20 Network Changing Products 178
An anonymous reader wrote to mention a Network World piece about products that have changed networking over the last twenty years. From the article: "SendMail 1998 - Sendmail was key to the e-mail revolution because it was how everyone got up and running with e-mail communications over the Internet. Eric Allman wrote the original version of this open source mail-transfer agent while he was at the University of California at Berkeley in 1979. He stopped development on it in 1982, however, and didn't revisit it until 1990. In 1998 he founded SendMail to sell the software's first commercial version, the SendMail switch."
Ugh (Score:5, Insightful)
And Sendmail also happens to be one of the absolute worst widely-deployed programs in the history computer software. Man, I despite that program. How could anyone have thought that configuration file format was a good idea? You know it's bad when you have to have a preprocessor to translate something (semi-)tolerable into its syntax.
The e-mail revolution succeeded DESPITE sendmail, not because of it, though I give it some small credit for flexibility. It was just barely adequate enough to keep people from writing a replacement (thought we have some now).
No point to this post, except to voice how much I despise sendmail. :)
Re:Ugh (Score:5, Insightful)
-matthew
Re:Ugh (Score:4, Insightful)
Re:Ugh (Score:5, Informative)
The
As another poster pointed out, Sendmail is more than just a SMTP daemon.
Re:Ugh (Score:3, Insightful)
No, sendmail's complexity/flexibility made sense because there were oodles of very different mail protocols. Now, almost everything can be sent from point A to B via SMTP, but back then there were lots of different options, and the options were needed to make it all work. (Granted, the options are still available now, but few people use them anymore.)
And really, it's not that bad once you get used to it.
And besides, i
Re:Ugh (Score:5, Insightful)
There are many different protocols that it supported which are simply not used now. Sure, you can write a SMTP server in fewer lines of code, but I doubt you'd be able to write something that could handle all of the crazy protocols in use at the time (and was flexible enough to be modified for protocols not invented yet).
Yes and no. (Score:3, Interesting)
(Indeed, all of the original Unix tools are written as pipelined utilities. If Sendmail had been written in this manner, you woul
Re:Yes and no. (Score:5, Insightful)
This is a fallacy, and one that Linus himself debunks in his auto-biography.
A monolithic program may look more complex and harder to maintain and secure (and I'll admit, I hate sendmail), having a HUNDRED binaries as part of this program would add an order of magnitude of complexity that is entirely unnecesary.
Think: While it is true that a singular, small program which does one task is simpler than a monolithic giant, the program (as a whole, encompassing all the small parts) will still need to do all the same stuff a monolithic program has to do, except now it has to deal with message passing between small binary executables, queueing or drop files, and a number of other issues where security is a concern.
It's not as simple as taking parts out of the whole design and implementing them independantly; adding "parts" to the "whole" creates issues which do not exist in the monolithic.
qmail is able to do this fairly well, but it only has about 4 or 5 executables, IIRC, and it is compiled very carefully against bernsteins' special stdio and other library files that he's hardened.
See also: Linux Kernel vs. Hurd or Minix.
~Will
Re:Yes and no. (Score:2)
Message passing and repeated input validation imposes a performance penalty. However, with well defined interfaces, the interdependencies are highly reduced, and maintainance becomes simple.
A large monolithic program leads to complex interdependencies in the code and maintainance becomes difficult.
Security is easy to do, if you design it in right from the beginning (see Postfix, which doesn't even have a custom libc, but is simpler to run than qmail and gives better performance).
Oh, you poor old old-timers. (Score:5, Interesting)
Seriously, anyone who calls themselves an Old-Timer in a field that is barely over 60 years old, is either a former co-worker of Turing or Von Neumann - the only generation with any business adding the word "old" - or they don't have enough understanding of the field to qualify.
Operating Systems in general are relatively new things. MULTICS is "historic", but only in the sense that it isn't in use. It has many ideas I consider valuable today, and I wish it was easier to get hold of MULTICS code, but it is far from ancient.
The odds are fairly high, though, that most "old-timers" on Slashdot are from the Unix or even the CP/M generation. Some might even call themselves "old-timers" when they only really started with DOS 3.1 or even something as modern as Windows 3.0!
I predate CP/M - not by much - but that doesn't matter because I don't claim to be an Old-Timer. Experienced, sure. Aware, certainly. Old-timer? No. I can tell you what I saw - from the control center at Jodrel Bank's Lovell Telescope to Imperial Computer's minis at Daresbury, from dusty Forth manuals to robotics and micromice - the word was Small. Small was good. Small was in. Small made Smartware one of the best damn integrated packages of that era in computing - and it outperformed many later generation systems. Small made Acornsoft's "Elite" the hottest game ever published by any title, as a percentage of the userbase it sold to.
Not sure if PETSpeed was small & unit-based. Wouldn't surprise me. You couldn't fit much even in a 32K machine, so modules would be logical.
As for Linus -- we're talking about Torvalds, right? The one who produced Linux, probably the most modular (and therefore smallest) OS ever released on this planet? The one who gave up on monolithic maintenance because he couldn't scale, so modularized even the maintenance process? You'd use him as an illustration for monolithic design, given that he hasn't used that in Linux in God-lost-count number of years?
Re:Oh, you poor old old-timers. (Score:3, Insightful)
My dad used to scope single bits from radio tubes, working for IBM. My mom used to punch up punchcards. I think that qualifies as old-timer. Though if you use the term old-timer to mean "someone with experience", I'm going to laugh.
Re:Oh, you poor old old-timers. (Score:2)
Re:Ugh (Score:5, Funny)
I love sendmail. It's the reason I became an application engineer instead of a sysadmin.
Re:Ugh (Score:3, Insightful)
I've messed with over 100 email packages in my life and I still use sendmail. Its sill flexible, and you can still add stuff to it for experiments and they still fix bugs no matter how obscure and unlikely they are. Like the recent one which effects nearly every unix bit of code
Re:Ugh (Score:3, Insightful)
- Huge, bloated software.
- Hard to configure.
- Hard to maintain.
- Has a history of enabling spam and virus propagation (due to users inability to set it up properly).
- Yet it dominates the market despite all other alternatives.
Obviously if you're discussing Windows it's BAD!. If it's sendmail, well, it's GOOD!.
Even more funny is that I do it too.
Re:Ugh (Score:3, Informative)
I've found sendmail to be as spam-resistant as any of the other MTAs out there at the same time.
At one point, every mail server was an open relay, because that's just the way things were done, and few people abused it and it was nice. Then the spammers came and ruined that. Sendmail changed to default to `don't relay' approximately as fast as everybody else. From time to time spammers have found
Re:Ugh (Score:2)
Re:Ugh (Score:2)
Re:Ugh (Score:2)
Solaris [sun.com]
HP-UX [hp.com]
RedHat [redhat.com]
Suse [novell.com]
Slackware [slackware.com]
Re:Ugh (Score:4, Informative)
The top 10 Linux distros, according to DistroWatch.com, and their default mail servers are:
So the score is eight non-sendmail to two sendmail. Three if you count Fedora and Red Hat separately, which seems reasonable since Ubuntu, Debian, Knoppix and MEPIS are counted separately (Red Hat doesn't show up in the distrowatch top ten list, which seems strange). A better way to look at it, of course, is by market share, but decent market share figures are nearly impossible to obtain.
It appears to me that however you count it, the GP is right in saying that most Linux distributions/installations do not use sendmail by default. They all have a /usr/bin/sendmail utility, of course, but that doesn't mean they use the sendmail package.
Of the major Unixes, it appears that Solaris, HP-UX, IRIX, and the BSDs use sendmail, but AIX and OS X Server use Postfix, so sendmail appears to be the winner there.
I'll give them the rest of it, but Skype!? (Score:5, Informative)
Skype
2003
This proprietary peer-to-peer telephony application provided the first real quality VoIP product (did we mention it's free here?) that has built a cult following and spurred industry questions about why corporations can't move to convergence more quickly. Skype picked up both business clout and deep pockets when eBay bought the company in the fall of 2005
Hello? Asterisk anybody?
Open source? Check
Open standards? Check ( note: skype is not open in this regard )
Quality product? Check check check
Huge business impact? Check
Not to mention asterisk isn't burdened with weird restrictions fueled by marketing concerns. Digium is the company behind it, and they do make hardware that works with it, but it's hardly locked down to *that* specific hardware.
AIM messenger! (Score:5, Insightful)
These non-anonymous chat services changed the way we relate to people on the web, replacing the untrusty anonymous IRC. It gave the ability to chat to every joe user.
Re:AIM messenger! (Score:2)
As you were saying... ?
Re:AIM messenger! (Score:2)
As you were saying... ?
Fails on Efnet, Undernet. On IRCnet --
I don't think that's what you were referring to ...
Dalnet won't let me in, it's like all the servers are down or something, so I can't check that ...
Perhaps this is part of why IRC isn't the killer application -- AIM, Yahoo, MSN etc. are. IRC was great when I discovered it in 1990 or so, but people now want instant gratification, and IRC isn't that.
Re:AIM messenger! (Score:2)
I think he meant that AIM screen names are typically exchanged by friends prior to conversing, and one can be fairly sure that a given screen name is attached to the same person each conversation. Not that this is impossible with IRC, just less convenient.
Re:I'll give them the rest of it, but Skype!? (Score:3)
Re:I'll give them the rest of it, but Skype!? (Score:4, Insightful)
Re:I'll give them the rest of it, but Skype!? (Score:3, Informative)
because you have accesse to the source and can chabge what ever you want if you have the abilitity.... Duh
Re:I'll give them the rest of it, but Skype!? (Score:2)
Re:I'll give them the rest of it, but Skype!? (Score:2)
Any capable programmer. Not some business rep. No NDA's to sign.
Re:I'll give them the rest of it, but Skype!? (Score:2)
Re:I'll give them the rest of it, but Skype!? (Score:3, Insightful)
why is open source high on your list of what makes something good?
Though commercially funded astroturfers like to lie about this, the type of license is a very important part of the featureset of a program. To pretend otherwise is naive.
Some people regard this feature as important, others less so.
open or closed, a product can still be better than something else...
You need to improve your reading comprehension skills. Just because the license is an important feature of a program doesn't make it t
Re:I'll give them the rest of it, but Skype!? (Score:2)
Some reasons why people like open source (aka Free Software):
- Lack of vendor lock-in
- Enhanced customisability
- Enhanced scalability
- Reduced licensing costs
Re:I'll give them the rest of it, but Skype!? (Score:2)
Open standards? Check ( note: skype is not open in this regard )
Quality product? Check check check
Huge business impact? Check
Market penetration? Ease of use?
Skype is VOIP that any Joe can install for free, and has widespread useage.
Asterisk, on the other hand, is a royal headache to install, configure and maintain. The VoIP phones I've seen that are supposed to work with it are generally pretty clunky and not very resilient. And unless something has changed since I last looked at it, the
Re:I'll give them the rest of it, but Skype!? (Score:2)
2. No GUI by default? Are you saying that traditional PBX systems DO?
3. Ease of use: It's easier to parse a couple of
4. Who can maintain it? Anyone who can RTFM, read English, and navigate vi, pico, or nano -- or a web browser if AMP is installed
5. re: The consequences of this are that that no two Asterisk installations will likely
Re:I'll give them the rest of it, but Skype!? (Score:2)
Sorry if you don't like these facts, though... do you work for Digium by any chance?
No, I'm a voip contractor ( among other things ). I have an install base of about 20 businesses. Figure about 50 or so people at each business, so I'm responsible for about 1000 people using VoIP with *. And I'm relatively new to this.
I agree that skype has made more headlines. But for serious work, those that know use *.
Microsoft Windows 2000 Server?!?!?!?! (Score:5, Insightful)
Re:Microsoft Windows 2000 Server?!?!?!?! (Score:3, Funny)
Re:Microsoft Windows 2000 Server?!?!?!?! (Score:2)
-matthew
Re:Microsoft Windows 2000 Server?!?!?!?! (Score:2)
Re:Microsoft Windows 2000 Server?!?!?!?! (Score:3, Insightful)
Out of your list, only Solaris really deserves to be there as far as world changing OS's and even then saying genuine, generic Unix would be more correct. FreeBSD does not have a huge earth shattering install base, and Linux only began to see large scale adoption when it became good enough to replace existing Unix deployments. That was because it was free.
Re:Microsoft Windows 2000 Server?!?!?!?! (Score:2, Insightful)
Of course you mean NetWare, right?
NCSA httpd? (Score:5, Insightful)
Re:NCSA httpd? (Score:2)
Re:NCSA httpd? (Score:2)
Re:NCSA httpd? (Score:2)
Re:NCSA httpd? (Score:2)
Hence the name, of course - Apache is "a patchy" webserver, as it started off life as a bunch of patches to NCSA httpd.
Re:NCSA httpd? (Score:2)
Well according to the Apache group this isn't actually true, although I believe it is - I just think they're trying to get away from the original meaning of the name.
In relation to the parent post, if I remember correctly they started creating Apache as NCSA had stopped being developed.
Re:NCSA httpd? (Score:2)
However, they certainly used to say "a patchy" was where the name came from - and I believe that the new reason (respect for american indians) is a cover up =P
missing options (Score:4, Funny)
2) facebook
3) friendster
4) hi5
these greatly improved my network ;)
Re:missing options (Score:2, Funny)
-matthew
Re:missing options (Score:2)
SQL server 7.0 (Score:3, Funny)
5 network-screwing products (Score:5, Insightful)
- Adware. Ah.... the Gator download manager (TM). Didn't you love this thing? It was free! Only it began displaying some ads in your computer. What could possibly go wrong?
- SPAM. Funny, the other day i began receiving mails about mortgage rates. Idiots, I'm too young for that. I'll ignore it, they're 1 in a 100.
- Popups. OK, this is getting annoying. I'll have to block images from these free websites like XOOM, Geocities, Angelfire and so on.
- Web viruses. The other day something weird went on. I went to a porn website, and the next day my PC began opening popups. WTF?
- Email viruses. Ack! All I did was open my mail on Outlook express!
It's funny. We take these things for granted, but I remember the days when they didn't exist AT ALL. It was a wonderful era. Also worthy of notice is that all of them (except popups) were possible thanks to Microsoft Windows(TM).
Re:5 network-screwing products (Score:2)
Eh hem, it's
Microsoft® Windows®
You don't want Steve Ballmer to throw a chair at you, do you? :)
See MS Trademarks [microsoft.com]
Re:5 network-screwing products (Score:3, Funny)
Re:5 network-screwing products (Score:2)
It's funny. We take these things for granted, but I remember the days when they didn't exist AT ALL.
Ah, yeah, those days... I remember when I did tech support/installations. "Good Times" email "virus" was pretty popular back then, and I used to tell my customers, "Don't worry, ignore that message. There's no way you can get a virus via email unless you open the attachement. Simply reading your mail is perfectly safe".
This was in the day
synoptics? (Score:2)
Re:synoptics? (Score:2, Informative)
tom
Re:synoptics? (Score:2)
Re:synoptics? (Score:2)
visual traceroute (Score:2)
w2k server? (Score:2, Informative)
Re:w2k server? (Score:5, Informative)
-matthew
ugh, fluff (Score:3)
Re:ugh, fluff (Score:2, Insightful)
Do you even *read* the news?
Skype was a pioneer of what will probably become a major unique networking scenario in the next few years. All of the major network software companies are jumping on the bandwagon, and I'm sure it's going to be a scenario that drives a lot of changes.
Re:ugh, fluff (Score:3, Funny)
We had dozens of VoIP programs a long time before Skype; what made them unpopular were troubles caused by ISPs. The end-of-life announcement of SpeakFreely [fourmilab.ch] is a good read.
Basically, the #1 reason why IPv6 is not widely deployed yet is that it makes VoIP and peer-to-peer work flawlessly, something that goes against the concept of tiered internet. Those "major
Re:ugh, fluff (Score:2)
Cue the black helicopters...
Show Sendmail Some Respect (Score:5, Insightful)
Muhammad Ali's ass. Of course, Mike Tyson is also
nearly 20 years younger. So, who is the better boxer?
For as much email has been run through sendmail in
the last couple decades, I'm always disappointed at how
little respect it receives.
I built my first mail server in 1993 using sendmail.
It brought internet email to my company over a serial
uucp link. By 1996, sendmail was moving nearly 87,000
internet messages a day for our company (not bad for a
486DX4-100 with a whopping 32M RAM (64M?)).
Saying the latest mail software (qmail, postfix, etc.)
is better than something written in 1972 - 27 years ago -
isn't saying much. (Well, maybe: Duh!)
Heck, 27 computing years is like 350 human years.
So, before you complain about security holes (one
in the last two years?) or complexity (like any other
programming language, practice makes perfect), why don't
you tell me which mail transport software you used in
1975, 1985 or 1995. Then, follow that up with which
transports you expect to see a lot of in 2010 and 2020.
Matt
Give respect where it is due (Score:3, Funny)
Many elements of *nix systems remained surprisingly unchanged in the last 25 years: /etc/passwd, init scripts, bourne shell, inetd, .... These are inspired for their utility, simplicity, and cleanliness. They endure. You cannot put Sendmail into this group. Why? The input format may be the worst way to configure a program yet devised. It is closely followed in wretchedness by lpd and /etc/printcap. You should not try to obscure these important facts with lame relativism. I am giddy that I don't have to look
Re:Show Sendmail Some Respect (Score:2)
Re:Show Sendmail Some Respect (Score:2)
Typical article about technology from a journalist (Score:5, Informative)
1) Apache was NOT the first free web server. Both CERN httpd and NCSA's httpd predate it, and both were free.
2) Netscape and Spyglass's version of Mosaic were the first commercial WEB BROWSERS. The article states that both were the first commercial GUI's. Last time I checked the first commercial GUI was to be found on the Xerox Star circa 1981. Terminology matters, when you do not use a term correctly you create confusion and/or make yourself look like an arse.
The problem with these sorts of articles, and the magazines in which they appear, is that they're being written by journalists. I can't tell you the number of times over the years that I've had the misfortune of reading something computer related in a magazine or newspaper and discovered multiple serious factual errors. I've come to accept this from periodicals that don't normally deal with computers or technology, but I'm pretty much fed up with finding errors in PC magazine on a regular ongoing basis.
Who are the people who write these articles? There are some people who are interested in computers but aren't quite there yet in terms of their understanding. Many are not blessed with "the knack" (http://home.pcisys.net/~tbc/sounds/dilknack.wav [pcisys.net]) Others are so blessed, but are still neophytes. Either way they're very good at creating and passing on erroneous information about computers and technology.
Lee
Re:Typical article about technology from a journal (Score:2)
Apache was NOT the first free web server. Both CERN httpd and NCSA's httpd predate it, and both were free.
Well, Apache started off as a set of patches for NSCA httpd afer Rob McCool (still the best name in Computer Science) left, so it could be seen as the continuation of NCSA httpd, so, more of a name change than a new product.
Remote Access (Score:5, Funny)
Sendmail has provided the essential r00t access for hax0rz to improve their skills in the past. Before Linux was cheap and available, one had to go out, and like a predator, acquire one's operating system privs. Sendmail was teh great enabler. Though I have moved on to better and brighter things, I thank Alman, and Vixie, for their great success in bringing r00t to the large number of adolescents everywhere.
Wireless? (Score:2)
I'd say that the two most profound things to happen to networking, aside from it's mere existence, are p2p and wireless. All the other things are just what's necessary in order to have a network (to a greater or lesser degree), but p2p and wireless have fundamentally changed what networking is, not just how we do it.
Re:Wireless? (Score:2)
I don't think these are in any particular order, otherwise I'd think webservers and browsers would have rated a tad higher.
Re:Wireless? (Score:2)
I thought it was time sorted, so having flicked through the whole lot (and missed that one) I went backwards but when I hit win95 I stopped.
d'oh.
Re:Wireless? (Score:2)
Re:Wireless? (Score:2)
Citrix? (Score:2, Insightful)
NCSA Mosaic (Score:4)
Netscape was just an improved NCSA Mosaic, albiet a hugely popular one. Smoother, faster, but network changing? I think not. Spyglass was an early ancestor of IE and, I think, AOL's browser but as itself it changed nothing.
Sendmail blocking in NZ (Score:2)
http://www.geekzone.co.nz/blog.asp?blogid=22&posti d=204 [geekzone.co.nz]
'Course, a fair chunk of Xtra is owned by Microsoft, but that's got nothing to do with it right?
It makes people's mail easier to intercept too, if you only have to get it from centralised mail servers.
It might stop some spam, but then so would chopping the cables.
Vik
That's why you use TLS and SMTP AUTH (Score:3, Interesting)
I have no sympathy for anyone who whines about port 25 being blocked. Judging from the number of zombied PCs trying to send spam to me, I would say that port 25 should be blocked by default at consumer ISPs.
Re:That's why you use TLS and SMTP AUTH (Score:2)
Important things though not products per se (Score:2)
AOL (Score:2)
http://www.ojr.org/ojr/stories/060112grubisich/ [ojr.org]
Does anyone also remember what it took for that AOL icon to appear on your fresh Windows install?
Other than that, I question Skype changing the network world.
I was/still am redirecting/receiving local voice/radio/etc over tcp/ip since 1
Nostalgia (Score:3, Insightful)
Today, I have a 5mbit download cable modem and just finished a work order to have a dedicated, full T1 put into my house for my new company.
Amazing how times have changed. What hasn't changed is how cool it all still is.
Re:Nostalgia (Score:2)
My first modem was a Prometheus 1200 in 1983. I've had a T1 in my home for over 5 years. Can't wait to get rid of it and stop paying those bills.
BSD TCP/IP stack (Score:2)
What about the smail MTA? (Score:2)
Windows 95??? Mac OS 7!!!! (Score:3, Insightful)
I am not trying to be a Mac fanboy here but, it took untill at least windows 98 and argueably XP for ease of use consumer networking on windows.
Re:Windows 95??? Mac OS 7!!!! (Score:2, Insightful)
took untill XP for windows not to need to be restarted to change tcp/ip settings
Untrue, Windows 2000 did it too.
Re:Windows 95??? Mac OS 7!!!! (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
Lists are subjective at best, but.... (Score:2)
BBS
Encrypted communications in general
Fibre
DNS
just off the top of my head....
DNS (Score:2)
If this weren't
Re:Does the auther even know what their talking ab (Score:3, Informative)
At the time Linux was started, the BSD code base was still tied up in the AT&T lawsuit. Some parts had to be removed from distribution, leaving an incomplete system. The various BSD based projects had to rewrite some bits to fill in the removed stuff to get a
Re:Does the auther even know what their talking ab (Score:2)
6 files. 4.4BSD lite was 4.4BSD with 6 files taken out. This is not exactly a huge deal. The reason noone wanted to touch BSD at the time was not technical, but that they didn't know how the lawsuit would come out.
Re:wifi, It depends what you mean by (Score:2)
Specifically, I never saw wifi stuff untill '98 when I started seeing a bunch of Proxim stuff. (I think Intel bought them.) Never saw much of the Lucent stuff, but be aware, the Orinoco WiFi cards are VERY popular for war-driving. (Not many laptop cards had external antenna connectors.)
One could argue that Cisco (also on the list) is the big wifi manufacture