On 02/12/2013 03:50 PM, Brett Bump wrote:
I'm not sure what the routing issue are with *Comcast*, however Johnny is
right about them not having "some" access to the rest of the internet. We
have been blocking email access FROM *Comast* for years because of all the
spam that comes off their network. My last access edit for CMCS was:
-rw-r--r-- 1 root wheel 6958 Apr 20 2008 CMCS
# CMCS Comcast Cable Communications, Inc.
#------------^------------------v--------------------------------------#
24.126 550 Spam not wanted (CMCS)
<snip>
I block 115 class B subnets from them (that's 7536640 IP addresses).
Are you differentiating AT ALL between their consumer connections and
their business connections? If not, that's a really bad idea.
That said, my mail server handles about 100 users and 24 domains, most
of which are businesses. It moves, on average, about 6500 messages per
day. Not being able to email Peter directly is the first issue I've had
in a year and a half of having this connection.
So, I am forced to ask: WTF?
-Dave
--
Dave McGuire, AK4HZ
New Kensington, PA
On 2013-02-12 21:57, Dave McGuire wrote:
On 02/12/2013 03:54 PM, Johnny Billquist wrote:
Interesting, I always though the 11/60 held that honor.
Nope. The 11/60 wasn't a big flop. It wasn't a success, admittedly, but
it did sell in some numbers. (I at one time, had four 11/60 machines to
play with in a computer club, and I still have a complete CPU board set
for an 11/60 - no WCS though.)
The limited success of the 11/60 was due to the totally incomprehensible
decision to go for 11/34 feature parity at a time when the 11/70 had
already set the future standard.
But apart from that stupidity, it was a rather nice machine, in a very
nice package.
I agree; I like 11/60s quite a lot. My very first computer consulting
gig involved selling and installing a (very) used 11/60 to a private
school in NJ. I wonder what happened to it. I really liked that
machine. Its only real limitation was the 18-bit addressing, and I was
really coveting the WCS capability! (my home machine at the time was an
11/34)
18-bit, no supervisor mode, and no split I/D-space... Just like an 11/34.
Johnny
--
Johnny Billquist || "I'm on a bus
|| on a psychedelic trip
email: bqt at softjar.se || Reading murder books
pdp is alive! || tryin' to stay hip" - B. Idol
On 2013-02-12 21:56, Cory Smelosky wrote:
Hello!
I've gotten Linux DECnet working...so my primary workstation is now on
HECnet. ;)
Change 9.15 to MAELNA please.
Done.
Johnny
--
Johnny Billquist || "I'm on a bus
|| on a psychedelic trip
email: bqt at softjar.se || Reading murder books
pdp is alive! || tryin' to stay hip" - B. Idol
On 2013-02-12 21:44, Dave McGuire wrote:
On 02/12/2013 03:41 PM, Johnny Billquist wrote:
So why is anyone (Dave) buying their service?
I'm buying their service because it's the best service I can get
here. (and it's significantly better than the best I could get in
either Florida or DC, at least when I lived there) And it's cheaper by
about 30% than what I had in Florida, though that was not a
consideration, as my connectivity is my livelihood. As a bonus, for
that 30% discount, I have more than twice the bandwidth and far, far
better reliability. (I was on Sprint business class in Florida)
I am 100% happy with Comcast Business. They are a class act. (with
the exception of that routing hole, which I will investigate!) Please
keep in mind that this is NOT the same organization, business model, or
staff as the consumer-grade shared cable network service. (There's
fiber to the pole outside my building!)
You guys are funny...
??
Yes. Talking about comcast blocking ports, dynamic IP addresses and all that stuff. It is Comcast that is being blocked.
You totally missed Peters point. It is *Comcast* who do not have access
to the whole internet, not the other way around. Comcast can't do
anything about it. Comcast is blacklisted by some parts of the Internet.
If you want access to those parts of the Internet you need to switch to
another ISP, which actually do have access to all of it.
Comcast is not blocking something for you. Comcast do not have access,
and thus can't sell it either. Comcast probably did not tell you, or any
other customer, that you will only be able to access parts of the
Internet through them. Ask for a refund, or go somewhere else...? I
doubt Comcast will suddenly be able to speak to Stupi.SE within any
forseeable future.
I thought it was a matter of Comcast not having BGP peering agreements
with some other backbone carriers. Is that not the case?
As far as I know, no. However, I'll let Peter expand on that, if he cares to.
But Comcast might also have BGP issues. I don't know. But if that was the case, I would have thought that it would just have to route through some it do have agreements with, and get to the end destination anyway, even if not through the best possible paths... Or else I missed something more. :-)
Johnny
--
Johnny Billquist || "I'm on a bus
|| on a psychedelic trip
email: bqt at softjar.se || Reading murder books
pdp is alive! || tryin' to stay hip" - B. Idol
On 02/12/2013 03:54 PM, Johnny Billquist wrote:
Interesting, I always though the 11/60 held that honor.
Nope. The 11/60 wasn't a big flop. It wasn't a success, admittedly, but
it did sell in some numbers. (I at one time, had four 11/60 machines to
play with in a computer club, and I still have a complete CPU board set
for an 11/60 - no WCS though.)
The limited success of the 11/60 was due to the totally incomprehensible
decision to go for 11/34 feature parity at a time when the 11/70 had
already set the future standard.
But apart from that stupidity, it was a rather nice machine, in a very
nice package.
I agree; I like 11/60s quite a lot. My very first computer consulting
gig involved selling and installing a (very) used 11/60 to a private
school in NJ. I wonder what happened to it. I really liked that
machine. Its only real limitation was the 18-bit addressing, and I was
really coveting the WCS capability! (my home machine at the time was an
11/34)
-Dave
--
Dave McGuire, AK4HZ
New Kensington, PA
On 2013-02-12 18:38, Clem Cole wrote:
On Tue, Feb 12, 2013 at 11:47 AM, <Paul_Koning at dell.com
<mailto:Paul_Koning at dell.com>> wrote:
Nothing. It was one of the most spectacular failures in DEC
history. A whole new OS (well, based on RSX I believe) and new
hardware designed specifically for it (VT62), canceled a week after
it was first announced.
Interesting, I always though the 11/60 held that honor.
Nope. The 11/60 wasn't a big flop. It wasn't a success, admittedly, but it did sell in some numbers. (I at one time, had four 11/60 machines to play with in a computer club, and I still have a complete CPU board set for an 11/60 - no WCS though.)
The limited success of the 11/60 was due to the totally incomprehensible decision to go for 11/34 feature parity at a time when the 11/70 had already set the future standard.
But apart from that stupidity, it was a rather nice machine, in a very nice package.
Johnny
--
Johnny Billquist || "I'm on a bus
|| on a psychedelic trip
email: bqt at softjar.se || Reading murder books
pdp is alive! || tryin' to stay hip" - B. Idol
On 02/12/2013 02:23 AM, Dan B wrote:
@Dave McGuire - I'm neither a kid nor a gamer. Perhaps you're
confusing the business vs. consumer services? They are quite
different; they don't even share a network infrastructure.
Well, the business side is better, for what I understand here (in the
north west,) many businesses use comcast business as backup, the
primaries differ based on each choices.
I don't know of any small company here using comcast as primary,
however may be wrong for lack of data, there may be some, they (cable
companies) lament too low business adoption, but from the other
(business clients) side there are fears mainly of security and
continuity of service.
If you have redundant fibers to your door, you may be better off using
comcast, since I read somewhere that getting fiber to the premises
with ILEC may prevent you to revert back to copper in the future.
Well like I said, I'm very happy with them, and I am one of the few
American consumers who is actually difficult to please. This is the
best service I've had since the 1990s, when the guys staffing my
connection's NOC were hired and managed by ME, and I had enable access
to the routers and root on the nameservers.
Comcast-wise, if there's a network peering issue, like reaching
Peter's part of the world, I will ask them about it when I have a chance.
-Dave
--
Dave McGuire, AK4HZ
New Kensington, PA
On 2013-02-12 17:47, Paul_Koning at Dell.com wrote:
On Feb 11, 2013, at 7:21 PM, Johnny Billquist wrote:
...
Speaking of IAS, it really looks cool when reading specs, but I've never touched it, and another aspect of those specs is that it looks like it would be rather slow...
IAS was basically RSX11-D with a timesharing system layered over it. My exposure to it was in supporting Typeset-11, which originally ran on RSX11-D and in later versions moved to IAS. For our purposes, the two were identical; we did not use the timesharing facilities of IAS at all. I'm not sure why Typeset-11 used RSX11-D instead of -M as most of the competition did. Perhaps history -- it may be that it predated -M.
Sounds likely. I wonder if much did happen in 11D after 11M, and even more, 11M+ were introduced. It sure looks like all focus was on the 11M family. But 11D did come before.
And yes, it was pretty heavy. It did work well enough for what we wanted, but it did use a whole 11/70 to support an application that was less functional than what competitors did with an 11/45. For example, Typeset-11 did not have WYSIWIG editing while the other guys did, and that was a major black mark.
Never seen TRAX in real life either, btw. What was so good about it?
Nothing. It was one of the most spectacular failures in DEC history. A whole new OS (well, based on RSX I believe) and new hardware designed specifically for it (VT62), canceled a week after it was first announced.
The little I've read about TRAX, I wonder how much RSX based it really was.
Also, the terminal must have been the VT61 (which I think was block-mode oriented). The VT62 is just a plain VT52 with some additional whistles. I had one for many years...
Cancelled after one week is rather spectacular, though. Do you know why? I've seen it mentioned in some documentation and so on, but never seen or heard anything of it outside of those few places. Obviously never seen or heard of anyone ever running it, or even knowing of any place where anyone have run it.
Johnny
--
Johnny Billquist || "I'm on a bus
|| on a psychedelic trip
email: bqt at softjar.se || Reading murder books
pdp is alive! || tryin' to stay hip" - B. Idol
On Tue, 12 Feb 2013, Dave McGuire wrote:
On 02/12/2013 03:41 PM, Johnny Billquist wrote:
So why is anyone (Dave) buying their service?
I'm buying their service because it's the best service I can get
here. (and it's significantly better than the best I could get in
either Florida or DC, at least when I lived there) And it's cheaper by
about 30% than what I had in Florida, though that was not a
consideration, as my connectivity is my livelihood. As a bonus, for
that 30% discount, I have more than twice the bandwidth and far, far
better reliability. (I was on Sprint business class in Florida)
I am 100% happy with Comcast Business. They are a class act. (with
the exception of that routing hole, which I will investigate!) Please
keep in mind that this is NOT the same organization, business model, or
staff as the consumer-grade shared cable network service. (There's
fiber to the pole outside my building!)
You guys are funny...
??
You totally missed Peters point. It is *Comcast* who do not have access
to the whole internet, not the other way around. Comcast can't do
anything about it. Comcast is blacklisted by some parts of the Internet.
If you want access to those parts of the Internet you need to switch to
another ISP, which actually do have access to all of it.
Comcast is not blocking something for you. Comcast do not have access,
and thus can't sell it either. Comcast probably did not tell you, or any
other customer, that you will only be able to access parts of the
Internet through them. Ask for a refund, or go somewhere else...? I
doubt Comcast will suddenly be able to speak to Stupi.SE within any
forseeable future.
I thought it was a matter of Comcast not having BGP peering agreements
with some other backbone carriers. Is that not the case?
-Dave
--
Dave McGuire, AK4HZ
New Kensington, PA
I'm not sure what the routing issue are with *Comcast*, however Johnny is
right about them not having "some" access to the rest of the internet. We
have been blocking email access FROM *Comast* for years because of all the
spam that comes off their network. My last access edit for CMCS was:
-rw-r--r-- 1 root wheel 6958 Apr 20 2008 CMCS
# CMCS Comcast Cable Communications, Inc.
#------------^------------------v--------------------------------------#
24.126 550 Spam not wanted (CMCS)
<snip>
I block 115 class B subnets from them (that's 7536640 IP addresses).
Brett
