|
|
| Author |
Message |
| 25 new of 162 responses total. |
scg
|
|
response 75 of 162:
| 
Aug 16 02:36 UTC 1999 |
User www directories on grex are in the form http://www.grex.org/~user.
The forms drew and don are suggesting wouldn't get you anywhere useful.
|
tsty
|
|
response 76 of 162:
|
Aug 16 08:53 UTC 1999 |
z-mod4em trouble ..... gets to 10240 bytes and freezes for awhile, or,
immediately disconnects. if it has just frozen it gets to 32764 bytes
and freezes for a while, or, disconnects. if it has frozen,
it gets to someting inthe 40s and disconnects.
dialed in to -3000, mesg n
and sz -b <fylename>, the std
s'matter wid dis? you-sta work JustFine (tm)?
|
dpc
|
|
response 77 of 162:
|
Aug 16 14:04 UTC 1999 |
I had been on a dialin for about half an hour when the System
hung up on me at 10:00! I've logged back on (obviously), and
here is the info about my last login:
Last login: Mon Aug 16 09:26:04 on ttyuc from 204.212.46.132
So, whatever dialin is represented by ttyuc hung up.
|
dpc
|
|
response 78 of 162:
|
Aug 16 14:13 UTC 1999 |
Grex just hung up on me *again*! Here the last login info:
Last login: Mon Aug 16 10:02:38 on ttyr8 from 204.212.46.132
Each of the times I was hung up on, I had dialed in on 761-3000.
This time I came in on 761-4931. We'll see how long it lasts...
|
scott
|
|
response 79 of 162:
|
Aug 16 16:29 UTC 1999 |
modems are not hard-wired to specific tty ports.
|
tpryan
|
|
response 80 of 162:
|
Aug 20 03:06 UTC 1999 |
Why doesn't lynx guess .gov s in it's list of 'trying'?
|
davel
|
|
response 81 of 162:
|
Aug 20 10:35 UTC 1999 |
Well, it also doesn't try .fi or .uk or .au etc.
|
albaugh
|
|
response 82 of 162:
|
Aug 20 19:58 UTC 1999 |
Newuser just told me at the "Enter your FULL name?" prompt:
Sorry -- no periods allowed in name.
*I'm* sorry - most people put a period after their middle initial.
I'm sure it's some kind of shell user input limitation kind of crud,
but I found it annoying.
|
mdw
|
|
response 83 of 162:
|
Aug 21 03:37 UTC 1999 |
Actually, it's a special character in mail addresses.
|
drewmike
|
|
response 84 of 162:
|
Aug 21 03:44 UTC 1999 |
Wouldn't a FULL name not have abbreviations?
|
remmers
|
|
response 85 of 162:
|
Aug 21 14:17 UTC 1999 |
Why should email address restrictions affect newuser?
|
albaugh
|
|
response 86 of 162:
|
Aug 21 15:29 UTC 1999 |
> Wouldn't a FULL name not have abbreviations?
Good point: Legally, on forms, it often will say name (last, first,
middle), while others will say name (last, first, mi). "Full name" may
be generally interpreted as the former. But there are many
circumstances where "first mi. last" is common/accepted/etc.
|
steve
|
|
response 87 of 162:
|
Aug 22 07:22 UTC 1999 |
You don't want that in a mail header, however. There are reasons for
keeping periods out of the fullname field in the passwd file, since the
fn field is used in mail headers.
|
mdw
|
|
response 88 of 162:
|
Aug 22 09:19 UTC 1999 |
Newuser is anal-retentive, because it wants to be *sure* the account it
creates is going to work right. If you *really* want dots in your name;
you can use "chfn" to change your full name. Chfn will warn you that
this could cause problems with some mailers, but the assumption is, if
you can use chfn to put dots in, you can use chfn to take them back out.
Grex's mail program *should* quote your gecos full name if it has
reserved characters in it; and other mail programs *should* work right
with the quoted characters, but there *are* broken mail programs out
there; there is no guarantee everything will work right everywhere.
|
remmers
|
|
response 89 of 162:
|
Aug 22 12:29 UTC 1999 |
I understand the reasoning but think it's going a tad overboard in this
day and age. I've used a bunch of different mailers, and they all seem
to do the quoting correctly (as I've been able to observe because of the
"H." in my name...). Does anybody know of any specific mailers that are
broken in this regard?
|
mdw
|
|
response 90 of 162:
|
Aug 22 16:31 UTC 1999 |
., like @ and <, is special to mail - that's in RFC 822 and can't be
changed. On the other hand, ' and ! aren't mentioned in RFC 822,
but...! ! was used for bang addressing and is still regarded as magical
by various mailers. ' shouldn't be special, but I ran across once
mailer that got very confused by 's. There are a *lot* of mailers out
there, and I doubt even all the readers of this conference are at all a
representative sample of the mailers available. Actually, in reading
RFC 822, it's kind of vague about full names; but the examples given
definitely quote full name data that includes .'s. It seems hard to
believe such an obvious area would be so ill defined; but that's life
when it comes to name data.
So far as that goes, stuffing name information into a field originally
intended to hold mainframe account/printer routing information is a hack
in itself.
|
remmers
|
|
response 91 of 162:
|
Aug 22 18:31 UTC 1999 |
(My personal opinion is that RFC 822 erred in making "." a special
character, but Marcus is right - the specification is so firmly
entrenched that we're essentially stuck with it.)
|
drew
|
|
response 92 of 162:
|
Aug 22 19:56 UTC 1999 |
Generally, you can escape special characters (\.) if you really want them
somewhere.
|
richard
|
|
response 93 of 162:
|
Aug 25 21:41 UTC 1999 |
grex is noticeably slow today...seems like the old days
|
remmers
|
|
response 94 of 162:
|
Aug 25 23:28 UTC 1999 |
Feels sprightly to me right now...
|
steve
|
|
response 95 of 162:
|
Aug 26 22:48 UTC 1999 |
Richard, remember that you could be having network problems such that
packets dribble out to you at an agonizing rate, when Grex itself could
be fine. It's sometimes hard to tell which is slow, I know.
|
bdh1
|
|
response 96 of 162:
|
Aug 27 05:05 UTC 1999 |
depending on your OS you may be able to do a 'traceroute' to grex to see
where the problem actually is. Typically you cannot do this behind
firewalls or from and ISP that blocks ICMP packets. But if you can do a
full traceroute to grex you most typically will find that your
'agonizing rate' is at a NAP between two backbone providers (typically
MCI/ATT/Ameritech) and has nothing to do with grex. None of the
carriers feel it is their responsibility to provide high speed/high
capacity access to competitors and only provide minimal NAP as a
necessary 'courtesy'.
|
scg
|
|
response 97 of 162:
|
Aug 27 05:33 UTC 1999 |
Actually, IP backbones (the good ones anyway) do pay a lot of attention to
good peering with other backbones. Since customers aren't generally just
trying to connect to customers of the same backbone, backbones with bad
peering generally get lots of upset customers. That's not to say that peering
out on the Net is good, as a general rule, since there are various political
conflicts and the like that get in the way.
|
bdh1
|
|
response 98 of 162:
|
Aug 27 06:36 UTC 1999 |
MCI and Ameritech are currently in court over a NAP in chicagoland area
(high traffic, buy a T1 and get throughput like a modem). MCI/Worldcom
recently had a 'problem' upstream from a number of ISPs in a market it
was trying to move into and for almost two weeks 'stonewalled' -
meanwhile the local ISPs got to deal with pissed off customers.
MCI/Worldcom 'coincidently' has local media campaign to promote its ISP
products.
re#97: define a 'good' 'backbone' provider and name one that doesn't
play the game the same way the rest of them do.
|
jazz
|
|
response 99 of 162:
|
Aug 27 12:19 UTC 1999 |
The problem with NAPs has little or nothing to do with the intentions
of major backbone providers, but rather that the NAPs themselves are run by
third-party companies who often know very little of IP networking, and
sometimes it seems precious little of FDDI and ATM internetworking, either.
In order to work out a problem on a NAP, at least three companies have to be
called into the fray, and most companies simply attempt to shift the blame
onto one of the others. Adding to that the fact that only about half of a
percent of the people who use traceroute tools to report NAP-related problems
have a good concept of "return route" and how to isolate a one-way asymmetric
problem, and the slowness of NAP providers ... and well, there you have the
reason that backbone providers tend to use PICs (Private InterConnects).
It's kind of silly to say that no ISP wants to provide access to it's
neighbors; large ISPs do not want to provide peering to their neighbors (they
sell them transit instead, it has to do with the way that BGP allows one
network to use the other network's bandwidth for traffic) but that's not
strictly relevant. The ability to reach ones' competitors is often a key
factor in choosing a particular connection over another.
|
