[Rack] [Noisebridge-discuss] Omar: Please don't "re-build" the network

Jonathan Lassoff jof at thejof.com
Wed Oct 23 05:06:21 UTC 2013


Please don't interpret this as me trying to block you in any way, I
just want to make sure that any changes that are being made are not
regressions.

If we can work through the use cases and the end state we're trying to
get to, I'm totally down to help implement and facilitate.

On Tue, Oct 22, 2013 at 10:04 PM, Jonathan Lassoff <jof at thejof.com> wrote:
> Thought I'd chime in here, as I've done a lot of the existing networking.
>
> I'm all for do-ocracy. That's how I built the current network.
> That said, at each step, I worked to have a concrete value proposition
> for each change. I don't think it's appropriate to make changes for
> change's sake.
>
> This makes me think of a common adage at Noisebridge, which is that
> "we don't try to preemptively solve problems before they happen".
>
>
> Omar -- I'm reading over the proposal as it is written up in its
> current form (https://www.noisebridge.net/index.php?title=New_Network&oldid=34572),
> and I'm trying to get a better understanding of where you're coming
> from and why you would like to re-do everything.
> In particular, I'm confused by the rhetoric of this sentence: "With
> the patch in place, and the WiFi being up regardless of whether or not
> any of the switches are online, I proposed we redo ALL the network
> infrastructure."
> Why would you like to redo all the infrastructure?
>
> In comparing the Logistics and Steps/ToDo List sections with what we
> have today, there is very little additions, other than segmentation
> between servers, printers/non-human equipment, and human users.
> Currently, we have one, big internal subnet and Ethernet broadcast
> domain, and it's worked mostly pretty well for us.
> However, there are a number of services that are running now that are
> not accounted for in the proposed new design.
> Some things that come to mind: QoS, WAN flow and SNAT load balancing,
> ISP failover, DNAT forwardings for {MC Hawking, Mode-S receiver
> hosts}.
>
> Also, why do you want to do away with switches?
> They serve a useful purpose in segmenting out the separate Ethernet
> broadcast domains, measure aggregate traffic throughput, and
> monitoring of link states of infrastructure gear.
>
>
> So, I have two requests/questions:
> - Please explain why segmenting out users, printers, and servers is useful.
> - Please propose how to implement the existing network services, so
> that service continuity is maintained.
>
> Cheers,
> jof
>
> On Tue, Oct 22, 2013 at 8:16 PM, Omar Zouai <ozouai.bavc at gmail.com> wrote:
>> A few things.
>> I am not a "new" member, I've been visiting NoiseBridge for over a year now.
>> What part of new network PROPOSAL do you guys not understand? Key word
>> 'PROPOSAL'. All of you are taking this idea up the butt like a communist
>> government. Ideas aren't perfect, they are meant to be perfected through
>> revision. There is no need to be obtrusive to the spread of new ideas,
>> NoiseBridge should not be a competitive environment. While yes, my idea is
>> pretty radical; so was electricity. Everybody didn't want it, Standard Oil
>> hated it. Diving deeper down into the competition like AC and DC power. DC
>> was being used to power the homes, and the generators had to be close by or
>> have a high capacity to allow for the majority of the power to reach its
>> destination. Edison thought it was the best. Then AC is started to become
>> perfected, and Edison is worried. Fast forward to today. All our homes have
>> AC power coming into them, due to its ability to travel long distances.
>>
>> I'm not saying that my idea is the best idea, all I'm saying is that we
>> could give it a chance, and change factors to have it run smoother.
>>
>> I made the Wiki page so I can better show what I intend to do. And where
>> does it say that I intend to EoL the existing equipment. The only thing that
>> was intended to be gone is BikeShed, and maybe it will still be up for
>> redundancy.
>>
>> And for those who are skeptical(which most of you are). I do know what I am
>> doing, I've been testing this network idea on my home network(and it's
>> running great). A little common sense goes a long way. So think twice before
>> you say something, you never know the full perspective.
>>
>> There's a fine line between being skeptical, and being ignorant.
>>
>> On Tue, Oct 22, 2013 at 5:00 AM, <rack-request at lists.noisebridge.net> wrote:
>>>
>>> Send Rack mailing list submissions to
>>>         rack at lists.noisebridge.net
>>>
>>> To subscribe or unsubscribe via the World Wide Web, visit
>>>         https://www.noisebridge.net/mailman/listinfo/rack
>>> or, via email, send a message with subject or body 'help' to
>>>         rack-request at lists.noisebridge.net
>>>
>>> You can reach the person managing the list at
>>>         rack-owner at lists.noisebridge.net
>>>
>>> When replying, please edit your Subject line so it is more specific
>>> than "Re: Contents of Rack digest..."
>>>
>>>
>>> Today's Topics:
>>>
>>>    1. Casey Callendrello comment rated +1 by Giovanni Re. Tag:
>>>       Avoiding NB antipatterns. - Re: [Noisebridge-discuss] Omar:
>>>       Please don't "re-build" the network (giovanni_re)
>>>    2. Re: [Noisebridge-discuss] Omar: Please don't "re-build" the
>>>       network (Oren Beck)
>>>
>>>
>>> ----------------------------------------------------------------------
>>>
>>> Message: 1
>>> Date: Mon, 21 Oct 2013 12:30:33 -0700
>>> From: "giovanni_re" <john_re at fastmail.us>
>>> To: Casey Callendrello <c1 at caseyc.net>, ozouai.bavc at gmail.com, rack
>>>         <Rack at lists.noisebridge.net>, NoiseBridge Discuss
>>>         <noisebridge-discuss at lists.noisebridge.net>
>>> Subject: [Rack] Casey Callendrello comment rated +1 by Giovanni Re.
>>>         Tag: Avoiding NB antipatterns. - Re: [Noisebridge-discuss] Omar:
>>>         Please don't "re-build" the network
>>> Message-ID:
>>>         <1382383833.3638.36731665.6ED672DB at webmail.messagingengine.com>
>>> Content-Type: text/plain
>>>
>>> Great post, Casey!  :)
>>>
>>> I suggest you get the heart of this somewhere prominent on the nb wiki.
>>> A "Things for NB Newbies to know, do, & not do".
>>> Link that from the nb home page.
>>>
>>> :)
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>> On Mon, Oct 21, 2013, at 11:28 AM, Casey Callendrello wrote:
>>> > Omar,
>>> >
>>> > I see you are planning to re-do the network, according to your wiki
>>> > page[1]. I am personally asking you not to do this. What you propose is
>>> > already how the network is configured.
>>> >
>>> > Noisebridge operates on a do-ocracy principle, yes, but that does not
>>> > trump the One Rule of Excellence. I am saying now, that a lot of people
>>> > will find it very unexcellent if you rip out some carefully constructed,
>>> > critical infrastructure.
>>> >
>>> > Nobody is claiming the network is perfect. When bikeshed refused to boot
>>> > for a few days, that sucked. However, the solution is not to eliminate
>>> > everything. The solution is to identify problems with the existing
>>> > infrastructure, then fixing those. Can you please list what you think
>>> > needs to be fixed?
>>> >
>>> > There is an anti-pattern we've seen a few times here at Noisebridge,
>>> > where occasionally people newly join our community and try and "fix"
>>> > everything they see is "broken" at once. These people either burn out,
>>> > supernova out, or are banned. Please take it slowly.
>>> >
>>> > Thank you,
>>> > --Casey
>>> >
>>> > 1: https://www.noisebridge.net/wiki/New_Network
>>> > _______________________________________________
>>> > Noisebridge-discuss mailing list
>>> > Noisebridge-discuss at lists.noisebridge.net
>>> > https://www.noisebridge.net/mailman/listinfo/noisebridge-discuss
>>>
>>> ---  Join the BerkeleyTIP-Global mail list -
>>> http://groups.google.com/group/BerkTIPGlobal. All Freedom SW, HW & Culture.
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>> ------------------------------
>>>
>>> Message: 2
>>> Date: Tue, 22 Oct 2013 03:49:00 +0800
>>> From: Oren Beck <orenbeck at gmail.com>
>>> To: Casey Callendrello <c1 at caseyc.net>
>>> Cc: rack <Rack at lists.noisebridge.net>, ozouai.bavc at gmail.com,
>>>         NoiseBridge Discuss <noisebridge-discuss at lists.noisebridge.net>
>>> Subject: Re: [Rack] [Noisebridge-discuss] Omar: Please don't
>>>         "re-build" the  network
>>> Message-ID:
>>>
>>> <CAHdyy+_iuPwvQnn9SYG5T6ryCT_c-Rj1XKmP6axNuEdD2T9FSA at mail.gmail.com>
>>> Content-Type: text/plain; charset="utf-8"
>>>
>>>
>>> Advocating for sanity as it's own path:>
>>>
>>> Decades ago we used to yank sites from LA36 terminals on dial
>>> modem>mainframe.. screamingly forwards to that year's best affordable kit.
>>> Same debates and team fragging applied then as now.
>>>
>>> So- we devised a process not yet improved on: Build the next generation of
>>> kit- thence validate it's stability in ramped up production- before daring
>>> to propose EoL on the old kit/network.
>>>
>>> I would approach the NB site in a similar proven mode. Obtain a new
>>> rack/cabinet, new cabling- et all- and deploy alongside the existing
>>> functional chaos. LAVISHLY annotate/document/LABEL REDUNDANTLY all cables
>>> and jack fields etc whilst so doing.  The next person to service/maintain
>>> interoperability will be one of us:>   So our craft level will either
>>> haunt
>>> or bless us.  Never forget that.
>>>
>>> Snip to the recap- Build a new infrastructure before touching the
>>> existing-
>>> we're golden.
>>>
>>> And thence begin a slow, deliberative  migration of non-mission critical
>>> loads to the new AWESOME build that was engineered to show our best.  I do
>>> so hope the build showcases the maybe several person-centuries of tech
>>> life
>>> experience this collective has between us.
>>>
>>> I'd also gently direct architecture of running ample spare cables to be
>>> tagged as such for expansion.
>>> -------------- next part --------------
>>> An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
>>> URL:
>>> <http://www.noisebridge.net/pipermail/rack/attachments/20131022/65d2306c/attachment-0001.html>
>>>
>>> ------------------------------
>>>
>>>
>>> _______________________________________________
>>> Rack mailing list
>>> Rack at lists.noisebridge.net
>>> https://www.noisebridge.net/mailman/listinfo/rack
>>>
>>>
>>> End of Rack Digest, Vol 45, Issue 21
>>> ************************************
>>
>>
>>
>> _______________________________________________
>> Rack mailing list
>> Rack at lists.noisebridge.net
>> https://www.noisebridge.net/mailman/listinfo/rack
>>


More information about the Rack mailing list