Follow Slashdot blog updates by subscribing to our blog RSS feed


Forgot your password?
DEAL: For $25 - Add A Second Phone Number To Your Smartphone for life! Use promo code SLASHDOT25. Also, Slashdot's Facebook page has a chat bot now. Message it for stories and more. Check out the new SourceForge HTML5 Internet speed test! ×

Comment Re:"Switch over to IPv6" is very misleading (Score 1) 246

Docsis 2. Comcast sent me a letter in the mail about upgrading my modem to a Docsis 3 modem. MetroNet just installed fiber in my neighborhood and they're advertising cheaper rates than Comcast for TV and Internet with faster speeds. The last conversation I had with them ended with them stating IPv6 would be available soon. I needed was a dual-stack router (ta'da, exactly what I've got) so that I could use either their IPv4 or IPv6 service. Plus, there's no modem rental with MetroNet. They said they run fiber from the street to your house and provide you with a media converter, all one needs is a router.

Comment Re:"Switch over to IPv6" is very misleading (Score 1) 246

I must be the small percentage that has had not such a great experience when investigating possibility of using IPv6. I've always run into hesitation with service providers and customers. As for me personally, I too own a dual-stack router (RVS4000) but Comcast is trying to nickel and dime me on switching to IPv6. They want me to buy a new cable modem (because I refuse to pay the "rental fee") and they consistently tell me that my router isn't supported; which is complete malarkey.

Comment I suspect it'll take a while. (Score 2) 246

IPv4 is the backbone of nearly all networked systems and applications; to expect EVERYONE to switch over to IPv6 immediately is a bit naive. It's not just the service providers (Quest, Lightbound, AT&T, Verizon, etc) that have to update their WHOLE infrastructure, but applications and operating systems have to natively support IPv6. Many home users cannot afford to upgrade their hardware and software on a whim and won't have a budget to do so for a few more years (mostly due to slow economy and unemployed consumers). I suspect it will take five to 10 years before we start seeing IPv6 make its way into mainstream services. I have a VM with Rackspace and it has a public IPv6 address, but the only service that I've found useful (or even readily available) are the primary Debian mirrors. Having worked as an IT Consultant for small businesses, a SysAdmin in the ISP vector (gaining insight from a vendor aspect) and now as a SysAdmin for a software company (consumer aspect), I have first hand experience at witnessing the readiness from two different ends of the spectrum. The insight I've gained tells me that NO ONE is ready to simply flip a switch; it's going to be a painful, multi-year migration.

Comment It seems fair to me, so long as ... (Score 1) 379

I think this is a fair idea proposed by Microsoft. The only caveat I would look for is since Microsoft is mandating the game be sold at market price and that the publisher receive a cut, that it's a good deal so long as the [new] end user receives any bonus content that was included when it was originally released. For example, I purchased a new copy of Arkham City about six months after it was released. It came with bonus content of a Nightwing and Catwoman playable character. If I resold this game to (for example) Gamestop, I think it's only fair that since I'm no longer the owner of the license that the new owner receive the same bonus content that I did.

If this is not the case then I would not recommend buying a used game. Then again, if Microsoft is imposing that the retailer resell the used game at market price, you might as well just buy the game from a first-sale retailer. I personally have only ever purchased new games for this reason, so whether or not Microsoft and the publishers include this with used games is a moot point for me. However, given my previous statement, I still care about my fellow gamers and their access to game content. I hope Microsoft and the game publishers have taken this into consideration.

Submission + - Quadcopter Drone Network Transports Supplies For Disaster Relief (

kkleiner writes: A startup called Matternet is building a network of quadcopter drones to deliver vital goods to remote areas and emergency supplies to disaster-stricken areas. The installation of solar-powered fueling station and an operating system to allow for communications with local aviation authorities will allow the network to be available around the clock and in the farthest reaches of the world.

Comment Re: It isn't cheap, nor is it easy. (Score 1) 56

I still think you have private and public clouds confused. A private cloud would be a single physical server on-premises, or uplinked to the clients office from a datacenter via MPLS circuit, that is managed by a single client like XenCenter (XenServer), vSphere (VMware) or System Center (HyperV). This allows one to spin up multiple VMs that would logically sit on their internal network and be perfect for low-latency, internal applications.

A public cloud offering is where you have a scaleable cluster of compute nodes connected to a massive backend storage system (like a NetApp- or HP-iSCSI SAN) and is managed by a management server running OpenStack, CloudStack, OpenNebula or whatnot. This then allows any user to simply login and create a VM with no guarantee of low-latency connectivity or functionality of use for internal applications, which is what you get with big-cloud providers. I certainly would not recommend using Linode, Rackspace, etc. for an internal server due to security concerns. A public cloud offering is what my original post was referring to and I apologize if I confused you. In your situation, depending on how many clients you have, I would heed warning as to whether or not you want to go the route of an Enterprise-level cloud service provider; but I do wish you the best of luck. It isn't cheap, and it isn't easy. :P

Comment Re: It isn't cheap, nor is it easy. (Score 1) 56

You have private clouds confused with public cloud offerings. You are thinking about a private cloud, not an IaaS public cloud. If you have the funds and resources, then by all means, build yourself a private cloud using VMware, XenServer or KVM. A public cloud offering IaaS product involves offering a web portal for your clients to build their own VMs ... like what Linode, Rackspace, etc. offer. If you are really concerned about latency then a private cloud would be the best solution. If you are using an application in a public cloud that is sensitive to latency, then I suggest you seriously re-evaluate your solution.

Comment It isn't cheap, nor is it easy. (Score 4, Insightful) 56

Building and maintaining a public cloud offering is not cheap, nor is it easy. I was laid off from my last job due to the shortsightedness of the management staff. When I started asking for licensing and support from the vendors due to unforeseen issues, as well as additional equipment due to the growth rate, the management staff realized they couldn't do it as cheaply as they wanted. I have experience building an IaaS product, and that experience tells me to just let someone else deal with it that already has the issues figured out. Linode and Rackspace are great examples. In addition, if one wants to offer a custom portal for their clients, then I suggest you write an interface that uses your vendor's API and call it a day. 'nuff said.

Slashdot Top Deals

It's later than you think, the joint Russian-American space mission has already begun.