[Rack] Networking as of 2013-10-02
leif at synthesize.us
Sat Oct 12 21:07:33 UTC 2013
On Tue, Oct 08, 2013 at 09:31:12AM -0700, Omar Zouai wrote:
> I believe I did look at the right box, correct me if I'm wrong. A green box
> with 4 LAN ports. 3 LEDs, green for power, yellow for disk, red for error.
> Console port, green antennae. All the LAN ports went back into the juniper
> Swap out a small router for a 150w server? Yep, that's my idea in a
> nutshell. Even though it might be more resource intensive, there's always
> pros and cons to an idea. Here's some that I see.
> Able to incorporate gateway, dhcp, dns into a singe box.
> Able to shape bandwidth to prevent hogging.
> Able to create different networks for different clients.
Those things could be done with a small solid-state computer.
> Able to efficiently blacklist anything that would make the FBI storm
> into NoiseBridge.
> Logging of how the network is being used.
WTFBBQ?! Please do not implement surveillance or censorship of the network!
> High memory/cpu.
> Uses a lot more power
> Space consuming.
> More sensitive.
> Less redundancy.
> I only see a few key cons, but that's limited to my perspective.
I see zero benefits to this idea.
Omar, *please* coordinate with Jof and/or this mailing list before making any
more drastic changes to the network!
Jof and Ben and others, thank you for all of the work you've done on
Noisebridge's network infrastructure.
> On Oct 7, 2013 12:19 PM, "Ben Kochie" <ben at nerp.net> wrote:
> > On Mon, 7 Oct 2013, Omar Zouai wrote:
> >> I did consult the rack. Hence this current debate. Yes, when the network
> >> went down, the r00ter
> >> was rebooted multiple times. And yes, I let it sit for half an hour, both
> >> on and off. I did
> >> what was necessary to maintain a internet connection at the time in the
> >> space, and came up with
> >> an idea on how it can be improved.
> >> Yes, I did read the damned wiki while trying to get the internet back
> >> up(mobile data).
> >> CF Card? After 4 unsuccessful boots, I opened r00ter up. There wasn't a
> >> CompactFlash in it.,
> >> the only thing remotely visible to it is the WiFi chipset. Maybe this is
> >> a problem?
> > Are you sure you looked at the right box?
> > Correction, Networking is simple, but will get more and more complex;
> >> which would be fine if
> >> all the equipment was "perfect", and did everything it was supposed to do
> >> without errors and
> >> never failed. But we don't live in a perfect world, things will have
> >> errors, and equipment
> >> will go offline. That's where the nightmare comes in.
> > No, it was already as complex as it needed to be. We had a nice simple
> > all-solid-state router to connect, failover, and load-balance our two ISPs.
> > You want to replace this with a 150W server with fans and hard drives?
> > And you call this "simpler"?
> > We even simplified the network just a few months ago by removing two
> > switches from the critical path and replaced it with one good Juniper
> > switch.
> > The noisebridge network is actively maintained by this group.
> > I highly doubt watching the rack is good enough to prevent fuckery. If
> >> someone was determined
> >> enough to do something stupid, they simply would just go do it, without
> >> consulting the Wiki or
> >> Rack.
> >> On Oct 7, 2013 3:53 AM, "Ben Kochie" <ben at nerp.net> wrote:
> >> The network at noisebridge is not a toy for you to play
> >> with.
> >> Disclaimer: I actually agree that it would be much more
> >> convenient if
> >> the network wasn't dramatically gutted when not necessary. I
> >> only point
> >> out the following technicality.
> >> This is "doacracy" at its best (and worst). Technically, it
> >> is a toy
> >> that people could play with. It's a shame the play wasn't
> >> "playing
> >> nicely" with the work already done (and previously working).
> >> Actually, the network is one of the few places that is not a toy to
> >> play with. We
> >> (the rack list) keep an eye on things and try and keep the fuckery
> >> on the network
> >> to a minimum.
> >> Glen
> Rack mailing list
> Rack at lists.noisebridge.net
-------------- next part --------------
A non-text attachment was scrubbed...
Size: 836 bytes
Desc: Digital signature
More information about the Rack