switch to room list switch to menu My folders
Go to page: [1] 2 3 4 5 ... Last
↑↑↑ Old messages ↑↑↑            ↓↓↓ New messages ↓↓↓
[#] Mon Aug 13 2012 14:22:06 EDT from IGnatius T Foobar @ Uncensored

Subject: domain registrars?

[Reply] [ReplyQuoted] [Headers] [Print]

So ... what's a good domain registrar to use these days? I have two domains expiring in November; one is with NetSol, which is too expensive, and the other is with GoDaddy, who are scumbags, so I'd like to find a new registrar for both of them.

Looking for a registrar that is inexpensive, reliable, and anti-
SOPA. Any suggestions?

[#] Mon Aug 13 2012 15:18:11 EDT from Spell Binder @ Uncensored

[Reply] [ReplyQuoted] [Headers] [Print]

I've been using Dotster, for one of my domains and haven't had any issues with them. I can't find any information about their stance on SOPA, though: e_Stop_Online_Piracy_Act

[#] Tue Aug 14 2012 11:30:20 EDT from IGnatius T Foobar @ Uncensored

[Reply] [ReplyQuoted] [Headers] [Print]

Dotster it is, then. I'm even going to transfer now, because they will honor the rest of the existing registration period plus add another year free for transferring. Can't argue with that.

[#] Tue Aug 14 2012 14:12:55 EDT from zooer @ Uncensored

[Reply] [ReplyQuoted] [Headers] [Print]

Arguably the first and most prominent case regarded,
a popular internet domain registrar and web hosting company
which openly supported SOPA. GoDaddy sustained significant losses,
losing over 72,000 domains in less than one week, as a result
of a proposed boycott of their services, pending it renounce its
support of SOPA. GoDaddy has since announced that it "no longer
supports SOPA legislation," then amended that
statement to "GoDaddy OPPOSES SOPA.

They changed their mind.

[#] Tue Aug 14 2012 16:00:15 EDT from IGnatius T Foobar @ Uncensored

[Reply] [ReplyQuoted] [Headers] [Print]

I suspect that all the other registrars didn't really have a strong opinion on SOPA one way or the other; they just wanted to take the opportunity to dogpile on GoDaddy. And I'm sure GoDaddy didn't "change their mind" so much as they said "oh shit, we've gotta backpedal on this before we lose any more customers"

[#] Wed Oct 03 2012 17:37:12 EDT from fleeb @ Uncensored

[Reply] [ReplyQuoted] [Headers] [Print]

I think we're getting burned by our use of a cloud server for distributing a/v content. I suspect that we don't have a dedicated pipe of networking, and someone else is consuming the pipe we're trying to use, because we're not quite getting the throughput we'd been getting.

[#] Wed Oct 03 2012 17:51:10 EDT from fleeb @ Uncensored

[Reply] [ReplyQuoted] [Headers] [Print]

Sanctified defication!

Those idiots had 65 different connections to the client, all watching the video at the same time!

We never tested for that many connections. Stupid network executives.

[#] Wed Oct 03 2012 17:58:33 EDT from fleeb @ Uncensored

[Reply] [ReplyQuoted] [Headers] [Print]

Sorry, 65 different client connections to the server, streaming audio/video.

[#] Thu Oct 04 2012 01:33:25 EDT from the8088er @ Uncensored

[Reply] [ReplyQuoted] [Headers] [Print]

I admit my ignorance to most of this, but is there not some sort of multicast thing that can be done?

[#] Thu Oct 04 2012 10:27:19 EDT from fleeb @ Uncensored

[Reply] [ReplyQuoted] [Headers] [Print]

Multicast is tricky to set up. It would be nice for something like this, but getting it to work over large geographic regions like this is rather tricky.

Besides, our processes normally expect some two-way network traffic, which you can't really do with multicast.

No, we're going to implement a few changes on our end to address this. I'm going to add some code to limit the number of users with the same username who may connect as a viewer at one time. This will significantly address the problem.

[#] Thu Oct 04 2012 14:27:15 EDT from fleeb @ Uncensored

[Reply] [ReplyQuoted] [Headers] [Print]

The children have opened it up to the entire freaking company.

[#] Fri Oct 05 2012 10:10:13 EDT from Ragnar Danneskjold @ Uncensored

[Reply] [ReplyQuoted] [Headers] [Print]

Want a fun experience? Drop a sniffer on a network that has no administration.....

[#] Fri Oct 05 2012 12:53:37 EDT from Spell Binder @ Uncensored

[Reply] [ReplyQuoted] [Headers] [Print]

NEYBIOS: Hello! This is WINDOZE1!
NETBIOS: Hello! This is WINDOZE2!
NETBIOS: WINDOWS1: Glad to meet you WINDOWS2!
NETBIOS: WINDOWS2: Glad to meet you, too WINDOWS1!
NETBIOS: WINDOWS1: Windows Genuine Advantage Check: Requesting CD key.

[#] Sat Oct 06 2012 05:43:42 EDT from dothebart @ Uncensored

[Reply] [ReplyQuoted] [Headers] [Print]

I realy like running ntop at the gate outside.

[#] Sun Oct 07 2012 23:45:06 EDT from the8088er @ Uncensored

[Reply] [ReplyQuoted] [Headers] [Print]

NETBIOS: WINDOWS1: Windows Genuine Advantage Check: Requesting CD key.

This isn't a thing is it? Tell me it isn't a thing.

[#] Mon Oct 08 2012 13:35:52 EDT from Spell Binder @ Uncensored

[Reply] [ReplyQuoted] [Headers] [Print]

Hehehehehehe. As far as I know, there's no NETBIOS API for requesting a peer's CD key. Given the frequency with which Microsoft likes to check for "Genuine Windows" when downloading updates, though, I wouldn't be surprised if they've developed their own proprietary network protocol for doing so.
More than likely, though, they're using XML over HTTP.

That post was attempting to convey two main points. First, NETBIOS, even over TCP, is a chatty protocol that causes your network to be filled with meaningless crap. The second was a direct jab at Microsoft's often draconian efforts to stop piracy.

[#] Mon Oct 08 2012 14:37:30 EDT from the8088er @ Uncensored

[Reply] [ReplyQuoted] [Headers] [Print]

Ah, that's a bit of a relief. I took it as comedy but with Microsoft you never can tell, heh.

[#] Mon Oct 08 2012 22:50:12 EDT from IGnatius T Foobar @ Uncensored

[Reply] [ReplyQuoted] [Headers] [Print]

Hey, it's more realistic than you think.  Remember NetWare?  If two NetWare servers saw each other using the same license key, Bad Things™ would begin happening.  One or more of the servers would actively harass you.

[#] Tue Oct 09 2012 11:11:47 EDT from dothebart @ Uncensored

[Reply] [ReplyQuoted] [Headers] [Print]

well, two wintendos with the same guid would also make magic things happen.

[#] Thu Oct 11 2012 12:35:28 EDT from the8088er @ Uncensored

[Reply] [ReplyQuoted] [Headers] [Print]

Adobe apps do this too. They broadcast a hash of their license key over the network periodically and if another copy hears the hash of the same key you're using it will start bugging you.

Go to page: [1] 2 3 4 5 ... Last