Hey guys and girls,

Since I already have some experience with Gentoo I'm not surprised it
just cowardly refuses to do something but this is one I don't know so
here we go... :-)

A while ago I replaced my old motherboard by another old one but the
replacement board was still 100% crash free.
I went from a P4 based Medion MD 5000 board
(http://217.110.237.67/Manuals/Medion%20MD5000.pdf) to another similar
one being an ASRock P4VT8+
(http://www.asrock.com/mb/overview.asp?Model=P4VT8%2B).

So I compiled my kernel before the switch with all the needed drivers
and all is working fine but one thing: eth0 does not exist.

I don't understand since all the stuff is in the kernel (basically the
VIA Rhine II driver) and it's even detected at boot time but it can't
be
brought up.

This is the relevant kernel snippet:

CONFIG_NET=y
CONFIG_PACKET=y
CONFIG_PACKET_MMAP=y
CONFIG_UNIX=y
CONFIG_XFRM=y
CONFIG_XFRM_USER=y
CONFIG_NET_KEY=y
CONFIG_INET=y
CONFIG_IP_FIB_HASH=y
CONFIG_INET_AH=y
CONFIG_INET_ESP=y
CONFIG_INET_IPCOMP=y
CONFIG_INET_XFRM_TUNNEL=y
CONFIG_INET_TUNNEL=y
CONFIG_INET_XFRM_MODE_TRANSPORT=y
CONFIG_INET_XFRM_MODE_TUNNEL=y
CONFIG_INET_XFRM_MODE_BEET=y
CONFIG_INET_DIAG=y
CONFIG_INET_TCP_DIAG=y
CONFIG_TCP_CONG_CUBIC=y
CONFIG_DEFAULT_TCP_CONG="cubic"
CONFIG_NETDEVICES=y
CONFIG_NET_ETHERNET=y
CONFIG_MII=y
CONFIG_NET_PCI=y
CONFIG_VIA_RHINE=y
CONFIG_VIA_RHINE_MMIO=y
CONFIG_VIA_RHINE_NAPI=y

And this is what dmesg has to say:

eth0: VIA Rhine II at 0xdfffb900, 00:0b:6a:73:04:f1, IRQ 16.
eth0: MII PHY found at address 1, status 0x7849 advertising 05e1 Link
0000.

But when I manually run /etc/init.d/net.eth0 start I get:

* Starting eth0
* Bringing up eth0
* dhcp
* network interface eth0 does not exist
* Please verify hardware or kernel module (driver)

I'm quite sure I forgot something stupid but I don't know what, so if
I
need to do more elaboration please tell me since I've been using
Windows
since... :-/

Thanks,

Wimmy

Wim Cossement wrote:

> [...]
>
> A while ago I replaced my old motherboard by another old one but the
> replacement board was still 100% crash free.
> I went from a P4 based Medion MD 5000 board
> (http://217.110.237.67/Manuals/Medion%20MD5000.pdf) to another similar
> one being an ASRock P4VT8+
> (http://www.asrock.com/mb/overview.asp?Model=P4VT8%2B).
>
> So I compiled my kernel before the switch with all the needed drivers
> and all is working fine but one thing: eth0 does not exist.
>
> I don't understand since all the stuff is in the kernel (basically the
> VIA Rhine II driver) and it's even detected at boot time but it can't
> be
> brought up.
>
> This is the relevant kernel snippet:
>
>[...]
>
> And this is what dmesg has to say:
>
> eth0: VIA Rhine II at 0xdfffb900, 00:0b:6a:73:04:f1, IRQ 16.
> eth0: MII PHY found at address 1, status 0x7849 advertising 05e1 Link
> 0000.
>
> But when I manually run /etc/init.d/net.eth0 start I get:
>
> * Starting eth0
> * Bringing up eth0
> * dhcp
> * network interface eth0 does not exist
> * Please verify hardware or kernel module (driver)
>
> I'm quite sure I forgot something stupid but I don't know what, so if
> I need to do more elaboration please tell me since I've been using
> Windows since... :-/

Hmm... Quite a transition from using a real operating system to using a
toy... I myself would have opted for at least another GNU/Linux
distribution for the time being, rather than to use Windows...
<horrified> :p

That said, I presume it's a /udev/ problem. Apparently your old /udev/
rules do not create the /eth0/ interface properly. Now I'm far from
a /udev/ expert - in fact, my work in progress on the other machine is my
first real encounter with /udev/ - but I suppose you can check that one
out. ;-)

P.S.: With regard to your other post concerning Telenet, I'm on Telenet too,
and I would advise you not to use your real Telenet e-mail address here on
Usenet. Well, it's already too late by now anyway, as the spam industry's
harvesting bots will have already picked up your e-mail address by now.

It only takes one post with your real e-mail address for you to enjoy months
worth of daily e-mails to your mail account regarding extending the size of
your penis, on-line offers for cheap counterfeit Viagra pills and where to
find rip-off copies of pirated proprietary software. ;-)

Trust me, I've made that mistake too once, back when I was still very new to
Usenet... ;-)

--
Aragorn
(registered GNU/Linux user #223157)

On 20 feb, 03:14, Aragorn <arag...@chatfactory.invalid> wrote:
> Wim Cossement wrote:
> > [...]
>
> > A while ago I replaced my old motherboard by another old one but the
> > replacement board was still 100% crash free.
> > I went from a P4 based Medion MD 5000 board
> > (http://217.110.237.67/Manuals/Medion%20MD5000.pdf) to another similar
> > one being an ASRock P4VT8+
> > (http://www.asrock.com/mb/overview.asp?Model=P4VT8%2B).
>
> > So I compiled my kernel before the switch with all the needed drivers
> > and all is working fine but one thing: eth0 does not exist.
>
> > I don't understand since all the stuff is in the kernel (basically the
> > VIA Rhine II driver) and it's even detected at boot time but it can't
> > be
> > brought up.
>
> > This is the relevant kernel snippet:
>
> >[...]
>
> > And this is what dmesg has to say:
>
> > eth0: VIA Rhine II at 0xdfffb900, 00:0b:6a:73:04:f1, IRQ 16.
> > eth0: MII PHY found at address 1, status 0x7849 advertising 05e1 Link
> > 0000.
>
> > But when I manually run /etc/init.d/net.eth0 start I get:
>
> > * Starting eth0
> > * * Bringing up eth0
> > * * * dhcp
> > * * * * network interface eth0 does not exist
> > * * * * Please verify hardware or kernel module (driver)
>
> > I'm quite sure I forgot something stupid but I don't know what, so if
> > I need to do more elaboration please tell me since I've been using
> > Windows since... :-/
>
> Hmm... *Quite a transition from using a real operating system to using a
> toy... *I myself would have opted for at least another GNU/Linux
> distribution for the time being, rather than to use Windows...
> <horrified> :p

Well I could have done that but I still need Windoos to transfer music
to my MP3-player... :-/
Perhaps that's why it was so cheap despite having a 30 GB HDD.

> That said, I presume it's a /udev/ problem. *Apparently your old /udev/
> rules do not create the /eth0/ interface properly. *Now I'm far from
> a /udev/ expert - in fact, my work in progress on the other machine is my
> first real encounter with /udev/ - but I suppose you can check that one
> out. ;-)

Well as that other user suggested I'll check out that rules-file and
in a worst case scenario I guess I can play with emerge a bit.

> P.S.: With regard to your other post concerning Telenet, I'm on Telenet too,
> and I would advise you not to use your real Telenet e-mail address here on
> Usenet. *Well, it's already too late by now anyway, as the spam industry's
> harvesting bots will have already picked up your e-mail address by now.

Well I fucked it up 2 times yesterday! :-(

First I could not post in Mozilla (on Windows) even when I
authenticated myself and recently they've changed newsservers (or
sumthin' like that) but my first post (only postable with my Telenet
address in) did not came trough after 5 minutes so assuming it failed
I used Google groups.
So now my Gmail address is exposed too.

> It only takes one post with your real e-mail address for you to enjoy months
> worth of daily e-mails to your mail account regarding extending the size of
> your penis, on-line offers for cheap counterfeit Viagra pills and where to
> find rip-off copies of pirated proprietary software. ;-)

I'd fancy a fake Rolex though... :-p

> Trust me, I've made that mistake too once, back when I was still very new to
> Usenet... ;-)

Well I could not find any Telenet users showing the ropes and the
other option seemed a bridge too far.

Wimmy

Wim Cossement wrote:

> On 20 feb, 03:14, Aragorn <arag...@chatfactory.invalid> wrote:
>
>> P.S.: With regard to your other post concerning Telenet, I'm on Telenet
>> too, and I would advise you not to use your real Telenet e-mail address
>> here on Usenet. Â*Well, it's already too late by now anyway, as the spam
>> industry's harvesting bots will have already picked up your e-mail
>> address by now.
>
> Well I fucked it up 2 times yesterday! :-(
>
> First I could not post in Mozilla (on Windows) even when I
> authenticated myself and recently they've changed newsservers (or
> sumthin' like that) but my first post (only postable with my Telenet
> address in) did not came trough after 5 minutes so assuming it failed
> I used Google groups.

Yes, they have recently changed their newsserver pool - I haven't really
done the test but I believe it's probably a "round robin"-kind of
connection, i.e. one subdomain pointing to a different IP address with each
connection. They used to do that for the servers with the binary
groups. ;-)

Additionally, you no longer need to authenticate yourself anymore with the
new newsserver name (newsgroups.telenet.be). ;-)

> So now my Gmail address is exposed too.

See below... ;-)

>> It only takes one post with your real e-mail address for you to enjoy
>> months worth of daily e-mails to your mail account regarding extending
>> the size of your penis, on-line offers for cheap counterfeit Viagra pills
>> and where to find rip-off copies of pirated proprietary software. ;-)
>
> I'd fancy a fake Rolex though... :-p

Oh yeah, how could I forget about those... :p

>> Trust me, I've made that mistake too once, back when I was still very new
>> to Usenet... ;-)
>
> Well I could not find any Telenet users showing the ropes and the
> other option seemed a bridge too far.

Well, just as I have done now with my e-mail address - which is of (an alias
to) my mail account with our domain - you can replace the TLD part of the
domain name by ".invalid". Alternatively, you can append ".invalid" to the
entire domain name, but the harvesting bots are clever, so I would simply
advise substituting the TLD part.

".invalid" is actually a recognized TLD, in the sense that DNS servers
recognize it as a droppable reference, i.e. anything pointing to
somedomain.invalid will be silently ignored in DNS queries. I used to use
telenet.invalid for the domain part of my e-mail address.

An often used alternative is a throwaway e-mail address on Hotmail, Yahoo or
eventually Gmail, but this is being found unethical by many - including
myself - considering that the spam still gets delivered to the domain then,
even though it will be trapped by the domain's catch-all mailbox or an
eventual designated spam mailbox.

About 85% of all e-mail traffic on the entire internet is spam, and is thus
responsible for needless bandwidth consumption. That's why it's best to
choke spam at the source by using target e-mail addresses which will simply
be dropped by the local DNS server, and if you replace the TLD by
".invalid" rather than just appending ".invalid" to the end, then even if
the bots are so clever to cut off that part, the resulting domain name will
still be invalid by lack of a TLD. ;-)

_Note:_ You can use such a mangled e-mail address for posting to Usenet, but
Telenet's SMTP won't allow you to send anything through to an e-mail
account like that. ;-)

--
Aragorn
(registered GNU/Linux user #223157)

Aragorn wrote:
> Wim Cossement wrote:
>
>> On 20 feb, 03:14, Aragorn <arag...@chatfactory.invalid> wrote:
>>
>>> P.S.: With regard to your other post concerning Telenet, I'm on Telenet
>>> too, and I would advise you not to use your real Telenet e-mail address
>>> here on Usenet. Well, it's already too late by now anyway, as the spam
>>> industry's harvesting bots will have already picked up your e-mail
>>> address by now.
>> Well I fucked it up 2 times yesterday! :-(
>>
>> First I could not post in Mozilla (on Windows) even when I
>> authenticated myself and recently they've changed newsservers (or
>> sumthin' like that) but my first post (only postable with my Telenet
>> address in) did not came trough after 5 minutes so assuming it failed
>> I used Google groups.
>
> Yes, they have recently changed their newsserver pool - I haven't really
> done the test but I believe it's probably a "round robin"-kind of
> connection, i.e. one subdomain pointing to a different IP address with each
> connection. They used to do that for the servers with the binary
> groups. ;-)
>
> Additionally, you no longer need to authenticate yourself anymore with the
> new newsserver name (newsgroups.telenet.be). ;-)
>
>> So now my Gmail address is exposed too.
>
> See below... ;-)
>
>>> It only takes one post with your real e-mail address for you to enjoy
>>> months worth of daily e-mails to your mail account regarding extending
>>> the size of your penis, on-line offers for cheap counterfeit Viagra pills
>>> and where to find rip-off copies of pirated proprietary software. ;-)
>> I'd fancy a fake Rolex though... :-p
>
> Oh yeah, how could I forget about those... :p
>
>>> Trust me, I've made that mistake too once, back when I was still very new
>>> to Usenet... ;-)
>> Well I could not find any Telenet users showing the ropes and the
>> other option seemed a bridge too far.
>
> Well, just as I have done now with my e-mail address - which is of (an alias
> to) my mail account with our domain - you can replace the TLD part of the
> domain name by ".invalid". Alternatively, you can append ".invalid" to the
> entire domain name, but the harvesting bots are clever, so I would simply
> advise substituting the TLD part.

I took the liberty of chaning it to invalid.am, the I would have been
too much.

> ".invalid" is actually a recognized TLD, in the sense that DNS servers
> recognize it as a droppable reference, i.e. anything pointing to
> somedomain.invalid will be silently ignored in DNS queries. I used to use
> telenet.invalid for the domain part of my e-mail address.

Sounds okay but what if you actually want a domain having 'invalid' as TLD?

> An often used alternative is a throwaway e-mail address on Hotmail, Yahoo or
> eventually Gmail, but this is being found unethical by many - including
> myself - considering that the spam still gets delivered to the domain then,
> even though it will be trapped by the domain's catch-all mailbox or an
> eventual designated spam mailbox.

Well I agree on the bad policy part.
Even Gmails web interface is sweet and as un-bloaty as possible IMHO!

> About 85% of all e-mail traffic on the entire internet is spam, and is thus
> responsible for needless bandwidth consumption. That's why it's best to
> choke spam at the source by using target e-mail addresses which will simply
> be dropped by the local DNS server, and if you replace the TLD by
> ".invalid" rather than just appending ".invalid" to the end, then even if
> the bots are so clever to cut off that part, the resulting domain name will
> still be invalid by lack of a TLD. ;-)

The same could be said about the population: 85 % are idiots and
consuming valuable resources... :-p

> _Note:_ You can use such a mangled e-mail address for posting to Usenet, but
> Telenet's SMTP won't allow you to send anything through to an e-mail
> account like that. ;-)

Wimmy

Wim Cossement wrote:

> Aragorn wrote:
>
>> ".invalid" is actually a recognized TLD, in the sense that DNS servers
>> recognize it as a droppable reference, i.e. anything pointing to
>> somedomain.invalid will be silently ignored in DNS queries. I used to
>> use telenet.invalid for the domain part of my e-mail address.
>
> Sounds okay but what if you actually want a domain having 'invalid' as
> TLD?

Well, that is something you cannot do. ".invalid" is recognized by DNS
servers but only in that this will tell them to drop any query to the
domain. In fact, that *is* what it was implemented for. ;-)

Additionally, you cannot just pick any TLD you like for a domain you wish to
register. Domain names always have to use a TLD from the list that was
officially recognized by the ICANN - it's basically an American
organization but it has recently made an appeal to the US Government to
become a truly independent internation organization.

In fact, perhaps you remember that ".eu" was only recently adopted as an
official TLD (top level domain), or that ".xxx" was recently requested and
eventually denied as a TLD for domains that show explicit visual material
with regards to the physics involved with the very first step in the human
reproduction system. :p

A number of unofficial TLDs have at times been implemented and may still be
active today, but those are simply "DNS hacks" as the root DNS servers have
no records for any such domain. ".invalid" is however implemented in the
DNS RFC as a kind of instruction to the nameserver to silently ignore and
drop all domain name resolution requests made to such a domain. ;-)

>> About 85% of all e-mail traffic on the entire internet is spam, and is
>> thus responsible for needless bandwidth consumption. That's why it's
>> best to choke spam at the source by using target e-mail addresses which
>> will simply be dropped by the local DNS server, and if you replace the
>> TLD by ".invalid" rather than just appending ".invalid" to the end, then
>> even if the bots are so clever to cut off that part, the resulting domain
>> name will still be invalid by lack of a TLD. ;-)
>
> The same could be said about the population: 85 % are idiots and
> consuming valuable resources... :-p

I absolutely agree on that, and just to be fully on-topic with the current
ecological issues and the global warming debate, we could then also
postulate that since this 85% of the population is releasing carbon dioxide
into the atmosphere every time they exhale, there is an urgent need to
replace that 85% with an ecologically and intellectually more valuable
species. :p

We could start by replacing all politicians first. After all, their habit
of talking too much causes them to release far more CO2 into the atmosphere
than would be justifiable by their rendition to humanity. ;-)

--
Aragorn
(registered GNU/Linux user #223157)

Aragorn <aragorn@chatfactory.invalid> wrote:
> Wim Cossement wrote:
>
>> Sounds okay but what if you actually want a domain having 'invalid'
>> as TLD?
>
> Well, that is something you cannot do. ".invalid" is recognized by
> DNS servers but only in that this will tell them to drop any query to
> the domain. In fact, that *is* what it was implemented for. ;-)
>
> Additionally, you cannot just pick any TLD you like for a domain you
> wish to register. Domain names always have to use a TLD from the
> list that was officially recognized by the ICANN - it's basically an
> American organization but it has recently made an appeal to the US
> Government to become a truly independent internation organization.
>
> In fact, perhaps you remember that ".eu" was only recently adopted as
> an official TLD (top level domain), or that ".xxx" was recently
> requested and eventually denied as a TLD for domains that show
> explicit visual material with regards to the physics involved with
> the very first step in the human reproduction system. :p
>
> A number of unofficial TLDs have at times been implemented and may
> still be active today, but those are simply "DNS hacks" as the root
> DNS servers have no records for any such domain. ".invalid" is
> however implemented in the DNS RFC as a kind of instruction to the
> nameserver to silently ignore and drop all domain name resolution
> requests made to such a domain. ;-)

No, they should not "silently ignore and drop" requests for the .invalid
TLD. They should answer with a negative. Else a client will ask again, and
then often ask other servers (or even upstreams servers), and create extra
traffic.

>>> About 85% of all e-mail traffic on the entire internet is spam, and
>>> is thus responsible for needless bandwidth consumption. That's why
>>> it's best to choke spam at the source by using target e-mail
>>> addresses which will simply be dropped by the local DNS server, and
>>> if you replace the TLD by ".invalid" rather than just appending
>>> ".invalid" to the end, then even if the bots are so clever to cut
>>> off that part, the resulting domain name will still be invalid by
>>> lack of a TLD. ;-)
>>
>> The same could be said about the population: 85 % are idiots and
>> consuming valuable resources... :-p
>
> I absolutely agree on that, and just to be fully on-topic with the
> current ecological issues and the global warming debate, we could
> then also postulate that since this 85% of the population is
> releasing carbon dioxide into the atmosphere every time they exhale,
> there is an urgent need to replace that 85% with an ecologically and
> intellectually more valuable species. :p

See Sturgeon's Law, and the corrolaries. It's impossible to divide the crap
from the non-crap, because if you do, 90% of the non-crap turns out to be
crap, as per Sturgeon's Law.

Regards,
--
*Art

Arthur Hagen wrote:

> Aragorn <aragorn@chatfactory.invalid> wrote:
>
>> Wim Cossement wrote:
>>
>>> Sounds okay but what if you actually want a domain having 'invalid'
>>> as TLD?
>>
>> Well, that is something you cannot do. ".invalid" is recognized by
>> DNS servers but only in that this will tell them to drop any query to
>> the domain. In fact, that *is* what it was implemented for. ;-)
>>
>> [...]
>>
>> A number of unofficial TLDs have at times been implemented and may
>> still be active today, but those are simply "DNS hacks" as the root
>> DNS servers have no records for any such domain. ".invalid" is
>> however implemented in the DNS RFC as a kind of instruction to the
>> nameserver to silently ignore and drop all domain name resolution
>> requests made to such a domain. ;-)
>
> No, they should not "silently ignore and drop" requests for the .invalid
> TLD. They should answer with a negative. Else a client will ask again,
> and then often ask other servers (or even upstreams servers), and create
> extra traffic.

Aye, I sometimes say things all wrongly, especially when I'm fatigued. :-/
You are of course referring to the actual name-resolving DNS request, while
I myself was actually speaking of an e-mail sent to an ".invalid"
domain. :-)

>>>> About 85% of all e-mail traffic on the entire internet is spam, and
>>>> is thus responsible for needless bandwidth consumption. That's why
>>>> it's best to choke spam at the source by using target e-mail
>>>> addresses which will simply be dropped by the local DNS server, and
>>>> if you replace the TLD by ".invalid" rather than just appending
>>>> ".invalid" to the end, then even if the bots are so clever to cut
>>>> off that part, the resulting domain name will still be invalid by
>>>> lack of a TLD. ;-)
>>>
>>> The same could be said about the population: 85 % are idiots and
>>> consuming valuable resources... :-p
>>
>> I absolutely agree on that, and just to be fully on-topic with the
>> current ecological issues and the global warming debate, we could
>> then also postulate that since this 85% of the population is
>> releasing carbon dioxide into the atmosphere every time they exhale,
>> there is an urgent need to replace that 85% with an ecologically and
>> intellectually more valuable species. :p
>
> See Sturgeon's Law, and the corrolaries. It's impossible to divide the
> crap from the non-crap, because if you do, 90% of the non-crap turns out
> to be crap, as per Sturgeon's Law.

Odd, isn't it? :-) <Kafka mode> But then again, sturgeons are odd fish.
And then there's Sturgeon, who formerly was Hans Reiser's best friend until
he started sleeping with Mrs. Reiser, and who despite that he's a
self-confessed serial killer is mysteriously acquitted from having had
anything to do with the disappearance and presumed death of Nina Reiser,
over which Hans Reiser is now on trial for murder... 8-| </Kafka mode>

:p

--
Aragorn
(registered GNU/Linux user #223157)

Aragorn wrote:
> Wim Cossement wrote:
>
>> Aragorn wrote:
>>
>>> ".invalid" is actually a recognized TLD, in the sense that DNS servers
>>> recognize it as a droppable reference, i.e. anything pointing to
>>> somedomain.invalid will be silently ignored in DNS queries. I used to
>>> use telenet.invalid for the domain part of my e-mail address.
>> Sounds okay but what if you actually want a domain having 'invalid' as
>> TLD?
>
> Well, that is something you cannot do. ".invalid" is recognized by DNS
> servers but only in that this will tell them to drop any query to the
> domain. In fact, that *is* what it was implemented for. ;-)
>
> Additionally, you cannot just pick any TLD you like for a domain you wish to
> register. Domain names always have to use a TLD from the list that was
> officially recognized by the ICANN - it's basically an American
> organization but it has recently made an appeal to the US Government to
> become a truly independent internation organization.
>
> In fact, perhaps you remember that ".eu" was only recently adopted as an
> official TLD (top level domain), or that ".xxx" was recently requested and
> eventually denied as a TLD for domains that show explicit visual material
> with regards to the physics involved with the very first step in the human
> reproduction system. :p

Well personally think that this could have been a good idea since you
have some sort of clue about what the contents of the site would be. Why
the hell did they drop this?
And I'm not only talking about the xxx one but stuff like .music or
..games would be good TLD's too.

> A number of unofficial TLDs have at times been implemented and may still be
> active today, but those are simply "DNS hacks" as the root DNS servers have
> no records for any such domain. ".invalid" is however implemented in the
> DNS RFC as a kind of instruction to the nameserver to silently ignore and
> drop all domain name resolution requests made to such a domain. ;-)
>
>>> About 85% of all e-mail traffic on the entire internet is spam, and is
>>> thus responsible for needless bandwidth consumption. That's why it's
>>> best to choke spam at the source by using target e-mail addresses which
>>> will simply be dropped by the local DNS server, and if you replace the
>>> TLD by ".invalid" rather than just appending ".invalid" to the end, then
>>> even if the bots are so clever to cut off that part, the resulting domain
>>> name will still be invalid by lack of a TLD. ;-)
>> The same could be said about the population: 85 % are idiots and
>> consuming valuable resources... :-p
>
> I absolutely agree on that, and just to be fully on-topic with the current
> ecological issues and the global warming debate, we could then also
> postulate that since this 85% of the population is releasing carbon dioxide
> into the atmosphere every time they exhale, there is an urgent need to
> replace that 85% with an ecologically and intellectually more valuable
> species. :p

Dream but don't sleep! :-)

> We could start by replacing all politicians first. After all, their habit
> of talking too much causes them to release far more CO2 into the atmosphere
> than would be justifiable by their rendition to humanity. ;-)

Well that sounds like a good idea since you've noticed we had no
government for over 6 months during the formation and things still were
fine!

Arthur Hagen wrote:
> Aragorn <aragorn@chatfactory.invalid> wrote:
>> Wim Cossement wrote:
>>
>>> Sounds okay but what if you actually want a domain having 'invalid'
>>> as TLD?
>>
>> Well, that is something you cannot do. ".invalid" is recognized by
>> DNS servers but only in that this will tell them to drop any query to
>> the domain. In fact, that *is* what it was implemented for. ;-)
>>
>> Additionally, you cannot just pick any TLD you like for a domain you
>> wish to register. Domain names always have to use a TLD from the
>> list that was officially recognized by the ICANN - it's basically an
>> American organization but it has recently made an appeal to the US
>> Government to become a truly independent internation organization.
>>
>> In fact, perhaps you remember that ".eu" was only recently adopted as
>> an official TLD (top level domain), or that ".xxx" was recently
>> requested and eventually denied as a TLD for domains that show
>> explicit visual material with regards to the physics involved with
>> the very first step in the human reproduction system. :p
>>
>> A number of unofficial TLDs have at times been implemented and may
>> still be active today, but those are simply "DNS hacks" as the root
>> DNS servers have no records for any such domain. ".invalid" is
>> however implemented in the DNS RFC as a kind of instruction to the
>> nameserver to silently ignore and drop all domain name resolution
>> requests made to such a domain. ;-)
>
> No, they should not "silently ignore and drop" requests for the .invalid
> TLD. They should answer with a negative. Else a client will ask again,
> and then often ask other servers (or even upstreams servers), and create
> extra traffic.
>
>>>> About 85% of all e-mail traffic on the entire internet is spam, and
>>>> is thus responsible for needless bandwidth consumption. That's why
>>>> it's best to choke spam at the source by using target e-mail
>>>> addresses which will simply be dropped by the local DNS server, and
>>>> if you replace the TLD by ".invalid" rather than just appending
>>>> ".invalid" to the end, then even if the bots are so clever to cut
>>>> off that part, the resulting domain name will still be invalid by
>>>> lack of a TLD. ;-)
>>>
>>> The same could be said about the population: 85 % are idiots and
>>> consuming valuable resources... :-p
>>
>> I absolutely agree on that, and just to be fully on-topic with the
>> current ecological issues and the global warming debate, we could
>> then also postulate that since this 85% of the population is
>> releasing carbon dioxide into the atmosphere every time they exhale,
>> there is an urgent need to replace that 85% with an ecologically and
>> intellectually more valuable species. :p
>
> See Sturgeon's Law, and the corrolaries. It's impossible to divide the
> crap from the non-crap, because if you do, 90% of the non-crap turns out
> to be crap, as per Sturgeon's Law.

Then it would be recursive I suppose.
So we would end up with almost nothing in the end!

But there is no non-crap without crap so we're doomed... :-)