You are not logged in. Login Now
 0-24   25-49   50-52        
 
Author Message
25 new of 52 responses total.
tsty
response 25 of 52: Mark Unseen   May 9 10:45 UTC 1996

with a level response field the most amaaaaaaazing thingz can happen.
<ditto chuckle@#20>
mdw
response 26 of 52: Mark Unseen   May 11 07:26 UTC 1996

The 2 minute delay was put in to deal with "attack telnet"'s.  There
were too many people running scripts that must have read something like:
        while: ; telnet cyberspace.org; done
without the delay, this essentially meant something like 30% of all the
grex CPU (plus an undetermined amount of network bandwidth) was going to
searching for pty ports, expensively, then telling the attack telnet's,
"no more ports".  I don't know about you, but as a greedy grex user, *I*
think that's pretty excessive, and the 2 minute delay was the easiest
thing I could put in.  I've since implemented a much nicer version; it
still needs a tad more work, but at this point I'm basically waiting for
feedback on how well the current version works, and spare time to
actually finish it up.
tsty
response 27 of 52: Mark Unseen   May 12 14:34 UTC 1996

that's not a particular aggrevation now that we know the details. It
sure *seemed* to be a nuisance though. maybe 60-90 seconds would work
as well while minimizing the aggrevation?
popcorn
response 28 of 52: Mark Unseen   May 12 16:27 UTC 1996

Marcus?  Feedback from who?  I'd be glad to try it out, if it's somewhere
accessible....
jep
response 29 of 52: Mark Unseen   May 13 16:23 UTC 1996

        I hate the delay, Marcus, but I'm glad to have the explanation for it
now.  Is there a way you can tell incoming telnet users who get turned
away about the delay?  I thought something was hanging until I saw your
explanation.
tsty
response 30 of 52: Mark Unseen   May 15 09:22 UTC 1996

same here .... fwiw.
selena
response 31 of 52: Mark Unseen   May 18 19:27 UTC 1996

Well I know WHY the delay's there now, and I think it's unnecessary harassment
of those of us who are unlucky unenough to try and telnet here when it's busy!
arthurp
response 32 of 52: Mark Unseen   May 19 01:05 UTC 1996

The damage to the usability of grex resulting from attack telneting is an
unnecessary harassment of all the users of grex.
brighn
response 33 of 52: Mark Unseen   May 19 03:10 UTC 1996

Spoken like someone with local call modem range to Grex.  =}
gregc
response 34 of 52: Mark Unseen   May 19 05:18 UTC 1996

Actually, aurthurp's response was spoken like someone who has some regard
for the needs of the whole system and all the users, rather than his
own needs.
brighn
response 35 of 52: Mark Unseen   May 19 15:11 UTC 1996

Precisely why Arthurp for a long time, including during a protion of
the telnetd problem in question, was using three logins at once.
Greg, get off it.
carson
response 36 of 52: Mark Unseen   May 19 18:58 UTC 1996

...and doesn't anymore. sheesh.
brighn
response 37 of 52: Mark Unseen   May 20 07:54 UTC 1996

I'm forgetting this item.
Greg privately called me an "asshole"... what I said to him was
perhaps a bit uncalled for, but insults are DEFINITELY uncalled for.
brighn
response 38 of 52: Mark Unseen   May 20 08:49 UTC 1996

(actually, to the pleasure of many, i'm sure, i'm leaving co-op
entirely pending an apology from Greg C for the insult)
gregc
response 39 of 52: Mark Unseen   May 20 10:26 UTC 1996

For the record: brighn (unjustly)accused me of a certain activity, before
he had his facts straight. I personaly find such leap-before-you-think
finger pointing to be highly insulting. There will be no apology
from me on this subject.
brighn
response 40 of 52: Mark Unseen   May 20 22:11 UTC 1996

I apologize for the indirect accusation.
My feelings were hurt by the use of words such as "agenda", 
used in a context that implied malice or indifference, when all I did was
criticize a change and state my views on the subject.
But "he started it" is an immature attitude, so I'll just drop the
topic.  I've been in a snitty mood the last few days,
and I'll admit that Greg C provided himself as a suitably
abrasive target to start a fight with.  
Actually, I must say, he got hostile too quickly... I'm going
back to snitfights with Carson and Kerouac.  They're more fun,
and they don't kick sand in my eyes.  *giggle*
And if Greg isn't going to apologize for calling me an asshole, 
that's all right, because he's an asshole.  =}
selena
response 41 of 52: Mark Unseen   May 21 03:38 UTC 1996

Oh, WTF, people??

arthurp
response 42 of 52: Mark Unseen   May 25 22:29 UTC 1996

First, attack telnetting has no affect on me whatsoever.  I cruise along if
people attack telnet, ftp, or whatever.  For myself, I could care less, the
system always performs.  
For a time of a month or two between discovering screen and hearing that
people were not able to get in I used screen to multilogin so I could have
my helper flag on and accomplish things in another window.  Now that I realize
there is port contention I have not done it at all.
With that in mind it seems hard to believe that someone would paint me as
selfish.  Occasionally a bit unaware of the big picture, but selfish?
carson
response 43 of 52: Mark Unseen   May 25 23:11 UTC 1996

I'd've described Chaz exactly as he did.
brighn
response 44 of 52: Mark Unseen   May 25 23:50 UTC 1996

My point, Chaz, is that a certain someone is painting me as selfish
whenI'm as selfish as you are.  You've done a few things which,
taken out of context, make you look like a greedy pig too...
(and the grexers sing, Brandi, you're a fine girl, what
 a good file you would be, but our love, our life, and
 our lady is the Net...)   =}
I resented being painted as a selfish hoarder by someone who then
characterized you as an ideal user.
That's all.
carson
response 45 of 52: Mark Unseen   May 26 00:21 UTC 1996

Chaz learns from his errors. :P
brighn
response 46 of 52: Mark Unseen   May 27 05:17 UTC 1996

(and I don't, Carson?  When was the last time you and I got into a serious
flamewar, child?  =} )
carson
response 47 of 52: Mark Unseen   May 28 18:05 UTC 1996

since I stopped paying attention to you. your point?
brighn
response 48 of 52: Mark Unseen   May 28 23:11 UTC 1996

(silly carson, you started the last one... about sexuality, way back
when, and we snitted each other... =}  and this whole thing has gone
wackily off-thread, the point being... oh, i don't remember, i don't
care  =} )
I don't have an agenda.  All I know is that it took me twenty tries 
to get online last night to check my mail, then another fifteen tries
to check blondval's.  I guess I wasn't aware that wanting to use the
system counted as an agenda.  =}
tsty
response 49 of 52: Mark Unseen   May 29 07:56 UTC 1996

these might be the unfriendly troubles item, but, !!hello!!, it's machine
oriented, not personal. thank you for  your attention.....
 0-24   25-49   50-52        
Response Not Possible: You are Not Logged In
 

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