Date: Fri, 15 Dec 2000 12:24:24 GMT From: Cliff Sarginson <cliff@raggedclown.net> To: "Troy Settle" <troy@psknet.com>, <questions@FreeBSD.ORG> Subject: RE: Netcraft Message-ID: <E146tuS-0002EB-00@post.mail.nl.demon.net>
next in thread | raw e-mail | index | archive | help
Just noticed this... $ uname -a WindowsNT BillyBoy 4.0 Generic 80286 Compaq PC $ uptime 1:18pm up 2000 day(s), 42 min(s), 759 user, load average: 1.26, 1.20, 1.24 mmm, some mistake here surely ? > > 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 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?E146tuS-0002EB-00>