Re: [cobalt-users] anonymous ftp on raq 4I

[Jeff Lasman <jblists@xxxxxxxxxxxxx>]

Paul Jacobs wrote:

> No, but someone in the big bad unix/linux world (Free open source for all)
> should be able to.

Paul, you totally misunderstand Open Source.  And Free.  It really
doesn't mean Free as in Beer.

What it means is you're free to make your own changes, or pay someone
else to do it for you.

And just so you know, if you did write (or have someone write for you) a
completely new FTP, that would allow anonymous shared FTP, it wouldn't
work with any of today's clients.  So you've got the choice of either
telling your clients that you can give them anonymous ftp but everyone
who wants to use it will have to go out and buy or write their own
client for their own computer, or you can spring for hosting with a
company that doesn't limit IP#s.

Yes, they do exist.  We do NOT limit IP#s.  We do require justification,
but anonymous FTP is a perfectly good justification, as as SSL.

However, we don't allow warez or "adult" sites.  We've got our own
reasons, but what it boils down to is we don't need to have any
authorities knocking on our doors.

And please consider what I'm about to say very carefully...

I've been in the hosting business since late 1994; had one of the first
hosting companies, back in the days when you could only have one IP# per
machine and one URL per IP#.  Used Linux kernel v.0.99 (the first real
Slackware distribution on CD-ROM).  Since then the number of requests
I've had for ftp could fit on both hands.  And all except three (as I
recall; it's been a few years) were for people who wanted to post warez.

No, I'm not accusing you or your customers, just pointing out my own
experience.

And one more thing... every Windows security "expert" that exists will
tell you that Windows anonymous ftp is totally insecure and the only way
to even begin to approach Windows Internet security is to turn off ftp
completely.  (Which we don't have to do on our Windows box; we've
learned the hard way how to protect it).

So where are those figures showing speed differences between 250 sites
running on one IP and 250 sites running on 250 IP#s, on RaQs, and on
comparably equipped Windows boxes?

Jeff
-- 
Jeff Lasman <jblists@xxxxxxxxxxxxx>
Linux and Cobalt/Sun/RaQ Consulting
nobaloney.net
P. O. Box 52672, Riverside, CA  92517
voice: (909) 778-9980  *  fax: (702) 548-9484