Jason, I hope you are Livin' Good.
On a serious note.
What stops someone from going down to the center of town, launching a
little wifi SSID named xfinitywifi and collecting your customers usernames
and passwords?
Also, don't you think there is something just morally wrong with the fact
that your
Hey guys, I am running it on freeBSD. (nas4free)
It's my understanding that when a resilver happens in a zpool, only the
data that has actually been written to the disks gets used, not the whole
array like traditional raid5 does, reading even empty blocks. I know I
should be using RAIDZ2 for this
On Thu, 11 Dec 2014, Jimmy Hess wrote:
I am not 100% certain that this is available under the BSD implementations,
even if QUOTA is enabled in your kernel config.
In the past the BSD implementation of ZFS never seemed to be as
stable, functional, or performant as the OpenSolaris/Illumos ver
In this case, they do own the modems. I am not aware of any case where
they do this to customer owned gear.
On Dec 11, 2014 8:41 PM, "Ricky Beam" wrote:
> On Thu, 11 Dec 2014 19:33:03 -0500, Owen DeLong wrote:
>
> In short, the only thing really truly wrong with this scenario is that
>> Comcas
Seriously, I mean the availability of WiFi coming from your house clearly
trumps trespassing laws.
On Dec 11, 2014 8:16 PM, "Matthew Kaufman" wrote:
> Lots of other good reasons to oppose this (Comcast customers parking in
> your driveway to get the service, etc.)
>
> What would you tell AT&T if
On Thu, Dec 11, 2014 at 9:05 PM, Barry Shein wrote:
[snip]
> From my reading the closest you can get to disk space quotas in ZFS is
> by limiting on a per directory (dataset, mount) basis which is similar
> but different.
This is the normal type of quota within ZFS. it is applied to a
dataset a
Disk space by uid (by group is a plus but not critical), like BSD and
EXTn. And the reason I put "inode" in quotes was to indicate that they
may not (certainly not) be called inodes but an upper limit to the
total number of files and directories, typically to stop a runaway
script or certain malic
As for conversion between RAID levels; usually dump and restore are
your best bet.
Even if your controller HBA supports a RAID level migration; for a
small array hosted in
a server, dump and restore is your least risky bet for successful
execution; you
really need to dump anyways, even on a co
On Thu, 11 Dec 2014 19:33:03 -0500, Owen DeLong wrote:
In short, the only thing really truly wrong with this scenario is that
Comcast is using equipment that the subscriber should have exclusive
control over (they are renting it, so while Comcast retains ownership,
they have relinquished m
Lots of other good reasons to oppose this (Comcast customers parking in your
driveway to get the service, etc.)
What would you tell AT&T if they installed a coin phone at every residential
outside demarc?
Matthew Kaufman
(Sent from my iPhone)
> On Dec 11, 2014, at 4:33 PM, Owen DeLong wrote:
On 12/11/14, 3:58 PM, "Jay Ashworth" wrote:
>Alas, I cannot accept George's assertion
WG] well, perhaps you can accept Wes's assertion instead. ;-)
>In residential areas (non-multi-unit),
>this is only going to help out *Comcast subscribers*. If you have random
>visitors over, it won't help th
Yes. The industry is undergoing a shift from cloud or premise based ddos
appliance to a hybrid model where some or all (premise gear and cloud
scrubbing) of the solution is offered as a service. Equipment vendors such as
Radware & Arbor offer either directly or through partnerships also seeing
Yes. The industry is undergoing a shift from cloud or premise based ddos
appliance to a hybrid model where some or all (premise gear and cloud
scrubbing) of the solution is offered as a service. Equipment vendors such as
Radware & Arbor offer either directly or through partnerships also seeing
Your chances of traveling somewhere ate probably several orders of
magnitude higher than Comcast being interested in paid hosting in your
house :)
On Dec 11, 2014 6:53 PM, "Larry Sheldon" wrote:
> On 12/11/2014 17:42, Scott Helms wrote:
>
>> Perhaps we should balance that against what a subscribe
On 12/11/2014 17:42, Scott Helms wrote:
Perhaps we should balance that against what a subscriber might pay for
bandwidth while away from home, especially in Europe.
Why would that interest me--I have no interest in traveling anywhere.
--
The unique Characteristics of System Administrators:
T
This thread is out of control... I will attempt to summarize the salient points
in hopes we can stop arguing about inaccurate minutiae.
I don't like the way Comcast went about doing what they are doing, but I do
like the general idea...
Reasonably ubiquitous free WiFi for your subscribers when
On 12/11/14, 4:37 PM, "Tim Upthegrove" wrote:
>I received an email from Comcast that they were offering a free upgraded
>wifi router for my home.
Yes, since the main service tier doubled from 25 Mbps to 50 Mbps (some
went to 105 Mbps) that means DOCSIS 2.0 devices were no longer up to the
task.
On 10/12/14 18:41, Charles Mills wrote:
> In the US at least you have to authenticate with your Comcast credentials
> and not like a traditional open wifi where you can just make up an email
> and accept the terms of service. I also understand that it is a different
> IP than the subscriber. Base
Perhaps we should balance that against what a subscriber might pay for
bandwidth while away from home, especially in Europe.
On Dec 11, 2014 6:35 PM, "Larry Sheldon" wrote:
> On 12/11/2014 16:29, Jay Ashworth wrote:
>
>> - Original Message -
>>
>>> From: "Larry Sheldon"
>>>
>>
>> On 12/
In message <19950282.2897.1418340650252.javamail.r...@benjamin.baylink.com>, Ja
y Ashworth writes:
> > > Now, had Comcast pitched it as the Wi-Fi benefiting YOU because your
> > > freinds you use their Comcast credentials to access your Wi-Fi, then
> > > customers would not see this as Comcast usi
On 12/11/2014 16:29, Jay Ashworth wrote:
- Original Message -
From: "Larry Sheldon"
On 12/11/2014 07:10, William Herrin wrote:
What Comcast is stealing is electricity. Pennies per customer times
a boatload of customers.
.and floorspace, physical security, air conditioning, an
- Original Message -
> From: "Mark Andrews"
> > Now, had Comcast pitched it as the Wi-Fi benefiting YOU because your
> > freinds you use their Comcast credentials to access your Wi-Fi, then
> > customers would not see this as Comcast using your hardware for its
> > own
> > benefit.
>
> T
On Thu, 11 Dec 2014 17:46:24 -0500, Livingood, Jason
wrote:
By this logic they are all dumping gas on the fire as well.
I'm not denying it's a big fire. But adding additional 2.4Ghz radios Is.
Not. Helping. Because "everything else is" is not a reason for one of the
largest companies in t
In message <548a2240.7090...@vaxination.ca>, Jean-Francois Mezei writes:
> On 14-12-11 17:44, Mark Andrews wrote:
>
> > What space? It is the WiFi modem you are already using. Unless
> > it requires a seperate external aerial I don't see any extra space.
>
> Matter of principle. Comcast are us
On Thu, 11 Dec 2014 17:32:06 -0500, Spencer Gaw wrote:
Your reading comprehension could use some work:
That was post *AFTER* my comment. And it doesn't say the xfinity service
is running on its own dedicated radio, just that it has more than one
radio in it -- which it would having ac (5gh
On Thu, 11 Dec 2014 17:08:51 -0500, Livingood, Jason
wrote:
... Behavioral economics would suggest that opt-in rates are almost
always lower than opt-out.
There's two ways to look at it:
a) Everyone knows about it. Few would bother to opt-in, many would bother
to opt-out.
b) Few ("no one")
On 12/11/2014 2:46 PM, Livingood, Jason wrote:
On 12/11/14, 5:19 PM, "Ricky Beam" wrote:
On Thu, 11 Dec 2014 16:41:24 -0500, Livingood, Jason
wrote:
...But 2.4GHz was a bit of a mess before we came along with this
service.
So, knowing the house is on fire, you bring a can of gas to put
On 14-12-11 17:44, Mark Andrews wrote:
> What space? It is the WiFi modem you are already using. Unless
> it requires a seperate external aerial I don't see any extra space.
Matter of principle. Comcast are using space/power/shelter in your home
to create a service which they market for their o
I had resurrected a similar thread last year:
http://www.gossamer-threads.com/lists/nanog/users/123155
There are sloppy networks out there. If it was a big enough problem all
you'd need is a few key networks drop those prefixes and we'd have
a...slightly less sloppy Internet?
On 12/11/2014
On Thu, 11 Dec 2014 17:26:37 -0500, Josh Luthman
wrote:
Not correct. If it's on one radio it's using the same RF space it was
before, just with a virtual SSID. Just like the atheros or Ruckus stuff
it's the same RF space with an additional BSSID bridged to a different
software bridge or ps
On 14-12-11 16:37, Tim Upthegrove wrote:
> At the
> time, I kept wondering what the real incentive was for Comcast to send me
> anything for free.
It pays to move customer with old DOCSIS-2 modems to DOCSIS 3 ones as
they will even out usage on multiple channels instead of congesting the
one chann
On 12/11/14, 5:19 PM, "Ricky Beam" wrote:
>On Thu, 11 Dec 2014 16:41:24 -0500, Livingood, Jason
> wrote:
>> ...But 2.4GHz was a bit of a mess before we came along with this
>>service.
>
>So, knowing the house is on fire, you bring a can of gas to put it out.
>You aren't f'ing helping.
I think t
In message , "Robert Webb" writes:
> Many read, but what choice do they have. In many cases Comcast is the only
> game in town and it is either agree, or have no "real" internet access at
> all.
>
> I am one that has opposed the auto opt-in of this setup. The main reason is
> that Comcast want
On Thu, Dec 11, 2014 at 3:50 PM, Doug Barton wrote:
>
> My concerns are that apparently customers are not informed about the thing
> before it gets enabled, and the issue of wifi density that was raised by
> several people here. If you have an apartment building for example, where a
> significant
- Original Message -
> From: "Owen DeLong"
> Does an 802.11 transmitter that was already being used to support
> their own WiFi network that they are paying for really consume vastly
> more electricity to support a second SSID? In my experience, that
> claim is hard to fathom.
If popular
Your reading comprehension could use some work:
"The latest device (called an XB3, see
http://corporate.comcast.com/comcast-voices/the-technology-behind-the-industrys-fastest-wireless-gateway)
does have multiple radios"
Regards,
SG
On 12/11/2014 3:19 PM, Ricky Beam wrote:
On Thu, 11 Dec 201
- Original Message -
> From: "Larry Sheldon"
> On 12/11/2014 07:10, William Herrin wrote:
>
> > What Comcast is stealing is electricity. Pennies per customer times
> > a boatload of customers.
>
> .and floorspace, physical security, air conditioning, and all
> sorts of labor overhea
Not correct. If it's on one radio it's using the same RF space it was
before, just with a virtual SSID. Just like the atheros or Ruckus stuff -
it's the same RF space with an additional BSSID bridged to a different
software bridge or pseudo interface.
Josh Luthman
Office: 937-552-2340
Direct: 9
On Thu, 11 Dec 2014 16:41:24 -0500, Livingood, Jason
wrote:
...But 2.4GHz was a bit of a mess before we came along with this service.
So, knowing the house is on fire, you bring a can of gas to put it out.
You aren't f'ing helping.
Of course, since Comcast didn't spring for separate radi
Many read, but what choice do they have. In many cases Comcast is the only
game in town and it is either agree, or have no "real" internet access at
all.
I am one that has opposed the auto opt-in of this setup. The main reason is
that Comcast wants up to foot the bill for power and space for t
On 12/11/14, 4:45 PM, "Jean-Francois Mezei"
mailto:jfmezei_na...@vaxination.ca>> wrote:
Mr Livingood:
Out of curiosity, had Comcast decided to use an "opt-in" instead of "opt-out"
method, did your marketing dept have any idea of percentage of customer base
who would have opted in ?
No idea -
I just fat fingered a regex that was intented to show how many private ASNs
we’re using on our network for various things. The results of the fat fingers
showed that there are an astronomical number of private ASNs in the wild. I
checked the CIDR report, and those ASNs are shown there in a spe
On 2014-12-11 19:12, valdis.kletni...@vt.edu wrote:
> On Thu, 11 Dec 2014 18:04:20 +, "Livingood, Jason" said:
>
>> Right, so user name & password + MAC address. As more devices support
>> things like Passpoint, this will get more sophisticated.
>
> OK, so it *does* do .1x authentication with
On 12/11/14, 4:47 PM, "Grant Ridder"
mailto:shortdudey...@gmail.com>> wrote:
I think it may have already been slightly mentioned, but any reason why this is
not being rolled out on a separate radio than the private customer facing one?
Even if the bandwidth out to the internet is separated with
I would have to expect they're doing a virtual SSID which means 0
additional wattage. Worst case scenario it adds another radio of less than
5 watts of which is absolutely negligible if you're able to afford cable
Internet service.
Josh Luthman
Office: 937-552-2340
Direct: 937-552-2343
1100 Wayn
Barry Shein writes:
> From: Randy Bush
>>> We are now using ZFS RAIDZ and the question I ask myself is, why
>>> wasn't I using ZFS years ago?
>>
>>because it is not production on linux, which i have to use because
>>freebsd does not have kvm/ganeti. want zfs very very badly. snif.
>
> I keep
While I generally support the lawsuit, I have to question "a vast burden on
their electric bill".
Does an 802.11 transmitter that was already being used to support their own
WiFi network that they are paying for really consume vastly more electricity to
support a second SSID? In my experience,
On 12/11/2014 11:54, Livingood, Jason wrote:
Now..they are doing this on your electric bill and taking up space
(albeit a small amount of it) in your home.
Tell me I need a tin-foil hat if you like, but in the current news there
is reason to believe that the risk is real and actual that the p
On the converse side I live in a neighborhood that has quite a bit of distance
between houses yet I can still a couple of neighborhood SSIDs.If one of
their guests hops on to my Xfinity Wifi it is going to be with a weak signal.
Their weak signal is going to drag down the performance of th
I think it may have already been slightly mentioned, but any reason why
this is not being rolled out on a separate radio than the private customer
facing one? Even if the bandwidth out to the internet is separated with
DOCSIS channels, you are still using the same radio and one user streaming
a la
Mr Livingood:
Out of curiosity, had Comcast decided to use an "opt-in" instead of
"opt-out" method, did your marketing dept have any idea of percentage of
customer base who would have opted in ?
Secondly, at a more technical level:
In a MDU with a whole bunch of Comcast subscribers, could one r
On 12/11/14, 3:58 PM, "Jay Ashworth" wrote:
>No, I'm having a hard time figuring out what the use case *is* for this
>service as deployed against *residential* hardware, myself...
Well, the great thing about the marketplace is that if it ultimately does
not prove useful and of some value then it
On 12/11/14, 3:50 PM, "Doug Barton"
mailto:do...@dougbarton.us>> wrote:
That's interesting, thanks for that info, Mike. Jason has a good point in that
a lot of the "reporting" on this topic so far has been ill-informed...
What else is new? ;-) It’s frustrating where I sit but sometimes reporter
On 12/11/2014 07:10, William Herrin wrote:
> What Comcast is stealing is electricity. Pennies per customer times a
> boatload of customers.
.and floorspace, physical security, air conditioning, and all sorts
of labor overheads.
--
The unique Characteristics of System Administrators:
The
On 12/11/14, 3:06 PM, "Jean-Francois Mezei"
wrote:
>I think Comcast should have spun this totally differently.
Well, I think we probably did. But apparently all it takes is one lawsuit
filed in California and an article in The Register to really make an
impact. ;-)
Then again, the tech press
On 12/11/14, 3:04 PM, "Rodney Joffe" wrote:
>The flip side is that as a(n) happy xfinity customer I get to roam in
>lots of places around the US (and maybe even abroad), as do all of the
>xfinity home customers.
Outside of the U.S., a customer can use the WiFi networks operated by
Liberty Globa
On 12/11/14 1:14 PM, Owen DeLong wrote:
>> On Dec 10, 2014, at 23:11 , joel jaeggli wrote:
>>
>> On 12/10/14 7:45 PM, Justin M. Streiner wrote:
>>> On Wed, 10 Dec 2014, Yucong Sun wrote:
>>>
It is not the same thing though. In my case, they just say we want
you to
buy our IP, if you
Confidently based on no knowledge at all -
*Roy Hirst* | 425-556-5773 | 425-324-0941 cell
XKL LLC | 12020 113th Ave NE, Suite 100 | Kirkland, WA 98034 | USA
- We have noticed that in some instances that if a user is on a low
speed connection that their VPN speed gets cut by about 1/3.
> On Dec 10, 2014, at 23:11 , joel jaeggli wrote:
>
> On 12/10/14 7:45 PM, Justin M. Streiner wrote:
>> On Wed, 10 Dec 2014, Yucong Sun wrote:
>>
>>> It is not the same thing though. In my case, they just say we want
>>> you to
>>> buy our IP, if you don't and want use you own Arin allocated IP
> -Original Message-
> From: NANOG [mailto:nanog-boun...@nanog.org] On Behalf Of Bob Evans
> Sent: Thursday, December 11, 2014 7:30 AM
> To: nanog@nanog.org
> Subject: Re: Comcast thinks it ok to install public wifi in your house
>
>
> I think it's more than AC power issuewho knows wh
On 12/11/14, 2:53 PM, "Doug Barton" wrote:
>While that offer is noble, and appreciated, as are your other responses
>on this thread; personally I would be interested to hear more about how
>customers were notified. Was there a collateral piece included in their
>bill? Were they e-mailed?
It is a
- Original Message -
> From: "Christopher Morrow"
> On Thu, Dec 11, 2014 at 2:11 PM, George, Wes
> wrote:
> > Their intended use is to give
> > access to visitors in your house and/or yard without you needing to
> > set up
> > a dedicated guest network or giving them your wifi password.
On 12/09/2014 02:42 PM, Zachary McGibbon wrote:
I'm looking for some input on a situation that has been plaguing our new
AnyConnect VPN setup. Any input would be valuable, we are at a loss for
what the problem is.
We recently upgraded our VPN from our old Cisco 3000 VPN concentrators
running PP
- Original Message -
> From: "Valdis Kletnieks"
> On Thu, 11 Dec 2014 18:04:20 +, "Livingood, Jason" said:
>
> > Right, so user name & password + MAC address. As more devices
> > support things like Passpoint, this will get more sophisticated.
>
> OK, so it *does* do .1x authenticat
That's interesting, thanks for that info, Mike. Jason has a good point
in that a lot of the "reporting" on this topic so far has been
ill-informed, and I think it's important to understand the truth.
Re Rodney and Randy's point about this being blown out of proportion,
the thing I'm most conce
From: Randy Bush
>> We are now using ZFS RAIDZ and the question I ask myself is, why
>> wasn't I using ZFS years ago?
>
>because it is not production on linux, which i have to use because
>freebsd does not have kvm/ganeti. want zfs very very badly. snif.
I keep reading zfs vs btrfs articles an
note that free.fr does this in france. we both provide and use it
there. works out quite well.
i guess i should figure out how to use comcast's stateside version.
randy
>From the wired side, since the AP's bandwitdh is separate from the
paying customer's, the later really has no complaint to make. Taken to
the extreme, yeah, all those APs may end up adding to the load on the
coax segment and creating congestion. But somehow I doubt this is a huge
issue.
One the
Randy,
You're spot on. I don't understand this griping. The flip side is that as a(n)
happy xfinity customer I get to roam in lots of places around the US (and maybe
even abroad), as do all of the xfinity home customers. This isn't a paid
service... It's a byproduct of being a cable customer.
On 12/11/14 10:16 AM, Livingood, Jason wrote:
On 12/11/14, 1:06 PM, "Kain, Rebecca (.)" wrote:
No one who has Comcast, who I've forward this to, knew about this (all US
customers). Maybe you can send here the notification Comcast sent out,
to your customers.
I emailed you off-list. I am ha
On Thu, Dec 11, 2014 at 2:11 PM, George, Wes wrote:
> Their intended use is to give
> access to visitors in your house and/or yard without you needing to set up
> a dedicated guest network or giving them your wifi password.
this seems like the key point here... comcast isn't actually
benefiting (
On 12/11/14, 1:43 PM, "Jean-Francois Mezei"
wrote:
>BTW, it isn't just the electricity, but also climate control and
>location which the subscriber provides for free. Comcast need not rent
>space on poles and need not buy more expensive weatherized equipment
>that goes outdoors.
WG] In most ca
darn. i shoulda used a comcast cable modem instead of my own so i could
provide this service to neighbors. ah well. i do put up a non-wpa
ssid, but don't like the non-wpa.
randy
On 12/11/14, 1:43 PM, "Jean-Francois Mezei"
wrote:
>How is this done ?
>
>2 separate modems in same box ? or a single modem which gets 2 separate
>IPs and applies rate limiting independently on each IP ?
The latter.
JL
+1 on both. Mostly SmartOS, some FreeNAS (which is FreeBSD underneath).
-r
Ryan Brooks writes:
> Zfs on BSD or a Solaris like OS
>
>
>> On Dec 11, 2014, at 10:06 AM, Bacon Zombie wrote:
>>
>> Are you running ZFS and RAIDZ on Linux or BSD?
>>> On 10 Dec 2014 23:21, "Javier J" wrote:
>>>
>>
On 14-12-11 12:45, Livingood, Jason wrote:
> Not really; separate bandwidth in the DOCSIS network is provisioned for
> this.
How is this done ?
2 separate modems in same box ? or a single modem which gets 2 separate
IPs and applies rate limiting independently on each IP ?
BTW, it isn't just th
K, thanks
-Original Message-
From: Livingood, Jason [mailto:jason_living...@cable.comcast.com]
Sent: Thursday, December 11, 2014 1:16 PM
To: Kain, Rebecca (.)
Cc: NANOG list
Subject: Re: Comcast thinks it ok to install public wifi in your house
On 12/11/14, 1:06 PM, "Kain, Rebecca (.)"
On 12/11/14, 1:06 PM, "Kain, Rebecca (.)" wrote:
>No one who has Comcast, who I've forward this to, knew about this (all US
>customers). Maybe you can send here the notification Comcast sent out,
>to your customers.
I emailed you off-list. I am happy to investigate individual cases. The
rollou
Have you ever met an intelligent, informed consumer?
-
Mike Hammett
Intelligent Computing Solutions
http://www.ics-il.com
- Original Message -
From: "Rebecca Kain (.)"
To: "Jason Livingood" , "Charles Mills"
, "Jeroen van Aart"
Cc: "NANOG list"
Sent: Thursday, December
>Or you can just call Comcast and ask them to turn it off. Or you could
>in the past.
I can see where the pointy-haired types came up with the opt-out idea hoping
nobody would notice or care, but at least they make it (fairly) easy :
http://wifi.comcast.com/faqs.html
1. Log into your Comcast ac
On Thu, 11 Dec 2014 18:04:20 +, "Livingood, Jason" said:
> Right, so user name & password + MAC address. As more devices support
> things like Passpoint, this will get more sophisticated.
OK, so it *does* do .1x authentication with the name/password, not just
mac address. That's a lot less s
Here is how you disable it.
1 – Login to the customer portal https://customer.comcast.com/
2 – Click the “Users & Preferences” tab
(see pic @
http://media.bestofmicro.com/4/Z/442115/original/xfinity-how-to-disable-3.jpg)
3 – Click “Manage XFINITY WiFi”
(see pic @
http://media.bestofmicro.com/5
No one who has Comcast, who I've forward this to, knew about this (all US
customers). Maybe you can send here the notification Comcast sent out, to your
customers.
-Original Message-
From: NANOG [mailto:nanog-boun...@nanog.org] On Behalf Of Livingood, Jason
Sent: Thursday, December 11
On 12/11/14, 9:37 AM, "Scott Helms" wrote:
>It is, you only have to log in once and then it remembers your MAC
>address.
Right, so user name & password + MAC address. As more devices support
things like Passpoint, this will get more sophisticated.
Jason
On 12/10/14, 10:55 PM, "Phil Bedard" wrote:
>Really it is just the power they seem to be complaining about.
And per my other post, the citation was for two separate commercial
devices and the commercial WiFi AP being used 24x7. The one customers get
is a very, very different residential integrat
On 12/10/14, 9:41 PM, "Charles Mills"
mailto:w3y...@gmail.com>> wrote:
In the US at least you have to authenticate with your Comcast credentials and
not like a traditional open wifi where you can just make up an email and accept
the terms of service. I also understand that it is a different IP
- Original Message -
> From: "Scott Helms"
> On Thu, Dec 11, 2014 at 9:24 AM, wrote:
>
> > On Thu, 11 Dec 2014 00:11:07 -0500, Jay Ashworth said:
> > > I will give them their props: I only had to sign in *once*, last
> > > year;
> > > their auth controller has recognized my MAC address
On 12/10/14, 9:35 PM, "Jeroen van Aart" wrote:
>Why am I not surprised?
You¹re a smart guy - don¹t believe everything you read. ;-)
>Whose fault would it be if your comcast installed public wifi would be
>abused to download illegal material or launch a botnet, to name some
>random fun one coul
Zfs on BSD or a Solaris like OS
> On Dec 11, 2014, at 10:06 AM, Bacon Zombie wrote:
>
> Are you running ZFS and RAIDZ on Linux or BSD?
>> On 10 Dec 2014 23:21, "Javier J" wrote:
>>
>> I'm just going to chime in here since I recently had to deal with bit-rot
>> affecting a 6TB linux raid5 setu
Or you can just call Comcast and ask them to turn it off. Or you could
in the past.
My in-laws did that when they got their new equipment. I don't know
exactly how they found out it was going to be done - possibly inside
info due to a relative working for Comcast.
On 12/11/2014 8:05 AM, vald
Are you running ZFS and RAIDZ on Linux or BSD?
On 10 Dec 2014 23:21, "Javier J" wrote:
> I'm just going to chime in here since I recently had to deal with bit-rot
> affecting a 6TB linux raid5 setup using mdadm (6x 1TB disks)
>
> We couldn't rebuild because of 5 URE sectors on one of the other di
On Thu, 11 Dec 2014 07:30:00 -0800, "Bob Evans" said:
> However, I have not studied these new Docsis modems. So how do I shut the
> xfinitywifi SSID?
Motorola Surfboard, Netgear WNDR3800, reflash the 3800 with cerowrt. Done.
And you get less bufferbloat in the bargain.
(Though the 3800 runs int
BT in the UK did the same thing a few years ago with a silent firmware
upgrade.
On 11 Dec 2014 15:51, "Scott Helms" wrote:
> John,
>
> My apologies, I misread your email :)
>
>
> Scott Helms
> Vice President of Technology
> ZCorum
> (678) 507-5000
>
> http://twitt
I think it's more than AC power issuewho knows what strength level
they program that SSID to work at ? More wifi signal you are exposed to
without your knowledge and more...read on.
I have Comcast & ATT internet at home...and I have noticed an xfinitywifi
ssid at full strength. This tread br
John,
My apologies, I misread your email :)
Scott Helms
Vice President of Technology
ZCorum
(678) 507-5000
http://twitter.com/kscotthelms
On Thu, Dec 11, 2014 at 9:46 AM, John Peach
wrote:
> On Thu, 11 Dec 2014 09:37:22 -0500
>
On Thu, 11 Dec 2014 09:37:22 -0500
Scott Helms wrote:
> It is, you only have to log in once and then it remembers your MAC
> address. Harvesting usable MAC addresses is as trivial as putting up
> an open access point with the SSIDs xfinitywifi and CableWifi and
> recording the MAC addresses that
It is, you only have to log in once and then it remembers your MAC
address. Harvesting usable MAC addresses is as trivial as putting up an
open access point with the SSIDs xfinitywifi and CableWifi and recording
the MAC addresses that connect to it.
Scott Helms
Vice President of Technology
ZCoru
It's very scary, and something I'm doing a paper on. It _is_ just MAC
recognition, at least until you try and use a MAC address that's already
active somewhere else.
Scott Helms
Vice President of Technology
ZCorum
(678) 507-5000
http://twitter.com/kscotthelms
---
Not really, this is much more like the mesh networks that have been put in
place by lots of WISPs where every customer is also a relay. It's also
comparable to pico cells that many of the LTE operators use to extend
coverage.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Mesh_networking
http://en.wikipedia.org/w
On Thu, 11 Dec 2014 09:24:10 -0500
valdis.kletni...@vt.edu wrote:
> On Thu, 11 Dec 2014 00:11:07 -0500, Jay Ashworth said:
> > I will give them their props: I only had to sign in *once*, last
> > year; their auth controller has recognized my MAC address at every
> > spot I've used since.
>
> Actu
1 - 100 of 109 matches
Mail list logo
