Return to BSD News archive
Xref: sserve comp.os.linux.networking:10329 comp.os.ms-windows.networking.tcp-ip:13064 comp.unix.bsd.freebsd.misc:3739 Path: sserve!newshost.anu.edu.au!harbinger.cc.monash.edu.au!simtel!news.kei.com!newshost.marcam.com!usc!howland.reston.ans.net!agate!violet.berkeley.edu!jkh From: jkh@violet.berkeley.edu (Jordan K. Hubbard) Newsgroups: comp.os.linux.networking,comp.os.ms-windows.networking.tcp-ip,comp.unix.bsd.freebsd.misc Subject: Re: Internet service providing-which OS? Date: 22 Jul 1995 15:03:09 GMT Organization: University of California, Berkeley Lines: 60 Message-ID: <3ur3vd$ht2@agate.berkeley.edu> References: <3ue5qa$ain@panix.com> <3uk3b5$35a@legend.txdirect.net> <DC3sEM.1Jr@saturn.tlug.org> <tgmDC46x0.A4M@netcom.com> NNTP-Posting-Host: violet.berkeley.edu In article <tgmDC46x0.A4M@netcom.com>, Thomas G. McWilliams <tgm@netcom.com> wrote: > >FreeBSD ftp.cdrom.com crashed earlier this year and was down for over a >week. The fallout was catastrophic. Anyone who would be so foolish as >to use FreeBSD as a mission critical server should ask the OS/2 >community which was schwacked hard by the loss of a major FTP site. What a load of undistilled bulls**t! I have to wonder how Mr. McWilliams finds it within himself to make such lofty pronouncements without the slightest clue as to what really happened. Repeat after me, Tommy: ftp.cdrom.com crashed earlier this year due to HARDWARE PROBLEMS which, in the process of fixing, we decided to upgrade completely to a new machine and a new revision of the OS. This meant that the downtime was somewhat longer than we expected but we'd wanted to do the upgrade for some time and decided to take advantage of the unexpected failure to combine all the pending work we had for it. Since the machine is remote, we needed to drag all the hardware back to our own site, spend a few days making the new hardware work (the difficulties in which were due solely to PC architecture braindamage and had nothing to do with the OS - we were fighting just to get the damn thing to power up with all of its controllers!) and then drag it all back down to the remote site again and re-rack it. Since we have other responsibilities besides ftp.cdrom.com, this took a little time. Since the upgrade, ftp.cdrom.com and FreeBSD 2.0.5 have performed marvelously with most downtime being due to power failures at the remote site and a hard drive going bad - both factors well beyond our control. >business to lose connectivity for a week? How "Free" is FreeBSD when >you factor in over a week of downtime? Face it, if you need 24 hour per >day, 365 day per year reliability, FreeBSD will *NOT* cut it. And I think you have a larger agenda here. Who do you work for, Mr. McWilliams? I don't think that BSDI would ever stoop to this kind of mud-slinging, but this groundless and somewhat ad-hominem attack make me wonder if this isn't just some sort of PR exercise for a competing product. Be careful what you say, Thomas. I'm not litigious by nature, nor do I believe that one should cry "lawsuit!" at the drop of the hat, but I have saved your message and if I do find out that there was more to it than just another uninformed hothead issuing pompous pronouncements to the net then rest assured that I WILL haul your ass right into court on libel charges and I have more than enough legal horsepower on retainer to do so easily. I take my responsibilities to FreeBSD very seriously and there are a number of very dedicated individuals who are putting in long hours of unpaid effort to make this OS everything it can be. I won't have their work mindlessly slandered like this! Do not make the mistake of thinking that this is an empty threat. I've read your message several times and have more than adequate grounds to go to court with this. I strongly suggest that you pass a copy of your message to your own lawyer for review if you've any doubt. At the very least, I expect a public retraction from you at this stage. The software was NOT at fault and you are very much in error to say that it was. Jordan