Comments inline, I've cut out a bunch of replies to make it easier to read.
> -----Original Message----- > From: Jonathan G [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] > Sent: Friday, 17 September 2004 10:04 AM > To: [EMAIL PROTECTED] > Cc: [EMAIL PROTECTED] > Subject: Re: Defining ISP? > > Comments in line > > Darrel O'Pry wrote: > > > Well I guess I'll try to start a discussion about what would be needed > > for an ISP distribution, and present a basic primer to how I run my > > systems as an example of needs or things to keep in mind developing an > > ISP distribution that can meet a wide variety of needs. > > > > I'm agree with you, a distro with solely what is needed to run a general > purpose ISP. Check out http://debian-enterprise.org/ - Maybe work on that? > > > > I think it might be easier to develop and maintain ISP specific > > meta-packages, as Ben Lisle suggested? Would he be willing to put his > > existing meta-packages on the open market for community review and > > maintenance? Sure, I'll tidy them a little and repackage. Keep in mind, they're very "bennish" - the choice of software I use and the way I configure them reflect the way I administer my servers. I doubt this sort of thing would benefit many other people. > > Meta-Packages that reflect my deployments would include: > > The list of packages to be included should be disussion matter. In > example some people love postfix while i rather like exim, but the > global idea is, at least for me, include in the distro 2 programs for > each need in order to the sysadmin decide which one he will use: > > - web server: apache, minihttpd > - mta: exim, postfix, qmail > - imap/pop3: qpopper, courier, cyrus > - database: mysql, postgress > - radius: freeraidus, radiator > - etc... How many systems administrators do you know that do things the same way? :-) At this level I doubt the ISP distribution would be useful. You'd be catering to people who want a quick setup and nothing else - so maybe hosting providers. I for one would not trust someone else's slapd.conf. > A quick release in not as important as mantain your distro secure and > fault tolerant. However, again i'm agree that is better to patch a small > package distro than a general purpose distro with thousands of packages. > I'd rather see Sarge with better enterprise hardware support. EVMS off the bat, a good 2.4/2.6 kernel. That said, see the link at the top. Those guys need some more developers :-) > > Other expectations I would have of an ISP friendly distribution of > > debian would be a cluster friendly file system layout, and a set of > > shell scripts for managing users, ftp, and web accounts. Currently > > I use a layout along the lines of /var/www/domains/a/adomain.com/, > > /var/www/usersite/u/username/, /var/media/qt/a/auser, > > /var/media/real/a/user > > Use LVM or help admin use it, ok! But inject script to manipulate users > or accounts is not a good idea. For example in my case i use a different > organization than your, organization that as you i love and i don't want > to be forced to change it: > Build an administration tool for that - package it, submit it. I've been doing some LVS stuff at home and I wrote some simple Python scripts to quickly build new Debian and Redhat servers. Maybe something similar would be helpful to server administrators? > > > > I'm sure there are people out there with better method of implementing > > this, or maybe better ideas about going about this kind of work, but > > this seems to work pretty well for my small ISP, but I'm relatively in > > experienced at this job and kind of hack it together as I go to in > > attempts to keep legacy customers happy, provide the widest possible > > base of services and options, keep up with current applications, and > > make an attempt at maintaining the security of my network. Any feedback, > > ideas, or suggestions are greatly appreciated. > > Yep, those http://debian-enterprise.org/ guys could use your help :-) > Same feeling. :) > > > .darrel. > > > > > > > > > > BR, > > jonathan > > >>-----Original Message----- > >>From: Jonathan G [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] > >>Sent: Thursday, September 16, 2004 6:12 AM > >>To: [EMAIL PROTECTED] > >>Subject: Re: Defining ISP? > >> > >>Well, we can start reading the following documents about how to create > > > > a > > > >>CDD (Custom Debian Distribution): > >> > >>- http://wiki.debian.net/index.cgi?CustomDebian > >>- http://alioth.debian.org/projects/cdd/ > >>- > >>http://people.debian.org/~tille/debian-med/talks/paper-cdd/debian- > >>cdd.html/ > >>- http://people.debian.org/~kalfa/cdd/debian-devel > >> > >> > >>BR, > >> > >>jonathan > >> > >> > >> > >>shift wrote: > >> > >>>hej J. > >>> > >>>Me I'd like to be in it. > >>> > >>>shift > >>> > >>> > >>>----- Original Message ----- > >>>From: "Jonathan G" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> > >>>To: <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> > >>>Sent: Wednesday, September 15, 2004 12:42 PM > >>>Subject: Re: Defining ISP? > >>> > >>> > >>> > >>> > >>>>I would be so please with the help of the phorun to propose open a > > > > new > > > >>>>branch into the Debian community dedicated to ISP. > >>>> > >>>>Whom of you're interested?? > >>>> > >>>>BR, > >>>> > >>>>jonathan > >>>> > >>>> > >>>> > >>>> > >>>>shift wrote: > >>>> > >>>> > >>>> > >>>>>The idea seems still interesting to me 2 days after the week-end! > >> > >>( Did > >> > >>>>>some definitive dammage happen? :) > >>>>>I imagine an install, giving possibilities of Raid, backup, > > > > replication, > > > >>>>>networking etc from the start, all necessary tools and programs, in > > > > a > > > >>>>>compact, easy to use distribution with some "ncursed" ISP specific > >>>>>administration tools. Something secure, minimalistic (I like the > > > > word > > > >>>and > >>> > >>> > >>>>>the concept) and with some optimization possibilities. > >>>>>does-it still seem confuse? Is it "une idee farfelue"? > >>>>> > >>>>>shift > >>>>> > >>>>>----- Original Message ----- > >>>>>From: "Jonathan G - Mailing Lists" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> > >>>>>To: <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> > >>>>>Sent: Tuesday, September 14, 2004 3:39 PM > >>>>>Subject: Re: Defining ISP? > >>>>> > >>>>> > >>>>> > >>>>> > >>>>> > >>>>>>Hi, > >>>>>> > >>>>>>what i used to do is install a base system and then install some > > > > of > > > >>the > >> > >>>>>>package packs i've defined. > >>>>>> > >>>>>>For example, if what i want is install a web server with php % > > > > perl > > > >>>>>>support i use a config file what i've defined myself which > > > > contains > > > >>>this: > >>> > >>> > >>>>>>apt-get install apache2-common apache2-mpm-prefork > >>>>>>libapache2-mod-auth-mysql libapache2-mod-perl2 php4-common > >>>>>>libmailtools-perl libhtml-format-perl bzip2 file > > > > libio-socket-ssl-perl > > > >>>>>>ca-certificates libapache2-mod-php4 php4-mysql php4-pear > >>>>>> > >>>>>> > >>>>>>For the rest of services exactly the same. I'v defined manually > > > > the > > > >>>>>>whole list of packages needed for web server, ftp server, irc > > > > server, > > > >>>>>>mail server (smtp, pop and imap), antivirus server, etc... > >>>>>> > >>>>>>If you can build a local mirror of you version of debian, i.e. > > > > sarge, > > > >>>>>>you can do local network installations, and your installs will be > > > > so > > > >>>fast. > >>> > >>> > >>>>>>That work fine for me at least :) > >>>>>> > >>>>>>BR, > >>>>>> > >>>>>>jonathan > >>>>>> > >>>>>> > >>>>>> > >>>>>> > >>>>>> > >>>>>> > >>>>>>Christian Hammers wrote: > >>>>>> > >>>>>> > >>>>>> > >>>>>> > >>>>>>>On 2004-09-14 shift wrote: > >>>>>>> > >>>>>>> > >>>>>>> > >>>>>>> > >>>>>>>>Thinking maybe of a an ISP specific install. Lighter and even > > > > more > > > >>>>>>>>secure. A minimalistic distribution... > >>>>>>> > >>>>>>> > >>>>>>>Most ISP will probably have different servers for the different > >>> > >>>services > >>> > >>> > >>>>>and on each of them they will start with a secure base install with > > > > as > > > >>>few > >>> > >>> > >>>>>software installed as possible and then just install > >>> > >>>apache/postfix/proftpd > >>> > >>> > >>>>>whatever they need and customize it. > >>>>> > >>>>> > >>>>> > >>>>>>>I don't see a big bonus in a special ISP distribution. A better > >>>>> > >>>>>integration of iptables firewalls, vlans or traffic shapers would > > > > be > > > >>>nice > >>> > >>> > >>>>>but that's nothing ISP specific. > >>>>> > >>>>> > >>>>> > >>>>>>>bye, > >>>>>>> > >>>>>>>-christian- > >>>>>>> > >>>>>>>P.S.: pbuilder is a nice tool to build minimal installations that > > > > you > > > >>>>>can just untar onto a new harddisk > >>>>> > >>>>> > >>>>> > >>>>>>-- > >>>>>>To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] > >>>>>>with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact > >>>>> > >>>>>[EMAIL PROTECTED] > >>>>> > >>>>> > >>>>> > >>>>> > >>>> > >>>>-- > >>>> :::: Jonathan Gonzalez Fernandez :::: > >>>> > >>>> (o> mail : [EMAIL PROTECTED] > >>>> //\ jabber: [EMAIL PROTECTED] > >>>> V_/ site : www.surestorm.com > >>>> > >>>> ::: Registered Linux User #333386 ::: > >>>> > >>>> > >>>>-- > >>>>To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] > >>>>with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact > >>> > >>>[EMAIL PROTECTED] > >>> > >>> > >>> > >>> > >>-- > >> :::: Jonathan Gonzalez Fernandez :::: > >> > >> (o> mail : [EMAIL PROTECTED] > >> //\ jabber: [EMAIL PROTECTED] > >> V_/ site : www.surestorm.com > >> > >> ::: Registered Linux User #333386 ::: > >> > >> > >>-- > >>To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] > >>with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact > >>[EMAIL PROTECTED] > >> > >> > >>-- > >>Incoming mail is certified Virus Free. > >>Checked by AVG Anti-Virus (http://www.grisoft.com). > >>Version: 7.0.269 / Virus Database: 264.9.0 - Release Date: 9/13/2004 > >> > > > > > > > -- > To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] > with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact > [EMAIL PROTECTED]
