Grex Oldcoop Conference

Item 280: Agenda: Grex Board of Directors Meeting on Wednesday, Sept 14

Entered by slynne on Mon Sep 12 23:28:35 2005:

Agenda: Grex Board of Directors Meeting on Wed, Sept 14, 2005
 
  1.  arrivals 7:30p
  2.  Opening Gavel Tap 8:00p
  3. Treasurer's Report 
  4.  Staff Report
      a. hardware needs 
      b. adding new staff
      
      
  5. Old Business
      - Open New User
  7. Schedule Next Meeting 
  8. New Business 
     -consider hiring staff to repair grex during down times. 
  9. Closing Gavel Tap  

The board meeting will be held upstairs at Zingerman's Next Door,
Detroit St, Ann Arbor. Anyone who needs directions can call me on my
cell phone (734)754-3773

33 responses total.

#1 of 33 by mary on Tue Sep 13 01:35:01 2005:

Are we really starting the meeting at 8:00?  I thought it was 7:30.

(Mary yawns)


#2 of 33 by slynne on Tue Sep 13 02:25:40 2005:

I guess I couldnt remember. Let's start at 7:30


#3 of 33 by trh on Tue Sep 13 06:03:24 2005:

Hello:

I love Grex, and what it offers became an indispensable set of tools
that I produce here in the San Francisco Bay Area.

Recent lengthy outages made me miss these tools that I rely so much on.

I hope on Wednesday's meeting these outages would be discussed and ways
to deal with them expeditiously found.

Here in SF Bay Area, we are able to get new Linux-based computers as low
as $179. I am thinking perhaps a backup computer  can be built, and when
the main computer goes down the backup computer put into service until
the problem is fixed.

If you give me the specs, I can also look around here to see if there
are any free surplus used servers are available from the Silicon Valley
firms.

Ahmet Toprak



#4 of 33 by naftee on Tue Sep 13 15:43:56 2005:

i <3 GreX


#5 of 33 by richard on Tue Sep 13 23:11:00 2005:

"consider hiring staff to repair grex during down times."

how could grex possibly afford that?  even if it was affordable, how 
many people are even available to be paid that know unix anymore?


#6 of 33 by mcnally on Tue Sep 13 23:15:30 2005:

 Ann Arbor alone probably has dozens, if not hundreds of people with
 professional-level knowledge of Unix System Administration.  However,
 it's not as easy as just hiring someone who knows Unix really well.

 As for how Grex can afford it -- what do you think Grex will be able
 to afford if it continues to go down without warning for a week at
 a time?


#7 of 33 by richard on Tue Sep 13 23:28:19 2005:

This response has been erased.



#8 of 33 by richard on Tue Sep 13 23:30:46 2005:

re #6 years back, in the olden days, grex used to go down routinely.  
If it was up for 24 hours straight it was cause for celebration.  The 
down time never killed grex.  When its up, people come back.  Also 
grex's dues are classified as donations, so I don't think (not sure) 
that a member could request a partial refund of his dues because of 
excessive down time.  Nor does it say anywhere in newuser, or it 
shouldn't, that grex in anyway guarantees the reliability of its 
service. If they could do that, if grex would feel compelled to honor 
such refund requests, then you might consider paying extra money to get 
grex up faster



#9 of 33 by nharmon on Wed Sep 14 00:27:28 2005:

Certainly, reliable uptimes should be a goal of the system
administrators. But by no means should it be guranteed to the users.


#10 of 33 by aruba on Wed Sep 14 14:09:39 2005:

That's right, Grex is not a fee-for-service organization.  Still, we're
going to lose a lot of users if we keep going down like this.


#11 of 33 by mary on Wed Sep 14 14:26:05 2005:

My thought was that if we get into a state where we are down and it 
looks like we'll be down for a while because staff is busy with paying 
jobs, that what's left is to at least be able to ask staff to help us 
out on a for pay basis.  If I needed money and had to choose between 
spending time where I'd make money or instead spending that time in a 
volunteer position, I'd be working for the paycheck.  That's sane.  Grex 
can't expect our volunteer staff to do otherwise.

Now, I'm not sure that even if we agreed to have this emergency option 
available that anyone on our staff would be able to bump Grex's problems 
up to a higher priority, or if we could afford the time they'd need to 
devote.  But I do know one thing, that paying staff in an emergeny 
wouldn't stop anyone from donating any time that they otherwise would 
have been able to volunteer.  It's not going to happen.  Not with the 
people I know.    

This would be an emergency intervention.  We couldn't afford to pay for 
what our volunteers do routinely.  But, in my opinion, if we have to 
choose between Grex withering and dying offline, with a bank account, or 
being penniless, but online where we can ask for support, I'd go with 
the latter, and sweat the outcome.


#12 of 33 by jep on Wed Sep 14 15:48:37 2005:

The problem I see with hiring emergency expertise is figuring out a 
balance between several factors:

1) The amount of help Grex can afford
   Does Grex sign a blank check and then hope someone can pay the 
bill?  At a couple of hundred dollars per hour, Grex's cash on hand 
would be quickly consumed.  Then what?  Grex could borrow, or run up a 
credit balance, but not honestly, given that it's income is declining 
steadly.

2) Making sure the help which is hired is actually helpful
   You kind of need a technical expert who knows Grex to be in charge.  
If such a person is available, chances are pretty good there's no need 
to hire an outsider.  Other than that, you need someone who's dedicated 
and savvy and who isn't going to charge Grex for 3 hour coffee breaks.  
And who isn't going to take Grex's money, say they'll do X and Y and Z, 
then wander off to another project which they think is higher priority.

3) Determining when, and how, the emergency help is to be brought in
   Who presses the panic button, and when do they press it?  How do 
they decide to do it?  What if they're wrong?

I don't see a way to hire an expert, unless we have a staffer or other 
insider for whom being paid would make a difference in whether they can 
help out Grex.

Have we had a situation like that?  If so, is there any harm in asking 
for specifics?  (For a hypothetical example: janc could have been 
available September 6 if Grex could give him $500, but instead had to 
stick with his paying work.)  Or more generally, what reason do we have 
to believe anyone could ever be available for Grex when Grex is 
encountering a critical situation?


#13 of 33 by cross on Wed Sep 14 20:35:56 2005:

I think it's mostly technology problems.  Grex cut some corners and
made some decisions that `made people happy' but were misguided at best.
Now they're paying the price for it.


#14 of 33 by spooked on Wed Sep 14 20:48:13 2005:

Could be Mr Cross.  Those corners - can you ellaborate on them, please?


#15 of 33 by naftee on Wed Sep 14 20:50:29 2005:

We cut out some jugs and some hooters.  And some racks.


#16 of 33 by cross on Wed Sep 14 21:19:23 2005:

Well, ECC memory was billed as one of the biggest reasons *not* to get
an Intel machine, even though you can get them with ECC memory.  That
didn't happen when we actually bought the machine, though.  Not getting
a SCSI RAID controller was also, I think, short sighted.


#17 of 33 by spooked on Fri Sep 16 21:31:36 2005:

What can we do, Dan, to rectify these problems?



#18 of 33 by cross on Fri Sep 16 21:51:03 2005:

Oh, beats me.  I'd say take some of the money and buy a new machine and
install FreeBSD on it.  I don't suspect I'm supported in that by anyone
else, though.


#19 of 33 by nharmon on Fri Sep 16 22:00:04 2005:

Cross, I might support you if you could explain why you think FreeBSD is
more secure or reliable than OpenBSD. I hode both in high regard.


#20 of 33 by twenex on Sat Sep 17 20:17:51 2005:

I haven't seen any evidence that the problems grex are having are
hardware-related. Am I blind?


#21 of 33 by scott on Sat Sep 17 21:01:11 2005:

There's a lot of custom software on top of the OS.


#22 of 33 by richard on Sat Sep 17 22:00:23 2005:

grex seems to be having a lot more problems since it moved to the co-
lo. Was grex better off living by itself?


#23 of 33 by slynne on Sat Sep 17 22:51:48 2005:

Not financially


#24 of 33 by mary on Sun Sep 18 11:17:37 2005:

When we moved to co-lo we also moved to a new machine.  And you maybe have
forgotten how incredibly slow the old machine was, and how it crashed all
the time due to (what was thought) to be bad wiring at the pumpkin?

Our biggest problem at the moment isn't hardware, or software, or colo.  
It's staff being available to help.  Any problem requiring staff care and
feeding would be bringing us to our knees.


#25 of 33 by cross on Sun Sep 18 18:54:37 2005:

Regarding #19; I think FreeBSD would be more reliable since (a) it
has better hardware support, (b) it has more users, and thus a
higher chance of getting bugs flushed out earlier on, and (c) has
better people working on it (Kirk McKusick, for instance).  In
general, it seems more supported than OpenBSD ever will: more large
sites (like Yahoo) run off of FreeBSD than OpenBSD.  There's a
reason for that.  If OpenBSD was so much better, even with the
attitudes in the industry, I think you'd see more precense.

With regard to security, FreeBSD can't be much worse than OpenBSD
(we've had some pretty major holes here on Grex; not all of which
have been corrected).  For instance, pick an unused tty, cat it,
and wait for someone to telnet into it.  As far as I can tell,
OpenBSD 3.5 just shipped that way.  Certainly, I've seen no proof
to the contrary, and I can't find anywhere that anyone configured
it to do that.  But, FreeBSD also has its own source auditing
project, and they follow OpenBSD's security fixes, and you'd be
hard pressed to find many security bugs in FreeBSD that aren't also
in OpenBSD or that don't affect Grex.

Grex's problem isn't a lack of staff, it's that grex allowed a small
minority of staffers to dictate what software it would run without
really exploring the consequences of that, and with a firm belief
that they were right without anything to *really* back that up.
Those staffers more or less left and haven't been terribly active
lately (except for one in one time of major crisis, who did some
partial work and then left it unfinished for over a month, and
another who wrote a helpful email the other day but otherwise hasn't
done anything in, I think, over a year).

In retrospect, OpenBSD wasn't a good choice.  Things that should
have worked in OpenBSD 3.5 just didn't (e.g., soft metadata updates
in the filesystem; these work fine on FreeBSD).  However, I don't
think me or anyone else saying that is going to change anything:
the perennial responses to pointing out problems with OpenBSD are
either, ``well, we just didn't do that right...'' or, ``Wait until
the next release!  That's all fixed now!''  At what point, like wth
the Bush administration, do epople just get fed up and say, ``no,
it probably won't be fixed next release, so let's do something we
have a pretty good idea will work?''

Another data point with respect to reliability....  Mnet gets much
more usage than grex now, and runs an older version of FreeBSD on
less `server-class' hardware, and seems to have far fewer reliability
problems.

The direction I'd like to see grex take is the following: Invest
in a new machine with dual AMD processors, 2GB ECC memory, a
*hardware* RAID controller going onto SATA disks (you really don't
need SCSI) and a rack-mount case.  Install FreeBSD on it, and go
from there, including an audit and re-write of all the locally
installed software.  I don't see it happening, though.


#26 of 33 by twenex on Sun Sep 18 19:05:07 2005:

On what platform is OpenBSD primarily developed on? Perhaps (assuming there
are no grievous hardware faults) we could exchange current hardware for a
platform which OpenBSD has better support for? Second-hand systems are two
a penny on eBay.


#27 of 33 by cross on Sun Sep 18 21:00:29 2005:

It seems to be a fundamental step backwards to go from zippy, current,
modern hardware that's not supported well by software we chose nearly
abritrarily to flakey old hardware that may be marginally better supported.
Instead, why not get the well-supported software on the newer hardware?


#28 of 33 by nharmon on Sun Sep 18 23:29:05 2005:

This response has been erased.



#29 of 33 by nharmon on Sun Sep 18 23:30:04 2005:

It might not be too expensive if Grex bought a rack-mountable ATX case
they could transfer the present hardware into, and then perhaps use a
seperate SATA drive array. The biggest costs will be buying a SCSI
controller with hardware RAID, and the SATA drive array itself. I wonder
what our ISPs costs are dependant on how many U's of rack space we use.

Another option is to perform regular backups to DVD. This would just
require the cost of a DVD-RW drive. A staffer could perform a full
system backup bimonthly to DVD, and then put in a CD or DVD for
differential backups each week. This would also be an effective disaster
recovery measure in case our ISP is involved in a disaster.


#30 of 33 by twenex on Mon Sep 19 20:17:32 2005:

Second-hand doesn't necessarily mean old. Current Grex hardware was already
one or two years old by the time NewGREX was up.


#31 of 33 by cross on Tue Sep 20 15:24:41 2005:

True.


#32 of 33 by tsty on Sat Jan 14 07:27:36 2006:

nharmon #29 .. prophetic. redundant, but prophetic. the echo is amazing
and ignored just the same. 
  
to this day.


#33 of 33 by jesuit on Wed May 17 02:15:45 2006:

TROGG IS DAVID BLAINE


There are no more items selected.

You have several choices: