Worst Mistake New/Small Networks Can Make

Jason · Posted: Jun 14, 2004 8:06am Post subject:

Guys, please follow the forum rules. You can disagree with each other, but name calling and personal insults aren't allowed.

al5001 · Lurker Joined: 17 Jul 2003 Posts: 181 Location: Canada

I must agree with the author of this topic. Too many new and small networks have pathetically strict linking policies.

I've seen networks with requirements such as 100mbps connection speed. As far as I know, DALnet doesn't even require this much - at minimum, they require 45mbps (with two or more uplinks). DALnet is far bigger than the networks I've seen requiring blazing connections. Compare 30, 000+ users to a network with 830 (peak) users I recently visited that required 100mbps speed for linking.

Most new networks I visited have around 50 users and never really get more, except for the occasional tourist. Provided that information, they also have high connection speed requirements. In my opinion, 128kbps would be sufficient for that many users.

128kbps/8bits = 16KB/sec

I don't see how 50 users would make the IRCd use more than 16, 384 characters per second transfer, unless of course the users play four concurrent trivia games, run sixteen XDCC bots, or simply flood the server. By the way, most shell providers don't allow warez/copyright-infringement on their systems, and therefore, most servers hardly get any chatting at all, even with 50 users.

w00t · Posted: Jun 14, 2004 5:53pm Post subject:

dyjytyl · none Joined: 12 Jun 2004 Posts: 11

Ehh.. ignoring whatever those two are talking about.. Brain you have an excellent point.

I think a user needs more than just shell experience in many cases, but be realistic--a dedicated server running only one process (ircd) for a 2200 user network? And getting DDOS attacks to an unrecoverable point? Everything else you said seems to add up, but if you're that small of a network and getting DDOS attacked to the point where you *require* a dedicated box with only one process, you need to rethink what you've done to aggrivate someone to the point of wasting their time to DDOS your network.

Experience is key. But you still can't judge someone just because they run the shell account off a box. Take my case for example. I'm runnin a shell, I know the ins and outs of it for the most part (granted, I go to my box owner for help sometimes), but I know what it takes to run an ircd server.

It also helps to have a good relationship with the box owner. Personally, I know a lot more than just my box owner's first and last name. We are good friends, and if for any reason I need to have a command run or config changed through root, 9 times out of the 10 she's going to let me do it unless she thinks it's destructive to the box. You can't just judge someone because they have a shell though. I know a lot of people out there with shells that are just as capable, if not MORE capable than many of the server admins out there runnin a box. Maybe the problem is in the application, or the link team. The idea is to get to know the person who wants to link their server. Instead of trying to throw the odds against them, go talk to them and figure out what they're all about. Otherwise you'll never know.

See if the other side heard all of this, I'd be a much less angry person. But hardly anyone ever hears my side of the story, nor come anywhere near accepting it. I know it sounds like a difficult thing to do, but if you are aimed at linking the best servers you'll have to find out more about the person who wants to link--and you can't do that with just an app. It's not like real world jobs depend only on an application to hire someone--they schedule an interview if the applicant grabbed their attention, then they make a final decision.

I doubt most of the networks will ever get around to this because it simply requires too much effort or they make up excuses to not accept anyone with a shell. All I can say is that those networks are missing out on a lot of opportunity. The smaller networks who recognize this pattern and break away from following these trends are the networks who will surpass the others.

Edit > didn't notice there was a second page to this, but thanks for seeing my side of the story. there's too many networks that are just mimicking other networks, and to me that type of policy reflects their entire attitude. if i wanted something like dalnet, i'd just go to dalnet; i don't need another network with far less users to mimick that. i guess that's the fault on behalf of the linking team and those who manage the linking policies. so if you're from a network with a strict requirement like any mentioned in this topic, please consider revising them. it's become a trend too many people have gotten accustomed to, and networks should really start personalizing and customizing their rules to their own specifications--rather than copy and paste (plagiarize? lol) from other networks.

Ib3N · Lurker Joined: 10 Mar 2004 Posts: 157 Location: ChatSpike

sliq · Newbie Joined: 02 Jan 2004 Posts: 92 Location: IRC

that's why you don't allow warez in the first place.
find it, kill it, end of story.

Ib3N · Lurker Joined: 10 Mar 2004 Posts: 157 Location: ChatSpike

its the "kill it" part that pisses them off and starts ddosing

[DiMENSiON] · Eleet Joined: 06 Sep 2003 Posts: 621

It's very simple, just don't allow Warez on your network. Put it in your motd, they see it they wont bother. It saves alot of agrovation and alot of DDoSing.

Ib3N · Lurker Joined: 10 Mar 2004 Posts: 157 Location: ChatSpike

not everyone reads the motd obviously Wink

Not often though, but it happens now and then

sliq · Newbie Joined: 02 Jan 2004 Posts: 92 Location: IRC

then setup logonnews Wink

also, chatspike's server admins should make a short motd, have users type /motd to view the long things and then just have a global logonnews displaying "we do not allow warez" , then users wouldn't be able to ignore the rule, and you wouldn't have DDoS attacks over warez channels.

Ib3N · Lurker Joined: 10 Mar 2004 Posts: 157 Location: ChatSpike

logon news in notice is ok..

as for chatspike, Im a member of the oper team there, so I know every incindent of warez groupes trying to get established on our net. In our cases, we've actually had a peacefull chat with the leaders, and they left.

[DiMENSiON] · Eleet Joined: 06 Sep 2003 Posts: 621

Not everyone reads motd's ofcource not but it doesn't help some are pages long.. just a short breakdown of rules is what would be better than tonnes of, credits, rules, disclaimers etc.

w00t · Posted: Jun 17, 2004 6:14pm Post subject:

The problem is when peaceful methods don't work. I talked to the unofficial virc support chan people, and they decided to talk to me on our net... Which was all fine and good, till they decided to show what "irritating" people they were, and founded a warez channel, even though we strictly said it wasnt allowed.

To cut a long story short, we had to end up using services to close the issue, and threatened server bans before they departed on their own, malice-fuelled way.

[DiMENSiON] · Eleet Joined: 06 Sep 2003 Posts: 621

Why do we bother, there are so many nasty people on IRC all we want to do is run some nice networks and have fun in a peaceful IRC enviroment, is that too much to ask these days?