35 messages in com.redhat.fedora-listRe: Problem booting after Yum update ...
FromSent OnAttachments
Min ChenNov 27, 2005 4:00 pm 
David G. Miller (aka DaveAtFraud)Nov 27, 2005 5:28 pm 
Michael A. PetersNov 27, 2005 6:41 pm 
Min ChenNov 27, 2005 7:04 pm 
Min ChenNov 27, 2005 7:15 pm 
Rey CruzNov 27, 2005 7:31 pm 
Sam VarshavchikNov 27, 2005 7:42 pm 
Neil CherryNov 27, 2005 8:58 pm 
Min ChenNov 27, 2005 9:10 pm 
David G. Miller (aka DaveAtFraud)Nov 27, 2005 9:26 pm 
Min ChenNov 27, 2005 9:46 pm 
Michael A. PetersNov 28, 2005 12:17 am 
David G. Miller (aka DaveAtFraud)Nov 28, 2005 4:53 am 
John SummerfiedNov 28, 2005 5:35 am 
Charles E "Rick" Taylor IVNov 28, 2005 6:41 am 
Hans MüllerNov 28, 2005 8:46 am 
Neil CherryNov 28, 2005 5:10 pm 
John SummerfiedNov 28, 2005 9:36 pm 
Min ChenDec 1, 2005 3:32 pm 
David G. Miller (aka DaveAtFraud)Dec 1, 2005 6:16 pm 
Min ChenDec 1, 2005 9:25 pm 
David G. Miller (aka DaveAtFraud)Dec 1, 2005 10:04 pm 
Tony FosterDec 1, 2005 11:09 pm 
Min ChenDec 3, 2005 10:36 pm 
Hans MüllerDec 4, 2005 12:49 am 
James WilkinsonDec 5, 2005 1:26 pm 
Tony FosterDec 5, 2005 4:15 pm 
TimDec 6, 2005 4:10 am 
James WilkinsonDec 8, 2005 12:20 am 
TimDec 8, 2005 7:59 am 
Mike McCartyDec 8, 2005 8:37 am 
Tony FosterDec 8, 2005 9:20 am 
James WilkinsonDec 8, 2005 9:37 am 
Mike McCartyDec 8, 2005 11:03 am 
TimDec 9, 2005 2:51 am 
Actions with this message:
Paste this link in email or IM:
Paste this link in email or IM:
Atom feed for this thread
Paste this URL into your reader:
Subject:Re: Problem booting after Yum update of FC4Actions...
From:Mike McCarty (mike@sbcglobal.net)
Date:Dec 8, 2005 11:03:00 am
List:com.redhat.fedora-list

James Wilkinson wrote:

I suggested:

Try "ping google.com" for several hours, and see how many packets you drop.

[snip]

OK. Two people have told me "it's abuse". So I should at least take the objection seriously. You're telling me it's not a denial of service attack (which is reasonable), or an attempt to harm Google. You're telling me I'm suggesting using a service Google provides in a way that is not reasonable.

Umm, ping response is not a service, in the sense you are using it. They may have it there only to check their equipment, not yours. In order to find out why Google has ping response running, you'd have to ask them.

I maintain that * it's necessary in the particular case to which I was responding (at least to do this to somewhere in the Internet)

Possibly. Tell you what, how about *you* "provide a ping service" to this fellow, and let him ping you for a few hours? That way, everyone (especially the folks at Google) will be happy.

[snip]

Unfortunately, in order to diagnose certain sorts of network problems, this sort of activity is necessary. Especially when you have intermittent problems when only a few packets get dropped. Sometimes you will get about 20% packet drops over a few minutes in a period of a couple of hours.

Yep. So how about you offer to let this guy ping you for a few hours straight?

[snip]

This guy sounds like "it doesn't matter that I broke into the car repair shop and used the tools there, because I put them all back when I was through with them."

I'm sorry, I don't think this analogy works. It implies I "broke through" some sort of technical or signposted barrier.

Ok, that's reasonable. I withdraw the analogy.

A better one might be that someone provided a water fountain, and I suggested one might fill a few water bottles from it, in the absence of any signs to the contrary, and in such a way as not to deny the use of the fountain to anyone else.

In this case, the question really becomes "how many is too much"?

Yes. As I pointed out 30 or so pings would probably be ok, and perhaps not even noticed. Hours on end is a very different thing.

There's a difference between filling a few water bottles, and watering your lawn using your next door neighbor's faucet.

So I agree, it's a matter of degree.

[snip]

Mike