 UTC 2001

resp:46

(from Arbornet's "support" command):


                           Patron       Member       Guest

Inbound telnet ports        64           56     48 from Michigan,
                                                  28 otherwise


(again, you're joking, right?)
jp2
response 50 of 176: Mark Unseen   Apr 27 13:58 UTC 2001

This response has been erased.

carson
response 51 of 176: Mark Unseen   Apr 27 15:06 UTC 2001

resp:50

("As a current Board member and former staff member, I am pretty 
convinced I know more about what is going on that you do?"  that's 
just *too* easy.)  :P

(again, you're joking, right?  I haven't even addressed site-bans 
yet.)  ;)
jp2
response 52 of 176: Mark Unseen   Apr 27 15:22 UTC 2001

This response has been erased.

pfv
response 53 of 176: Mark Unseen   Apr 27 15:33 UTC 2001

Site-bans are also "normal": grex uses them as well..
Any admin uses them.
Only an idiot would NOT use them.
(For what and why is your issue).
jep
response 54 of 176: Mark Unseen   Apr 27 15:42 UTC 2001

I apologize for any part I've had in turning this into a Grex vs. M-Net 
battle.  That's not any goal or interest of mine.  I only meant to 
support the idea that Grex runs too slowly; it's speed is a problem.
carson
response 55 of 176: Mark Unseen   Apr 27 16:32 UTC 2001

resp:52

(so you admit that such limitations had been implemented?  I'll 
grant that the text I cited was revised only as recently as March 18, 
2000, so if Arbornet has moved away from limiting tty allocations 
based on donor status [of which I was aware] and IP address [of which 
I was not aware] since that time because of the actions of a script 
kiddie from Brighton and a rogue staff member, then cheers to them.  
that doesn't explain away the xenophobic attitude apparently supported 
by most of Arbornet.)

(then again, you seem to think that Chinet moved to NT along with 
CBBS.  ;P  you might want to look at the finger output from 
chinet.chinet.com again.)  

resp:53

(in the interest of clarifying the misinformation you seem to provide 
so willingly, I'll note that Grex used a site ban once, as previously 
posted in the Coop conference, when contact with a particular site's 
sysadmins failed to yield productive results.  it was a big deal then,
and was lifted fairly shortly thereafter.  if you're aware of any 
other time Grex has used a site ban, feel free to point it out.)  :P

---

(frankly, if the only things people can pick out about resp:37 are
the mentions of port allocations and Backtalk, then I'm pribly very
much on the mark.)

(jep, out of curiosity, what sort of net connection are you using?  
I'm currently using a cable modem, and never have to wait more than 
a minute for a page to load, even with a full 20 responses.  I had
similar response times while in Québec, using whatever connection
Université Laval had at the time.  have you considered that perhaps
the delays in Backtalk aren't necessarily on Grex's end?)
carson
response 56 of 176: Mark Unseen   Apr 27 16:34 UTC 2001

(jep slipped.  I agree that criticisms of Arbornet should pribly be 
left to another item.  however, I'd add that experiences that they
and other systems have had after "upgrading" are certainly worth 
considering when discussing issues of speed.)
jp2
response 57 of 176: Mark Unseen   Apr 27 16:42 UTC 2001

This response has been erased.

jep
response 58 of 176: Mark Unseen   Apr 27 18:29 UTC 2001

re #55: I believe my network connection at work is a pair of T1s running 
through the Sterling Commerce network, which is provided by our parent 
company, SBC.
mdw
response 59 of 176: Mark Unseen   Apr 30 01:42 UTC 2001

Grex does "block sites" (using tcpd) with some frequency.  Usually these
attract no notice and generate no complaints because they involve sites
*only* used by a vandal.  The most recent case involved a mail bomber
from Poland who liked to running a mail based DOS attack involving us
and about 2-3 other "free" Unix sites.
janc
response 60 of 176: Mark Unseen   Apr 30 03:07 UTC 2001

I think the difference in web conferencing speed on M-Net and Grex are mostly
due to processing delays.  M-Net's machine is substantially faster and usually
substantially more lightly loaded.  Network delays probably contribute, but
not so much.  I'm not sure how the different software platforms compare - I
think WebYapp is less heavily scripted than Backtalk, which should give it
a performance advantage, but I've done some things to upgrade the backend
(like index files for all items) that might well make up the difference.

I'd be reluctant to do co-location, but for several months now I've had the
only key to the pumpkin.  I haven't used it, and no other staff member has
borrowed it from me, so I know for a fact that no human being has been in that
room for a long time.  (We should start worrying about backups.)

On the other hand, I can't imagine a lot of places being eager to colocate
our current hardware - a number of large oldly awkwardly shaped boxes strung
together by a morass of wires.  Everyone visiting the colo facility would
point at it and say, "what the hell is that mess?"
scg
response 61 of 176: Mark Unseen   Apr 30 07:42 UTC 2001

Well yeah, it probably would have to be cleaned up and rack mounted.  It would
have to be moved as well, meaning that it wouldn't be much more work for Grex
to rack mount its stuff than it would be for anybody moving into a colo
facility.  Grex even has that rack mount Sun 690 case sitting in the Pumpkin.

Anyhow, Grex's current cabling mess is not a feature.  Stuff would be much
more managable even wehre it currently is if that were cleaned up.
 0-24   12-36   37-61   62-86   87-111   112-136   137-161   162-176   
Response Not Possible: You are Not Logged In
 

- Backtalk version 1.3.30 - Copyright 1996-2006, Jan Wolter and Steve Weiss