Groups | Search | Server Info | Keyboard shortcuts | Login | Register [http] [https] [nntp] [nntps]

Groups > linux.debian.user > #181878 > unrolled thread

NTP.conf pool vs server

Back to article view | Back to linux.debian.user

Contents

  NTP.conf   pool vs server ray <ray@aarden.us> - 2017-06-07 15:20 +0200
    Re: NTP.conf   pool vs server Greg Wooledge <wooledg@eeg.ccf.org> - 2017-06-07 15:30 +0200
      Re: NTP.conf   pool vs server Gene Heskett <gheskett@shentel.net> - 2017-06-07 16:50 +0200
    Re: NTP.conf   pool vs server Gene Heskett <gheskett@shentel.net> - 2017-06-07 16:40 +0200
      Re: NTP.conf   pool vs server Greg Wooledge <wooledg@eeg.ccf.org> - 2017-06-07 17:00 +0200
      Re: NTP.conf   pool vs server Darac Marjal <mailinglist@darac.org.uk> - 2017-06-07 17:00 +0200
        Re: NTP.conf   pool vs server Greg Wooledge <wooledg@eeg.ccf.org> - 2017-06-07 17:10 +0200
          Re: NTP.conf pool vs server Joshua Schaeffer <jschaeffer0922@gmail.com> - 2017-06-07 17:30 +0200
            Re: NTP.conf pool vs server Greg Wooledge <wooledg@eeg.ccf.org> - 2017-06-07 17:50 +0200
          Re: NTP.conf   pool vs server Henrique de Moraes Holschuh <hmh@debian.org> - 2017-06-07 18:10 +0200
        Re: NTP.conf   pool vs server Darac Marjal <mailinglist@darac.org.uk> - 2017-06-07 17:20 +0200
        Re: NTP.conf   pool vs server Gene Heskett <gheskett@shentel.net> - 2017-06-08 01:10 +0200
          Re: NTP.conf   pool vs server Darac Marjal <mailinglist@darac.org.uk> - 2017-06-08 14:30 +0200
            Re: https_port "Adiel Plasencia Herrera" <adielp@estereocentro.icrt.cu> - 2017-06-08 14:50 +0200
              Re: https_port Darac Marjal <mailinglist@darac.org.uk> - 2017-06-08 15:30 +0200
                Re: https_port Henrique de Moraes Holschuh <hmh@debian.org> - 2017-06-08 17:00 +0200
                  Re: https_port "Adiel Plasencia Herrera" <adielp@estereocentro.icrt.cu> - 2017-06-08 17:20 +0200
                    Re: https_port Darac Marjal <mailinglist@darac.org.uk> - 2017-06-08 17:30 +0200
                      Re: https_port Greg Wooledge <wooledg@eeg.ccf.org> - 2017-06-08 17:40 +0200
                        Re: https_port Darac Marjal <mailinglist@darac.org.uk> - 2017-06-08 17:50 +0200
                          Re: https_port "Adiel Plasencia Herrera" <adielp@estereocentro.icrt.cu> - 2017-06-08 18:00 +0200
                            Re: https_port Jim Ohlstein <jim@mailman-hosting.com> - 2017-06-08 19:10 +0200
                            Re: https_port Charlie Kravetz <cjk@teamcharliesangels.com> - 2017-06-09 16:40 +0200
                              Reply-to-all or reply-to-list again (was: https_port) Nicolas George <george@nsup.org> - 2017-06-09 16:50 +0200
                                Re: Reply-to-all or reply-to-list again (was: https_port) Fungi4All <fungilife@protonmail.com> - 2017-06-09 17:20 +0200
                                Re: Reply-to-all or reply-to-list again The Wanderer <wanderer@fastmail.fm> - 2017-06-09 17:20 +0200
                                  Re: Reply-to-all or reply-to-list again Nicolas George <george@nsup.org> - 2017-06-09 18:00 +0200
                                    Re: Reply-to-all or reply-to-list again The Wanderer <wanderer@fastmail.fm> - 2017-06-09 21:20 +0200
                                    Re: Reply-to-all or reply-to-list again Joel Rees <joel.rees@gmail.com> - 2017-06-10 04:20 +0200
                                      Re: Reply-to-all or reply-to-list again Fungi4All <fungilife@protonmail.com> - 2017-06-10 16:00 +0200
                                        Re: Reply-to-all or reply-to-list again Joel Rees <joel.rees@gmail.com> - 2017-06-10 16:30 +0200
                                          Re: Reply-to-all or reply-to-list again Fungi4All <fungilife@protonmail.com> - 2017-06-10 18:00 +0200
                                Re: Reply-to-all or reply-to-list again (was: https_port) Gene Heskett <gheskett@shentel.net> - 2017-06-09 17:30 +0200
            Re: NTP.conf   pool vs server Gene Heskett <gheskett@shentel.net> - 2017-06-08 16:10 +0200
      Re: NTP.conf   pool vs server John Hasler <jhasler@newsguy.com> - 2017-06-07 18:10 +0200
        Re: NTP.conf   pool vs server Brian <ad44@cityscape.co.uk> - 2017-06-07 18:30 +0200
          Re: NTP.conf   pool vs server David Wright <deblis@lionunicorn.co.uk> - 2017-06-11 18:00 +0200
            Re: NTP.conf   pool vs server Brian <ad44@cityscape.co.uk> - 2017-06-11 19:30 +0200
        Re: NTP.conf   pool vs server Teemu Likonen <tlikonen@iki.fi> - 2017-06-08 08:40 +0200
          Re: NTP.conf   pool vs server Curt <curty@free.fr> - 2017-06-08 09:20 +0200
          Re: NTP.conf   pool vs server Gene Heskett <gheskett@shentel.net> - 2017-06-08 15:40 +0200
      Re: NTP.conf   pool vs server Jim Ohlstein <jim@mailman-hosting.com> - 2017-06-07 18:40 +0200
    Re: NTP.conf   pool vs server Kushal Kumaran <kushal@locationd.net> - 2017-06-07 17:00 +0200

Page 2 of 3 — ← Prev page 1 [2] 3  Next page →

#181939 — Re: https_port

[Multipart message — attachments visible in raw view] — view raw

I  just do not understand how to 
respond in the list, maybe I did wrong  and that's why they are confused, I 
beg my apologies if it is so.

I'm not talking about NTP, in fact I do not know what it is.

Yesterday  I sent my question hbaia with the subject https_port but 
when I  answered I did not know how it was to respond again and what I did 
was  create an email and send it to the list with the subject Re: 
https_port.

This was the one that wanted to respond

Http://lists.squid-cache.org/pipermail/squid-users/2017-June/015565.html 
[http://lists.squid-cache.org/pipermail/squid-users/2017-June/015565.html]


-----Original Message-----

From: Darac Marjal <mailinglist@darac.org.uk>

To: debian-user@lists.debian.org

Date: Thu, 8 Jun 2017 16:43:57 +0100

Subject: Re: https_port




On Thu, Jun 08, 2017 at 11:34:20AM -0400, Greg Wooledge wrote:

>On Thu, Jun 08, 2017 at 04:25:11PM +0100, Darac Marjal wrote:

>> On Thu, Jun 08, 2017 at 11:18:16AM -0700, Adiel Plasencia Herrera wrote:

>> >  Hello,

>> >  I do not look for security, is that having no real internet ip in my

>> >  company I need certain programs to go to the internet and for that I

>> >  use proxycap (http://www.proxycap.com/ [http://www.proxycap.com/]) 
that makes me this function

>> >  perfectly through the proxy . What happens is that with HTTP does not

>> >  work and I need to pass my squid to use HTTPS authentication for the

>> >  program (proxycap) to work well.

>>

>> I don't think squid works with NTP at all, but it's been a few years

>> since I played with Squid, so maybe someone else will be able to give

>> better advice.

>

>I don't think he's *asking* about NTP at all.

>



Ah. You mean he's a politician (replying to a topic by introducing one's

own, unrelated, topic)?





-- 

For more information, please reread.

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]

#181944 — Re: https_port

[Multipart message — attachments visible in raw view] — view raw

Hello,

On Thu, 2017-06-08 at 11:51 -0700, Adiel Plasencia Herrera wrote:
> I just do not understand how to respond in the list, maybe I did
> wrong and that's why they are confused, I beg my apologies if it is
> so.
> I'm not talking about NTP, in fact I do not know what it is.
> Yesterday I sent my question hbaia with the subject https_port but
> when I answered I did not know how it was to respond again and what I
> did was create an email and send it to the list with the subject Re:
> https_port.
> This was the one that wanted to respond
> Http://lists.squid-cache.org/pipermail/squid-users/2017-
> June/015565.html

While you're figuring out how to use a mailing list, please also set
the clock on your computer correctly.


> 
>  
> -----Original Message-----
> From: Darac Marjal <mailinglist@darac.org.uk>
> To: debian-user@lists.debian.org
> Date: Thu, 8 Jun 2017 16:43:57 +0100
> Subject: Re: https_port
> 
> On Thu, Jun 08, 2017 at 11:34:20AM -0400, Greg Wooledge wrote:
> >On Thu, Jun 08, 2017 at 04:25:11PM +0100, Darac Marjal wrote:
> >> On Thu, Jun 08, 2017 at 11:18:16AM -0700, Adiel Plasencia Herrera
> wrote:
> >> >  Hello,
> >> >  I do not look for security, is that having no real internet ip
> in my
> >> >  company I need certain programs to go to the internet and for
> that I
> >> >  use proxycap (http://www.proxycap.com/) that makes me this
> function
> >> >  perfectly through the proxy . What happens is that with HTTP
> does not
> >> >  work and I need to pass my squid to use HTTPS authentication
> for the
> >> >  program (proxycap) to work well.
> >>
> >> I don't think squid works with NTP at all, but it's been a few
> years
> >> since I played with Squid, so maybe someone else will be able
> to  give
> >> better advice.
> >
> >I don't think he's *asking* about NTP at all.
> >
> 
> Ah. You mean he's a politician (replying to a topic by introducing
> one's
> own, unrelated, topic)?
> 
> 
> -- 
> For more information, please reread.
-- 
Jim Ohlstein
Professional Mailman Hosting
https://mailman-hosting.com/

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]

#181973 — Re: https_port

-----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-----
Hash: SHA256

On Thu, 08 Jun 2017 11:51:35 -0700
"Adiel Plasencia Herrera" <adielp@estereocentro.icrt.cu> wrote:

>I  just do not understand how to 
>respond in the list, maybe I did wrong  and that's why they are confused, I 
>beg my apologies if it is so.
>
>I'm not talking about NTP, in fact I do not know what it is.
>
>Yesterday  I sent my question hbaia with the subject https_port but 
>when I  answered I did not know how it was to respond again and what I did 
>was  create an email and send it to the list with the subject Re: 
>https_port.
>
>This was the one that wanted to respond
>
>Http://lists.squid-cache.org/pipermail/squid-users/2017-June/015565.html 
>[http://lists.squid-cache.org/pipermail/squid-users/2017-June/015565.html]
>
>
>-----Original Message-----
>
>From: Darac Marjal <mailinglist@darac.org.uk>
>
>To: debian-user@lists.debian.org
>
>Date: Thu, 8 Jun 2017 16:43:57 +0100
>
>Subject: Re: https_port
>
>
>
>
>On Thu, Jun 08, 2017 at 11:34:20AM -0400, Greg Wooledge wrote:
>
>>On Thu, Jun 08, 2017 at 04:25:11PM +0100, Darac Marjal wrote:  
>
>>> On Thu, Jun 08, 2017 at 11:18:16AM -0700, Adiel Plasencia Herrera wrote:  
>
>>> >  Hello,  
>
>>> >  I do not look for security, is that having no real internet ip in my  
>
>>> >  company I need certain programs to go to the internet and for that I  
>
>>> >  use proxycap (http://www.proxycap.com/ [http://www.proxycap.com/])   
>that makes me this function
>
>>> >  perfectly through the proxy . What happens is that with HTTP does not  
>
>>> >  work and I need to pass my squid to use HTTPS authentication for the  
>
>>> >  program (proxycap) to work well.  
>
>>>  
>
>>> I don't think squid works with NTP at all, but it's been a few years  
>
>>> since I played with Squid, so maybe someone else will be able to give  
>
>>> better advice.  
>
>>  
>
>>I don't think he's *asking* about NTP at all.  
>
>>  
>
>
>
>Ah. You mean he's a politician (replying to a topic by introducing one's
>
>own, unrelated, topic)?
>
>
>
>
>

When replying to the mailing list, hit reply. Do not use "Reply to
All", since that sends individual emails to the person you are
answering. Most people are members of the mailing list, and do not want
individual emails. If there is a "Reply to mailing list", it is okay to
use that. The subject should fill itself in.

When asking a question on the mailing list, hit "New Message" or
"Compose". Use a statement in the Subject to describe what you are
asking, and tell us in the message body what you need. The more
information you give, the better the answers you will get.

- -- 
Charlie Kravetz
Linux Registered User Number 425914
[http://linuxcounter.net/user/425914.html]
Never let anyone steal your DREAM.   [http://keepingdreams.com]
-----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE-----

iQEzBAEBCAAdFiEEG5QK93YKrQMH22ZTiq6LjqbJ0IAFAlk6rGoACgkQiq6LjqbJ
0IB6+Qf/T5wybVTiO8ufwMJcuh6lRBahGFpA3RhUzUjkZC2EAqtqlgGC6JUcSbug
SCab9tZ2PU8AuFvXn43tUOXxcS3pFQY7Nw8hqekBam0n1xwe0dBe7pJATvhAu9WG
IEBlf5DaFit0lffbsyWcR9EozmU9QMr3NT/HpUoifNIlroiXE/twNiu+GQiY4fVJ
LSpfharxwYvGjBbvZ1y6DjOrZ0JfzWE2B0BJNcirwLHqVhKOiQtN2duhyBZD6Aox
Kkeg4AfR1zUmhat2llhr1vJN/jbA4BVKBuU2Lgh8351ec1ISy81A9hizZz4+irdI
geGVopHkYSXXSMG464UGuc6PTeATKg==
=VTXc
-----END PGP SIGNATURE-----

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]

#181975 — Reply-to-all or reply-to-list again (was: https_port)

[Multipart message — attachments visible in raw view] — view raw

Le primidi 21 prairial, an CCXXV, Charlie Kravetz a écrit :
> When replying to the mailing list, hit reply. Do not use "Reply to
> All", since that sends individual emails to the person you are
> answering.

This recommendation is unsustainable and should be eliminated from the
guidelines. It only exists because the mailing-list server is not
configured correctly.

The reply-to-list feature is flawed because it requires the user to give
special attention each time "am I replying to a personal mail or to a
mailing-list"? The correct behaviour should be the default, always,
because that is the only way to minimize mistakes. This is what happens
with mailing-list servers properly configured.

When replying to a mail, any mail, use reply-to-all, unless you actively
know you want to reply to an unusual subset of recipients. (But heed the
reply-to headers, of course.)

If somebody complain, tell them to set up their mail headers, just as I
did mine.

Regards,

-- 
  Nicolas George

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]

#181976 — Re: Reply-to-all or reply-to-list again (was: https_port)

[Multipart message — attachments visible in raw view] — view raw

UTC Time: June 9, 2017 2:47 PM
From: george@nsup.org
To: Charlie Kravetz <cjk@teamcharliesangels.com>
debian-user@lists.debian.org

Le primidi 21 prairial, an CCXXV, Charlie Kravetz a écrit :
> When replying to the mailing list, hit reply. Do not use "Reply to
> All", since that sends individual emails to the person you are
> answering.

This recommendation is unsustainable and should be eliminated from the
guidelines. It only exists because the mailing-list server is not
configured correctly.

The reply-to-list feature is flawed because it requires the user to give
special attention each time "am I replying to a personal mail or to a
mailing-list"? The correct behaviour should be the default, always,
because that is the only way to minimize mistakes. This is what happens
with mailing-list servers properly configured.

right before I replied to xorriso Thomas and the reply went personal. I hit reply
to this message and it is going to the list. So I agree with you, it is always
easier to delete the unwanted than to edit an addition and/or both.

When replying to a mail, any mail, use reply-to-all, unless you actively
know you want to reply to an unusual subset of recipients. (But heed the
reply-to headers, of course.)

I think it seems affected by the post of each member and transmits some
but not all headers for threading. I can't explain it otherwise.
Even if the list was misconfigured it should have been consistent for all
messages and all recipients. Here we have supernatural evidence of ghost
in the machine.
Whatever happened to bounce instead of forward? Is it illegal now? Is this
list utilizing this action, bouncing instead of trimming and forwarding?

If somebody complain, tell them to set up their mail headers, just as I
did mine.

and some laxatives for side dish.

Regards,
Nicolas George

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]

#181977 — Re: Reply-to-all or reply-to-list again

[Multipart message — attachments visible in raw view] — view raw

On 2017-06-09 at 10:47, Nicolas George wrote:

> Le primidi 21 prairial, an CCXXV, Charlie Kravetz a écrit :
> 
>> When replying to the mailing list, hit reply. Do not use "Reply to
>> All", since that sends individual emails to the person you are
>> answering.
> 
> This recommendation is unsustainable and should be eliminated from
> the guidelines. It only exists because the mailing-list server is
> not configured correctly.
> 
> The reply-to-list feature is flawed because it requires the user to
> give special attention each time "am I replying to a personal mail or
> to a mailing-list"? The correct behaviour should be the default,
> always, because that is the only way to minimize mistakes. This is
> what happens with mailing-list servers properly configured.

Agreed.

> When replying to a mail, any mail, use reply-to-all, unless you
> actively know you want to reply to an unusual subset of recipients.
> (But heed the reply-to headers, of course.)

Disagreed. This results in sending extra copies to people who are
subscribed to the list, which is incorrect. The only time you should
send a copy of a message both to the list and to someone who is
subscribed to the list is when you specifically want to draw that
person's attention to that particular message, e.g. if you think they
might otherwise miss it among the rest of the list traffic, or if you
have the mistaken impression that they are not subscribed to the list.

Just as it's bad to require the user to check "am I replying to a
personal mail or to the mailing list?" every time, it's equally bad to
require the user to check "did this reply include addressees which it
shouldn't, or omit ones which it should?" every time. Using "Reply to
All" as your default action leads to the latter situation.

Ideally, things would be configured so that simple Reply would work
correctly in all cases (and I have indistinct memories of mailing-list
discussions in years long past where this seemed to in fact be the
case); however, I'm not certain of how to achieve that in practice.
Regardless, Reply-to-All as the "use as baseline default" is simply not
a good approach.

> If somebody complain, tell them to set up their mail headers, just as
> I did mine.

Are there pages out there documenting how to configure various mail
clients (much less Webmail!) to do this automatically?

Because tweaking mail headers by hand on every reply is unwieldy and
impractical, and people are simply not going to do that.

-- 
   The Wanderer

The reasonable man adapts himself to the world; the unreasonable one
persists in trying to adapt the world to himself. Therefore all
progress depends on the unreasonable man.         -- George Bernard Shaw

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]

#181980 — Re: Reply-to-all or reply-to-list again

[Multipart message — attachments visible in raw view] — view raw

Le primidi 21 prairial, an CCXXV, The Wanderer a écrit :
> Disagreed. This results in sending extra copies to people who are
> subscribed to the list, which is incorrect.

Not if the list is properly configured.

Debian's lists are badly configured, it results in burden to all users,
but the users should reject that burden. I do.

I will not answer Gene's message, he obviously missed the whole point of
my mail.

Regards,

-- 
  Nicolas George

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]

#181986 — Re: Reply-to-all or reply-to-list again

[Multipart message — attachments visible in raw view] — view raw

On 2017-06-09 at 11:57, Nicolas George wrote:

> Le primidi 21 prairial, an CCXXV, The Wanderer a écrit :
>
>> Disagreed. This results in sending extra copies to people who are
>> subscribed to the list, which is incorrect.
> 
> Not if the list is properly configured.

What configuration would avoid this result, when using "Reply to All"?

When using "Reply", a mailing-list configuration which sets Reply-To to
point back to the list (presumably in addition to any Reply-To set by
the user, or only when the user did not set such) would avoid that
result, but I've seen arguments presented in the past that it also
results in undesirable results of other types in some cases; although I
didn't retain those arguments in full, I was also not able to come up
with effective counterarguments at the time.

When using "Reply to All", at least with some mail clients, Reply-To
will be ignored - and in fact, I think I might argue that any mail
client which does not ignore Reply-To in the case of "Reply to All" is
broken, since that is failing to do what the user explicitly requested.

Even if using a mail client which does treat Reply-To as overriding
"Reply to All", that just means that the user is required to keep track
of which mailing lists set Reply-To (and use "Reply to All" in those
cases), which don't (and use some other reply method in those cases),
and also which specific messages on some lists have changed the Reply-To
configuration (and then have to decide whether to override that
manually, including potentially copying some or all of the addresses
from the original mail by hand since the mail client won't do it for you).

*Maybe* that's better than any of the known alternatives as a practical,
real-world matter, but it hardly seems anything remotely close to ideal,
in my view.

> Debian's lists are badly configured, it results in burden to all users,
> but the users should reject that burden. I do.

And your chosen method of avoiding this burden seems to result both in
burden to you (in the form of having to modify message headers every
time you compose a reply) and in burden to others (in this case, in the
form of me receiving two copies of your reply, rather than only the copy
sent through the mailing list).

I'm not sure I'd agree that that's better.

-- 
   The Wanderer

The reasonable man adapts himself to the world; the unreasonable one
persists in trying to adapt the world to himself. Therefore all
progress depends on the unreasonable man.         -- George Bernard Shaw

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]

#181991 — Re: Reply-to-all or reply-to-list again

On Sat, Jun 10, 2017 at 12:57 AM, Nicolas George <george@nsup.org> wrote:
> Le primidi 21 prairial, an CCXXV, The Wanderer a écrit :
>> Disagreed. This results in sending extra copies to people who are
>> subscribed to the list, which is incorrect.
>
> Not if the list is properly configured.
>
> Debian's lists are badly configured, it results in burden to all users,
> but the users should reject that burden. I do.
>
> I will not answer Gene's message, he obviously missed the whole point of
> my mail.
>
> Regards,
>
> --
>   Nicolas George

There was a time when mailing lists were e-mail, and newsgroups were
newsgroups. Newsgroups have unfortunately mostly gone the way of the
dodo, and mailing list participants want the mailing lists to behave like
newsgroups.

And Now Google Doesn't Think Users Should Ever Set Headers.

Progress is progress.

-- 
Joel Rees

One of these days I'll get someone to pay me
to design a language that combines the best of Forth and C.
Then I'll be able to leap wide instruction sets with a single #ifdef,
run faster than a speeding infinite loop with a #define,
and stop all integer size bugs with a bare cast.

More of my delusions:
http://reiisi.blogspot.com/2017/05/do-not-pay-modern-danegeld-ransomware.html
http://reiisi.blogspot.jp/p/novels-i-am-writing.html

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]

#182018 — Re: Reply-to-all or reply-to-list again

[Multipart message — attachments visible in raw view] — view raw

UTC Time: June 10, 2017 2:13 AM
From: joel.rees@gmail.com

On Sat, Jun 10, 2017 at 12:57 AM, Nicolas George <george@nsup.org> wrote:
> Le primidi 21 prairial, an CCXXV, The Wanderer a écrit :
>> Disagreed. This results in sending extra copies to people who are
>> subscribed to the list, which is incorrect.
>
> Not if the list is properly configured.
>
> Debian's lists are badly configured, it results in burden to all users,
> but the users should reject that burden. I do.
>
> I will not answer Gene's message, he obviously missed the whole point of
> my mail.
> Nicolas George

And Now Google Doesn't Think Users Should Ever Set Headers.
Progress is progress.

Progress in a society comes when they collectively pursue in common something
that would improve their lives and conditions. If the few and powerful coerce or
blackmail a society to move a certain direction because that advances the interests
of the few I wouldn't dare call this progress. Rarely in history did such moves lasted
and stabilized, as for every action there is a reaction. Just give it some time and
the vast majority of the world will be really happy to see google/fb/ms collapse
and vanish. That may be progress, being without the pests.

Would you call android and win10 progress? I hope not. Vehicles were progress
over horses and carriages in some respects, people walking and one in
ten thousands being driven in a Rolls Royce where the passengers were covered
and the driver was outside was not progress. Model A was progress at
a cost.

Progress is not made by following rulers and those in power, it comes
from the dialectic of resisting and reacting to power and oligarchy.

Joel Rees

(AK)

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]

#182019 — Re: Reply-to-all or reply-to-list again

On Sat, Jun 10, 2017 at 10:52 PM, Fungi4All <fungilife@protonmail.com> wrote:
> UTC Time: June 10, 2017 2:13 AM
>
> From: joel.rees@gmail.com
>
> On Sat, Jun 10, 2017 at 12:57 AM, Nicolas George <george@nsup.org> wrote:
>> Le primidi 21 prairial, an CCXXV, The Wanderer a écrit :
>>> Disagreed. This results in sending extra copies to people who are
>>> subscribed to the list, which is incorrect.
>>
>> Not if the list is properly configured.
>>
>> Debian's lists are badly configured, it results in burden to all users,
>> but the users should reject that burden. I do.
>>
>> I will not answer Gene's message, he obviously missed the whole point of
>> my mail.
>> Nicolas George
>
> And Now Google Doesn't Think Users Should Ever Set Headers.
> Progress is progress.
>
>
> Progress in a society comes when they collectively pursue in common
> something
> that would improve their lives and conditions.  If the few and powerful
> coerce or
> blackmail a society to move a certain direction because that advances the
> interests
> of the few I wouldn't dare call this progress.  Rarely in history did such
> moves lasted
> and stabilized, as for every action there is a reaction.  Just give it some
> time and
> the vast majority of the world will be really happy to see google/fb/ms
> collapse
> and vanish.  That may be progress, being without the pests.
>
> Would you call android and win10 progress?  I hope not.  Vehicles were
> progress
> over horses and carriages in some respects, people walking and one in
> ten thousands being driven in a Rolls Royce where the passengers were
> covered
> and the driver was outside was not progress.  Model A was progress at
> a cost.
>
> Progress is not made by following rulers and those in power, it comes
> from the dialectic of resisting and reacting to power and oligarchy.
>
> Joel Rees
>
>
> (AK)

Yeah.

Progress is progress.

ahem. Sorry. I guess I forgot something.

{irony}Progress is progress.{end-irony}

-- 
Joel Rees

One of these days I'll get someone to pay me
to design a language that combines the best of Forth and C.
Then I'll be able to leap wide instruction sets with a single #ifdef,
run faster than a speeding infinite loop with a #define,
and stop all integer size bugs with a bare cast.

More of my delusions:
http://reiisi.blogspot.com/2017/05/do-not-pay-modern-danegeld-ransomware.html
http://reiisi.blogspot.jp/p/novels-i-am-writing.html

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]

#182026 — Re: Reply-to-all or reply-to-list again

[Multipart message — attachments visible in raw view] — view raw

From: joel.rees@gmail.com

> And Now Google Doesn't Think Users Should Ever Set Headers.
> Progress is progress.

Yeah.
Progress is progress.
ahem. Sorry. I guess I forgot something.

{irony}Progress is progress.{end-irony}
--
Joel Rees

If you live in a cave this may actually have some meaning among your cavemates

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]

#181978 — Re: Reply-to-all or reply-to-list again (was: https_port)

On Friday 09 June 2017 10:47:29 Nicolas George wrote:

> Le primidi 21 prairial, an CCXXV, Charlie Kravetz a écrit :
> > When replying to the mailing list, hit reply. Do not use "Reply to
> > All", since that sends individual emails to the person you are
> > answering.
>
> This recommendation is unsustainable and should be eliminated from the
> guidelines. It only exists because the mailing-list server is not
> configured correctly.
>
> The reply-to-list feature is flawed because it requires the user to
> give special attention each time "am I replying to a personal mail or
> to a mailing-list"? The correct behaviour should be the default,
> always, because that is the only way to minimize mistakes. This is
> what happens with mailing-list servers properly configured.
>
> When replying to a mail, any mail, use reply-to-all, unless you
> actively know you want to reply to an unusual subset of recipients.
> (But heed the reply-to headers, of course.)
>
> If somebody complain, tell them to set up their mail headers, just as
> I did mine.
>
> Regards,

Or use an email agent that does properly support a "reply to mailing 
list" function.  Such as this old kmail still included as part of the 
tde (trinity) desktop.

I do not use the reply-all format unless I am aware the OP is not 
subscribed. Those mailing lists I am subscribed to that do not require 
the poster to be subscribed are also flooded with spam.  And debian-user 
is one such list, and because of that, and my ISP's reject policy, I get 
threats from bendel of being unsubscribed because of bounces. It will 
never happen because when I get the bounce msg from bendel, its obvious 
why mail.shentel.net rejected it.  IMO debian needs to fix that, but its 
been made very clear that they will not go to a subscription required to 
post model.  Ever.  Sigh....  It is what it is.

Cheers, Gene Heskett
-- 
"There are four boxes to be used in defense of liberty:
 soap, ballot, jury, and ammo. Please use in that order."
-Ed Howdershelt (Author)
Genes Web page <http://geneslinuxbox.net:6309/gene>

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]

#181930

On Thursday 08 June 2017 08:20:51 Darac Marjal wrote:

> On Wed, Jun 07, 2017 at 07:00:52PM -0400, Gene Heskett wrote:
> >On Wednesday 07 June 2017 10:54:26 Darac Marjal wrote:
> >> On Wed, Jun 07, 2017 at 10:35:23AM -0400, Gene Heskett wrote:
> >> >On Wednesday 07 June 2017 08:56:59 ray wrote:
> >> >> I would like to know the correct syntax for entering a server
> >> >> entry for stretch.
> >> >>
> >> >> All the documentation I find says to list the ntp servers in the
> >> >> file as: server 0.XX.pool.ntp.org
> >> >> server 1.XX.pool.ntp.org
> >> >>
> >> >> An example source from 2017 is https://wiki.debian.org/DateTime
> >> >>
> >> >> When I open /etc/ntp.conf on my new stretch installation, I find
> >> >> this format: pool 0.debian.pool.ntp.org iburst
> >> >> pool 1.debian.pool.ntp.org iburst
> >> >>
> >> >> The latest Debian doc says to start the line with 'server'.
> >> >> The latest Debian implementation starts the line with 'pool'.
> >> >>
> >> >> Are these interchangeable?
> >>
> >> As I understand it "server" will do name resolution once and pick
> >> an IP from the result. "pool" will periodically refresh the name
> >> and cycle to a different member of the pool.
> >>
> >> >> Additionally, there is a parameter 'iburst' which I did not find
> >> >> in the Debian docs but found at
> >> >> http://doc.ntp.org/4.1.1/confopt.htm
> >>
> >> Did you install ntp-doc? Did you check there?
> >
> >I haven't gotten around to checking that, its on a raspberry pi3b,
> > which has a fan on its heat sinks, but isn't terribly stable, I've
> > locked it up tight at least a dozen times so far today with my
> > horsing around.
> >
> >But I did appear to get ntp to do its job, by adding "server " in
> > front of the fqdn's in /etc/ntp.conf.
> >
> >[...]
> >
> >Now, if I could just make it use the routers broadcasts. Or could at
> >least prove it is broadcasting. Yes it is, I caught a broadcast at
> >xx.xx.xx.255:
>
> Apparently, the word "broadcastclient" in ntp.conf is what you want:
>
>   broadcastclient
> 	Enable reception of broadcast server messages to any local interface
> 	(type	b address). Ordinarily, upon receiving a broadcast message
> 	for the first time, the broadcast client measures the nominal server
> 	propagation delay using a brief client/server exchange, after which
> 	it continues in listen-only mode. If a nonzero value is specified in
> 	the broadcastdelay command, the value becomes the delay and the
> 	volley is not executed. Note: the novolley option has been
> 	deprecated for future enhancements. Note that, in order to avoid
> 	accidental or malicious disruption in this mode, both the server and
> 	client should operate using symmetric key or public key
> 	authentication as described in the Authentication Options page. Note
> 	that the volley is required with public key authentication in order
> 	to run the Autokey protocol.
>
> This information IS in the ntp.conf manpage, and fairly apparent if
> searching that for the work "broadcast".
>
> >14:16:14.760909 IP coyote.coyote.den.ntp > xx.xx.xx.255.ntp: NTPv4,
> >Broadcast, length 48
> >
> >So it is broadcasting. Now the trick is to make the rest of my
> > machines use it.  Hints & examnples welcomed.
> >
> >And I did install ntp-doc just now. A wee bit more verbose, but still
> > no examples.
> >
Ok, on my test machine I have reinstalled ntp, and edited its .conf file, 
commenting out the server pool, and enabled the noauth and 
broadcastclient options at the bottom of that file.  So we will see in 
due time if its actually using it.  That particular machine has a quite 
low drift clock.

I must say that I am impressed with timedatectl, a systemd clock manager, 
but its not available to a wheezy install.

Thank you.

Cheers, Gene Heskett
-- 
"There are four boxes to be used in defense of liberty:
 soap, ballot, jury, and ammo. Please use in that order."
-Ed Howdershelt (Author)
Genes Web page <http://geneslinuxbox.net:6309/gene>

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]

#181893

Remove Ntp and install Chrony.
-- 
John Hasler 
jhasler@newsguy.com
Elmwood, WI USA

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]

#181894

On Wed 07 Jun 2017 at 10:30:54 -0500, John Hasler wrote:

> Remove Ntp and install Chrony.

Too easy. There would be nothing to rant about. :)

https://chrony.tuxfamily.org/comparison.html

-- 
Brian.

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]

#182079

On Wed 07 Jun 2017 at 17:26:30 (+0100), Brian wrote:
> On Wed 07 Jun 2017 at 10:30:54 -0500, John Hasler wrote:
> 
> > Remove Ntp and install Chrony.
> 
> Too easy. There would be nothing to rant about. :)
> 
> https://chrony.tuxfamily.org/comparison.html

I read this and did exactly that:

Start-Date: 2017-06-07  12:58:22
Install: […], chrony:i386 (1.30-2+deb8u2), […]

I looked at, but didn't change, the configuration file.

Two days later, the laptop¹ was still running about five seconds
slow, so:

Start-Date: 2017-06-09  17:39:56
Purge: […], chrony:i386 (1.30-2+deb8u2), […]

Start-Date: 2017-06-09  17:43:19
Install: […], ntp:i386 (4.2.6.p5+dfsg-7+deb8u2)

I looked at, but didn't change, the configuration file.

By the time I had brought up two swissclocks (from my server
and other laptop) all three second hands were marching in step
(and within one second of the radio wall clock).

¹ had been "running free".

Cheers,
David.

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]

#182082

On Sun 11 Jun 2017 at 10:57:51 -0500, David Wright wrote:

> On Wed 07 Jun 2017 at 17:26:30 (+0100), Brian wrote:
> > On Wed 07 Jun 2017 at 10:30:54 -0500, John Hasler wrote:
> > 
> > > Remove Ntp and install Chrony.
> > 
> > Too easy. There would be nothing to rant about. :)
> > 
> > https://chrony.tuxfamily.org/comparison.html
> 
> I read this and did exactly that:

It's good to see someone testing things.
 
> Start-Date: 2017-06-07  12:58:22
> Install: […], chrony:i386 (1.30-2+deb8u2), […]
> 
> I looked at, but didn't change, the configuration file.

Three machines running chrony here. One (which is always on) has an
original chrony.conf and the only change to the other one (a laptop
which is suspended overnight) is to use my ISP's time servers. The
third one has just been booted after not being used for fourteen
days; it uses a single one of my ISP's time servers.
 
> Two days later, the laptop¹ was still running about five seconds
> slow, so:
> 
> Start-Date: 2017-06-09  17:39:56
> Purge: […], chrony:i386 (1.30-2+deb8u2), […]
> 
> Start-Date: 2017-06-09  17:43:19
> Install: […], ntp:i386 (4.2.6.p5+dfsg-7+deb8u2)
> 
> I looked at, but didn't change, the configuration file.
> 
> By the time I had brought up two swissclocks (from my server
> and other laptop) all three second hands were marching in step
> (and within one second of the radio wall clock).
> 
> ¹ had been "running free".

Machines number 1 and 2 are in step with my radio clock. Machine
number 3 came up three seconds slow. Within 6 minutes it agreed
with the other machines. I cannot account for this because I've
never had cause to examine chrony's configuration or internal
workings. Perhaps it has to do with frequency of polling? At the
moment my motivation to find out why is not high.

All my other machines use systemd-timesyncd on the basis it is
already available on them. The first three have used chrony for
nearly ten years without a discernable problem.

-- 
Brian.

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]

#181909

[Multipart message — attachments visible in raw view] — view raw

John Hasler [2017-06-07 10:30:54-05] wrote:

> Remove Ntp and install Chrony.

Or remove both of those and run:

    sudo timedatectl set-ntp true

And that's about it.

-- 
/// Teemu Likonen   - .-..   <https://keybase.io/tlikonen> //
// PGP: 4E10 55DC 84E9 DFF6 13D7 8557 719D 69D3 2453 9450 ///

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]

#181910

On 2017-06-08, Teemu Likonen <tlikonen@iki.fi> wrote:
>
> John Hasler [2017-06-07 10:30:54-05] wrote:
>
>> Remove Ntp and install Chrony.
>
> Or remove both of those and run:
>
>     sudo timedatectl set-ntp true
>
> And that's about it.
>

I forgot about the built-in systemd-timesyncd.

Only functions as a client, though. And the OP's still on Wheezy, I
believe. But aside from that, good suggestion. 

https://wiki.archlinux.org/index.php/Systemd-timesyncd

-- 
"It might be a vision--of a shell, of a wheelbarrow, of a fairy kingdom on the
far side of the hedge; or it might be the glory of speed; no one knew." --Mrs.
Ramsay, speculating on why her little daughter might be dashing about, in "To
the Lighthouse," by Virginia Woolf.

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]

Page 2 of 3 — ← Prev page 1 [2] 3  Next page →

Back to top | Article view | linux.debian.user

csiph-web