Skip site navigation (1)Skip section navigation (2)
Date:      Fri, 15 Dec 2000 07:14:45 -0500
From:      "Troy Settle" <troy@psknet.com>
To:        <questions@FreeBSD.ORG>
Subject:   RE: Netcraft 
Message-ID:  <GIEHKBHPBGKJPNMBCOHFIEBPCAAA.troy@psknet.com>
In-Reply-To: <Pine.SOL.4.10.10012150329390.19239-100000@pacman.gpcc.itd.umich.edu>

next in thread | previous in thread | raw e-mail | index | archive | help

I'd agree that netcraft is wrong.  To demonstrate, here's a box that's been
up just over the 497 days they mention:

$ uname -a
FreeBSD blarg 3.2-STABLE FreeBSD 3.2-STABLE #0: Fri Jun  4 11:17:38 EDT 1999
root@blarg:/usr/src/sys/compile/BLARG  i386
$ uptime
 7:09AM  up 505 days,  2:41, 2 users, load averages: 0.08, 0.09, 0.04

I've got some 4.x boxes turned up a couple months ago.  We'll see how well
they hold out.  Will post sometime in 2002 to see if they survive the 497
day rollover.


--
  Troy Settle
  Pulaski Networks
  540.994.4254

It's always a long day, 86400 doesn't fit into a short.


** -----Original Message-----
** From: owner-freebsd-questions@FreeBSD.ORG
** [mailto:owner-freebsd-questions@FreeBSD.ORG]On Behalf Of Tim McMillen
** Sent: Friday, December 15, 2000 4:00 AM
** To: Jeremy Vandenhouten
** Cc: questions@FreeBSD.ORG
** Subject: Re: Netcraft
**
**
**
**
** But what everyone is saying is that why would you want to advertise your
** uptime?  Only bad can come of that.  Like script kiddies or worse seeing
** it as a challenge and attacking until they can get in.  No one else wants
** it to do that, so no one sees it as fixing FreeBSD to get it to tell a
** scan the uptime of a box.  If it's not fixing something, why do it?
** 	As for the 497day rollover, I'm pretty sure they are wrong.  In
** the record uptimes list there is one FreeBSD box (it is the number two
** overall, I think) with over 800 days uptime.  And yes of course
** those can
** be fudged.  I think the rollover used to be a problem with most
** unices but
** has been fixed.
**
** 							Tim
**
** On Thu, 14 Dec 2000, Jeremy Vandenhouten wrote:
**
** > Let me say this first, I love FreeBSD. Its a great platform.
** Now, on to
** > other matters.
** >
** > > > the "default configuration problem?"
** > >
** > > What makes you think its a problem?
** >
** > If I thought it was a TRUE problem I wouldn't have put it in quotes.
** >
** > > Would you want to advertise
** > > your
** > > uptime so the script kiddies can confirm their kills?
** >
** > No offense to anyone, but for all the responses I've seen to
** this, none
** > actually answered the question. And worst of all, I sense that I'm
** > being given a slightly negative response here. Now maybe that's not
** > what you meant to do, but I honestly think that as a forum we could
** > come across a little more politely at times.
** >
** > Continuing....
** >
** > Mike, thanks for the attempt at answering. I wish I knew how netcraft
** > pulled their results so that I could figure out how to get them to
** > accurately report it. That's why I asked if anyone else had an idea. I
** > did some searching on their site, but apparently they don't provide
** > that information. As for the information I provided, it was
** from quotes
** > from their FAQ page.
** >
** >
** >
** > To Unsubscribe: send mail to majordomo@FreeBSD.org
** > with "unsubscribe freebsd-questions" in the body of the message
** >
**
**
**
** To Unsubscribe: send mail to majordomo@FreeBSD.org
** with "unsubscribe freebsd-questions" in the body of the message
**
**



To Unsubscribe: send mail to majordomo@FreeBSD.org
with "unsubscribe freebsd-questions" in the body of the message




Want to link to this message? Use this URL: <https://mail-archive.FreeBSD.org/cgi/mid.cgi?GIEHKBHPBGKJPNMBCOHFIEBPCAAA.troy>