Article: 1248 of comp.unix.admin
Path: NewsServ!fauern!ira.uka.de!sol.ctr.columbia.edu!spool.mu.edu!sdd.hp.com!news.cs.indiana.edu!uceng!pmartin
From: pmartin@uceng.UC.EDU (Paul Martin)
Newsgroups: comp.unix.admin
Subject: IRC and Security
Keywords: IRC SECURITY
Message-ID: <7748@uceng.UC.EDU>
Date: 13 Mar 91 14:04:17 GMT
Article-I.D.: uceng.7748
Organization: Univ. of Cincinnati, College of Engg.
Lines: 106

I am sure that the following post will bring out religious fervor by
a few fanatics, however I am prepared to don my asbestos suit.  

Disclaimer: I am not the net police, just a system manager who has been
            burned.

I am a Unix system administrator here at the University of Cincinnati.
I have just recently discovered a band of computer hackers/pirates that
have been using the Internet to pirate commercial software.  There were
more than twenty individuals involved.  In talking to many of those involved,
there seems to be a common thread, IRC or Inter Relay Chat.  These people 
told me that they were passing the passwords through IRC as well as meeting
other hackers.  I believe that IRC has potential to do some good, however
I believe that it attracts those with little to do with their time and those
immature people who use IRC as a big teenage party line.  We have removed
IRC because of the problems that I described above.  I urge all administrators
who are interested in preventing unauthorized use of their system and who
have IRC installed, to re-evauluate their desision to keep IRC.  To illustrate
the point of IRC being used by those with nothing better to do with their
time I have enclosed a copy of a message posted to alt.irc which describes
a plan to use the internet for fantasy role playing games:


Xref: ucunx1.san.uc.edu alt.irc:126 rec.games.frp:1361 rec.games.mud:576
Path: ucunx1.san.uc.edu!ucunix.san.uc.edu!tut.cis.ohio-state.edu!ucbvax!decwrl!elroy.jpl.nasa.gov!jarthur!nntp-server.caltech.edu!kimf
From: kimf@nntp-server.caltech.edu (K. Dorian Flowers)
Newsgroups: alt.irc,rec.games.frp,rec.games.mud
Subject: IRC role-playing games network
Message-ID: <1991Mar9.023832.28600@nntp-server.caltech.edu>
Date: 9 Mar 91 02:38:32 GMT
Organization: California Institute of Technology, Pasadena
Lines: 66


Introducing ........

                           ******   IFN   *****

    Internet relay chat (irc) Fantasy role-playing (frp)game Network! 

(Yes, the ultimate acronym nightmare has finally arrived.)	

>From some obscure desire to combine our love of role-playing games and
our wish to be in charge of something, Jason Gabler
(jygabler@ucdavis.edu) and I are attempting to create an network of IRC
servers devoted more-or-less to role-playing games.

On this network, you will be able to play role-playing games of any
genre consistent with the format of Internet Relay Chat, give and
receive hints or suggestions on playing in or running a campaign, trade
stories, etc.  We're hoping to get busy enough so that we'll have
people on all the time, so that anyone hankering to drop out of reality
for a while can find some willing partners.

To get more people using our network at any given time, we are trying
to accomplish two things: 1) get more servers connected to our network,
and 2) convince a few suck...er, I mean game masters to run campaigns
with regularly-scheduled sessions on our network.

By attaching more servers to our network, we make our network available
to a greater number of net.people who, having nothing better to do with
their time, will inevitably find their way to our network and start
playing role-playing games. We only have a few servers up right now,
two of which are in California so ANY extension to our network is going
to be a BIG improvement.

If you have the urge to become one of those big-headed IRC server
operators, your machine runs Unix and you have the resources, then
contact Jason Gabler (jygabler@ucdavis.edu) to see where to get the IRC
server source, how to get it running and then which machines you should
have it connect to in order to become part of our little network.

Jason Gabler has taken it upon itself to maintain the network and to
deal with all matters having to do with Internet Relay Chat, so if you
have questions involving IRC, such as how to get your hands on the IRC
client and make it run, how you use the IRC client, what's the nearest
server in our network that you can access using your client, etc., bug
him. :)

I get the fun part: coordinating all the role-playing games that we
want to have running on our network. I am hereby putting out a call to
all potential game masters who have nothing better to do to come run a
campaign on our network! Just send mail to me, at
kimf@tybalt.caltech.edu, telling me who you are, how people can reach
you, a confirmation that you have at least one complete adventure ready
to run and a description of it, and what times you can play. I'll work
all the responses that I get into a list and post it for you.


SO!!! If you're interested in becoming a server operator, a game
master, or you just are a potential player who wants to receive updates
on the status of our network, contact us!

jygabler@ucdavis.edu  (Jason Gabler, Network Coordinator & UCDavis IFN Operator)
kimf@tybalt.caltech.edu (Kim Flowers, Gaming Coordinator & Caltech IFN Operator)


We can send you additional information, help you set up a campaign,
etc. Don't miss out...contact us now!


-- 
+-----------------[Paul Martin @ Engineering College OCC, UC]-----------------+
| Internet: pmartin@uceng.uc.edu        | "Yes I am serious,                  |
| Dumb:     ...uceng!pmartin            |  and don't call me Shirley"         |
+-----------------------------------------------------------------------------+


Article: 1252 of comp.unix.admin
Xref: NewsServ comp.unix.admin:1252 alt.flame:12643
Path: NewsServ!fauern!ira.uka.de!sol.ctr.columbia.edu!zaphod.mps.ohio-state.edu!rpi!bu.edu!encore!zelig.encore.com
From: jdarcy@zelig.encore.com (Jeff d'Arcy)
Newsgroups: comp.unix.admin,alt.flame
Subject: Re: IRC and Security
Message-ID: <14293@encore.Encore.COM>
Date: 13 Mar 91 18:19:04 GMT
References: <7748@uceng.UC.EDU>
Sender: news@Encore.COM
Followup-To: alt.flame
Lines: 49
Nntp-Posting-Host: zelig.encore.com

pmartin@uceng.UC.EDU (Paul Martin):
> I have just recently discovered a band of computer hackers/pirates that
> have been using the Internet to pirate commercial software.

...and now for the news.  I suspect that I know which group you're dealing
with; they're fairly well-known and will be dealt with shortly when enough
evidence against them has been gathered.

> there seems to be a common thread, IRC or Inter Relay Chat.  These people 
> told me that they were passing the passwords through IRC as well as meeting
> other hackers.  I believe that IRC has potential to do some good, however
> I believe that it attracts those with little to do with their time and those
> immature people who use IRC as a big teenage party line.

So?  That's hardly a crime.

> I urge all administrators
> who are interested in preventing unauthorized use of their system and who
> have IRC installed, to re-evauluate their desision to keep IRC.

Whoa, there!  What kind of anal-retentive BS is this?  Are you really trying
to blame the medium for the messages it carries?  If so, you might as well
shut down the Internet, because it has been used to perpetrate crimes since
long before IRC came along.  While you're at it, why don't we shut down the
phone system because drug dealers talk to their clients on the phone?  The
mail system will be next, because we all know that various illegal items are
routinely shipped that way.  Oh, I almost forgot: do you really think there
are no messages regarding illegal activities on the system you administer?

Think I'm getting carried away?  I'm only trying to illustrate where your
approach would take us, and it's not even much of a stretch.  Of *course*
some hackers use IRC, but THAT USE HAS NOTHING TO DO WITH THEIR HACKING.
They just happen to hang out there, and while they're talking they exchange
passwords and such along with the daily news about their term papers and
non-existent love lives.  We live in an age of electronic communication (I
shouldn't have to tell you that, but you seem ignorant of the fact) and IRC
is one of the "street corners" the local hoodlums hang out on.  There's no
more benefit to banning IRC than to banning street corners.  Your action is
punishing an innocent population for the misdeeds of a few, which will only
convince that population of your ignorance and lack of concern.  Once they
recognize their qualities in you, an adversarial relationship between you
and your users is likely to develop, and your security problems will only
multiply.

Hmmm.  I guess you might think of that as job security.  Nice trick.


          Jeff d'Arcy, Generic Software Engineer - jdarcy@encore.com
The problem with maintaining an open mind is all the crap people throw into it


Article: 1253 of comp.unix.admin
Path: NewsServ!fauern!unido!mcsun!sunic!news.funet.fi!fuug!fuug.fi!napo
From: napo@vipunen.hut.fi (Hannu Napari)
Newsgroups: comp.unix.admin
Subject: Re: IRC and Security
Message-ID: <NAPO.91Mar13202006@vipunen.hut.fi>
Date: 13 Mar 91 19:20:06 GMT
References: <7748@uceng.UC.EDU>
Sender: usenet@fuug.fi (USENET News System)
Organization: Helsinki University of Technology, Finland
Lines: 16
In-Reply-To: pmartin@uceng.UC.EDU's message of 13 Mar 91 14:04:17 GMT
Nntp-Posting-Host: vipunen.hut.fi

In article <7748@uceng.UC.EDU> pmartin@uceng.UC.EDU (Paul Martin) writes:
>We have removed
>IRC because of the problems that I described above.  I urge all administrators
>who are interested in preventing unauthorized use of their system and who
>have IRC installed, to re-evauluate their desision to keep IRC.  To illustrate
>the point of IRC being used by those with nothing better to do with their
>time I have enclosed a copy of a message posted to alt.irc which describes
>a plan to use the internet for fantasy role playing games:

On this basis you should remove talk, smtp, nntp...

--
Napo    $ Today I am / a small blue thing / Made of china / made of glass
(leon)  $ I am cool and smooth and curious / I never blink / I am turning
        $ in your hand / Turning in your hand / small blue thing
        $


Article: 1254 of comp.unix.admin
Path: NewsServ!fauern!ira.uka.de!sol.ctr.columbia.edu!samsung!spool.mu.edu!news.cs.indiana.edu!uceng!pmartin
From: pmartin@uceng.UC.EDU (Paul Martin)
Newsgroups: comp.unix.admin
Subject: Re: IRC and Security
Message-ID: <7753@uceng.UC.EDU>
Date: 13 Mar 91 22:21:31 GMT
References: <7748@uceng.UC.EDU> <NAPO.91Mar13202006@vipunen.hut.fi>
Organization: College of Engg., Univ. of Cincinnati
Lines: 16

In article <NAPO.91Mar13202006@vipunen.hut.fi> napo@vipunen.hut.fi (Hannu Napari) writes:
>In article <7748@uceng.UC.EDU> pmartin@uceng.UC.EDU (Paul Martin) writes:
>>We have removed
>>IRC because of the problems that I described above.  I urge all administrators
>
>On this basis you should remove talk, smtp, nntp...
>

Sorry but IRC appears to be SOLELY used for entertainment.  This is a
poor example of how to spend the students and taxpayers money.

-- 
+-----------------[Paul Martin @ Engineering College OCC, UC]-----------------+
| Internet: pmartin@uceng.uc.edu        | "Yes I am serious,                  |
| Dumb:     ...uceng!pmartin            |  and don't call me Shirley"         |
+-----------------------------------------------------------------------------+


Article: 1255 of comp.unix.admin
Newsgroups: comp.unix.admin
Path: NewsServ!fauern!ira.uka.de!sol.ctr.columbia.edu!caen!ox.com!ox.com!emv
From: emv@ox.com (Ed Vielmetti)
Subject: Re: IRC and Security
In-Reply-To: pmartin@uceng.UC.EDU's message of 13 Mar 91 22:21:31 GMT
Message-ID: <EMV.91Mar13181115@poe.aa.ox.com>
Sender: usenet@ox.com (Usenet News Administrator)
Organization: OTA Limited Partnership, Ann Arbor MI.
References: <7748@uceng.UC.EDU> <NAPO.91Mar13202006@vipunen.hut.fi>
	<7753@uceng.UC.EDU>
Date: 13 Mar 91 18:11:15

In article <7753@uceng.UC.EDU> pmartin@uceng.UC.EDU (Paul Martin) writes:

   Sorry but IRC appears to be SOLELY used for entertainment.  This is a
   poor example of how to spend the students and taxpayers money.

irc was used in the early days of the gulf war for real-time worldwide
discussion of what was happening in europe and the middle east.  seems
to me I recall a mention of it in the Wall Street Journal even.  
from what I can tell the bulk of discussion wouldn't be terribly
interesting to me right now, but who can say?

Given the absence of an internet-blessed real-time multiparty tcp/ip
based discussion protocol, I think that irc is as reasonable an
approach as any.  protocol development didn't require any taxpayers
money to fund DOE or DARPA grants.  I've heard of some innovative
applications being built on top of it.  Cost is minimum -- student time
is free, a few extra IRC bits doesn't saturate most links, and if it
gets really bad I'm sure we'd see protocol work done to minimize link
loading.

if you don't want to run it locally that's one thing, you can
rationalize that on any ground which you see fit.  but I wouldn't call
it worthless.

-- 
 Msen	Edward Vielmetti
/|---	moderator, comp.archives
	emv@msen.com






Article: 1256 of comp.unix.admin
Path: NewsServ!fauern!ira.uka.de!sol.ctr.columbia.edu!zaphod.mps.ohio-state.edu!usc!orion.oac.uci.edu!mothra.nts.uci.edu!meggers
From: meggers@mothra.nts.uci.edu (Mark Eggers)
Newsgroups: comp.unix.admin
Subject: Re: IRC and Security
Message-ID: <27DEB17E.23612@orion.oac.uci.edu>
Date: 13 Mar 91 23:10:54 GMT
References: <7748@uceng.UC.EDU> <NAPO.91Mar13202006@vipunen.hut.fi> <7753@uceng.UC.EDU>
Lines: 18
Nntp-Posting-Host: mothra.nts.uci.edu

pmartin@uceng.UC.EDU (Paul Martin) writes:


>Sorry but IRC appears to be SOLELY used for entertainment.  This is a
>poor example of how to spend the students and taxpayers money.

I just had two requests for a multiparty talk facility.  One was from
the Biology department, and the other was from the campus newpaper.

Both are interested in keeping track of a conference interaction, and both
do not want to take notes / hold meetings.  The only thing that is scaring
them away is that it takes a moderately knowledgeable Unix person to install
and maintain.

Personally I think phone conferences are much more productive, but recording
sessions might be very useful.

/mde/


Article: 1257 of comp.unix.admin
Path: NewsServ!fauern!ira.uka.de!sol.ctr.columbia.edu!spool.mu.edu!snorkelwacker.mit.edu!bloom-picayune.mit.edu!athena.mit.edu!jik
From: jik@athena.mit.edu (Jonathan I. Kamens)
Newsgroups: comp.unix.admin
Subject: Re: IRC and Security
Message-ID: <1991Mar13.232433.3162@athena.mit.edu>
Date: 13 Mar 91 23:24:33 GMT
Article-I.D.: athena.1991Mar13.232433.3162
References: <7748@uceng.UC.EDU> <NAPO.91Mar13202006@vipunen.hut.fi> <7753@uceng.UC.EDU>
Sender: news@athena.mit.edu (News system)
Organization: Massachusetts Institute of Technology
Lines: 19

In article <7753@uceng.UC.EDU>, pmartin@uceng.UC.EDU (Paul Martin) writes:
|> Sorry but IRC appears to be SOLELY used for entertainment.  This is a
|> poor example of how to spend the students and taxpayers money.

  During Desert Storm there Israelis on IRC during many of the bomb attacks,
giving eye-witness reports of what was going on (trying to censor themselves
for fear of giving away important information, for the most part). 
Furthermore, people all over the world were reporting news in real-time; for
much of the time, it was possible to get a compilation of all the important
facts from all the major news sources by logging into IRC.

  I don't consider that "entertainment," I consider it an integral part of the
"electronic community" for which I think we should be striving.

-- 
Jonathan Kamens			              USnail:
MIT Project Athena				11 Ashford Terrace
jik@Athena.MIT.EDU				Allston, MA  02134
Office: 617-253-8085			      Home: 617-782-0710


Article: 1258 of comp.unix.admin
Path: NewsServ!fauern!ira.uka.de!sol.ctr.columbia.edu!spool.mu.edu!samsung!cs.utexas.edu!sun-barr!newstop!texsun!convex!usenet
From: tchrist@convex.COM (Tom Christiansen)
Newsgroups: comp.unix.admin
Subject: Re: IRC and Security
Message-ID: <1991Mar13.232217.8994@convex.com>
Date: 13 Mar 91 23:22:17 GMT
Article-I.D.: convex.1991Mar13.232217.8994
References: <7748@uceng.UC.EDU> <NAPO.91Mar13202006@vipunen.hut.fi> <7753@uceng.UC.EDU>
Sender: usenet@convex.com (news access account)
Reply-To: tchrist@convex.COM (Tom Christiansen)
Organization: CONVEX Software Development, Richardson, TX
Lines: 11
Nntp-Posting-Host: pixel.convex.com

From the keyboard of pmartin@uceng.UC.EDU (Paul Martin):
:Sorry but IRC appears to be SOLELY used for entertainment.  This is a
:poor example of how to spend the students and taxpayers money.

So what?   Anything that gets them into computers more is a good thing.
Don't pre-judge what is and is not going to have good long-term side effects.

That said, it does sound frivolous, but unless there's a cycle or net 
or terminal crunch, I see no reason to take it away.

--tom


Article: 1259 of comp.unix.admin
Xref: NewsServ comp.unix.admin:1259 alt.flame:12659
Path: NewsServ!fauern!ira.uka.de!sol.ctr.columbia.edu!samsung!rex!wuarchive!psuvax1!hsdndev!husc6!encore!zelig.encore.com
From: jdarcy@zelig.encore.com (Jeff d'Arcy)
Newsgroups: comp.unix.admin,alt.flame
Subject: Re: IRC and Security
Message-ID: <14296@encore.Encore.COM>
Date: 13 Mar 91 23:01:05 GMT
References: <7753@uceng.UC.EDU>
Sender: news@Encore.COM
Followup-To: alt.flame
Lines: 14
Nntp-Posting-Host: zelig.encore.com

pmartin@uceng.UC.EDU (Paul Martin) writes:
> Sorry but IRC appears to be SOLELY used for entertainment.

Maybe that's the only use *you've* seen.  Unless you can read Finnish and
Kanji, you could never be sure how it's being used, and I assure you that
it has legitimate uses.

> This is a
> poor example of how to spend the students and taxpayers money.

Ahhh, another self-referential article.

          Jeff d'Arcy, Generic Software Engineer - jdarcy@encore.com
The problem with maintaining an open mind is all the crap people throw into it


Article: 1263 of comp.unix.admin
Path: NewsServ!fauern!ira.uka.de!sol.ctr.columbia.edu!spool.mu.edu!sdd.hp.com!zaphod.mps.ohio-state.edu!pacific.mps.ohio-state.edu!linac!att!pacbell.com!ucsd!ogicse!plains!overby
From: overby@plains.NoDak.edu (Glen Overby)
Newsgroups: comp.unix.admin
Subject: Re: IRC and Security
Message-ID: <8883@plains.NoDak.edu>
Date: 14 Mar 91 03:18:10 GMT
Article-I.D.: plains.8883
References: <7748@uceng.UC.EDU> <NAPO.91Mar13202006@vipunen.hut.fi> <7753@uceng.UC.EDU>
Organization: Geeks of the Round Table @ North Dakota State U
Lines: 11

In article <7753@uceng.UC.EDU> pmartin@uceng.UC.EDU (Paul Martin) writes:
>Sorry but IRC appears to be SOLELY used for entertainment.  This is a
>poor example of how to spend the students and taxpayers money.

Doesn't a good majority of Usenet News fall into the same category?

Not only is it a questionable expense of money, but time (well, time is
money ;-)  But it's something that we all enjoy, or we wouldn't be doing it.
-- 
		Glen Overby	<overby@plains.nodak.edu>
	uunet!plains!overby (UUCP)  overby@plains (Bitnet)


Article: 1264 of comp.unix.admin
Path: NewsServ!fauern!ira.uka.de!sol.ctr.columbia.edu!samsung!munnari.oz.au!goanna!minyos.xx.rmit.oz.au!s900387
From: s900387@minyos.xx.rmit.oz.au (Craig Macbride)
Newsgroups: comp.unix.admin
Subject: Re: IRC and Security
Keywords: IRC SECURITY
Message-ID: <1991Mar14.104207.9425@minyos.xx.rmit.oz.au>
Date: 14 Mar 91 10:42:07 GMT
References: <7748@uceng.UC.EDU>
Organization: VUT(RMIT), Melbourne, Australia
Lines: 18

pmartin@uceng.UC.EDU (Paul Martin) writes:

>[ ... ] To illustrate
>the point of IRC being used by those with nothing better to do with their
>time I have enclosed a copy of a message posted to alt.irc which describes
>a plan to use the internet for fantasy role playing games:

I suppose you'd prefer these people to do drugs or beat up old ladies, so
long as they don't use any CPU cyles on your machine to do it? What exactly
is bad about all these people using their minds to further games design and
communications? Are you just trying to make sure that those who use computers
aren't allowed to have fun while doing so?

-- 
 _--_|\		Craig Macbride	<uni: s900387@minyos.xx.rmit.oz.au>
/      \			<work: craig@bacchus.esa.oz.au>
\_.--.*/	VUT (RMIT) is responsible for the equipment, not the opinions!
      v


Article: 1266 of comp.unix.admin
Path: NewsServ!fauern!ira.uka.de!sol.ctr.columbia.edu!zaphod.mps.ohio-state.edu!know!news.cs.indiana.edu!uceng!pmartin
From: pmartin@uceng.UC.EDU (Paul Martin)
Newsgroups: comp.unix.admin
Subject: IRC and Security
Keywords: IRC SECURITY
Message-ID: <7763@uceng.UC.EDU>
Date: 14 Mar 91 15:31:08 GMT
Organization: Univ. of Cincinnati, College of Engg.
Lines: 59


In my orignal post, I describe a sitiuation that we have here at UC, dealing
with hackers, and pirates.  Since that time I have received numerous messages
telling me that I just dont know what IRC is about and IRC is used for 
anything from education to detailing scud attacks in Israel.  I have also
gotten replies telling me that game playing is good because it introduces
people to computers.  I have also received messages from people telling
not to blame the medium for the crime (ie. the phone system for a drug deal
or IRC for hacking)

I wish to make the following point:
I AM NOT TELLING SYSTEM ADMINISTRATORS HOW TO RUN THEIR SYSTEMS!
I am only presenting my point of view about how IRC is used.

Now that I have that out of the way I wish to present the following facts:

1) IRC is a meeting place for hackers and pirates.
   If you doubt this statement, logon to IRC and check out the different
   channels.  I was able to meet as many as five individuals willing to
   trade software with me in as little as two minutes.

2) People DO give out their passwords to people they meet on IRC.
   The most visible supporter of IRC was herself guilty at this University
   for giving out her password to more than twenty people.

3) IRC uses a great deal of bandwitdh.
   One of the replies I got back mentioned the as much as 3% of the
   total NSFNET backbone was used by IRC packets last month.

4) 99.9% of the information presented on IRC is used for entertainment.
   Again, if you don't believe this, logon to IRC and see for yourself.

5) Much of the network that IRC runs on is paid for by taxpayers.

6) IRC does not compare with Usenet News, Talk or E-Mail.
   Much of news is dedicated to the spread of knowledge (IE. this group).
   Talk and E-Mail normally used by individuals who know each other.
   Also these mediums are generally used for communication.

I am sure that people will continue to hack and pirate long after IRC is
gone from the earth, however it appears to me from my expeience in using
IRC, that IRC makes the problem worse.  One person mentioned to me that
I was "barking up two trees" because I saw two different problems with
IRC.  This is true.  IRC is both used for entertainment and illegitimate
activites.  But rather than take my word for it, please use IRC for a 
while so you can draw your own conculsions.  I also know that there are
many things worse than IRC on the Internet (like the Internet Crack Exchange,
a pirate BBS on the internet), and I know that there a many worse problems
in the world, however this is a problem which has simple and easy to
implement solution.  I do not have a personal vendeta against IRC.  I
appluade the free flow of information that the Internet is desgined to
be used for.  I just want to see the Internet being used in the fashion
that it was intended to be used.

-- 
+-----------------[Paul Martin @ Engineering College OCC, UC]-----------------+
| Internet: pmartin@uceng.uc.edu        | "Yes I am serious,                  |
| Dumb:     ...uceng!pmartin            |  and don't call me Shirley"         |
+-----------------------------------------------------------------------------+


Article: 1267 of comp.unix.admin
Path: NewsServ!fauern!ira.uka.de!sol.ctr.columbia.edu!samsung!cs.utexas.edu!execu!sequoia!uudell!upurbmw.dell.com!sblair
From: sblair@upurbmw.dell.com (Steve Blair)
Newsgroups: comp.unix.admin
Subject: Re: IRC and Security
Keywords: bzzzzzzzzzzzt WRONG ANSWER
Message-ID: <16415@uudell.dell.com>
Date: 14 Mar 91 15:22:24 GMT
References: <7748@uceng.UC.EDU> <NAPO.91Mar13202006@vipunen.hut.fi>
Sender: news@uudell.dell.com
Reply-To: sblair@upurbmw.dell.com (Steve Blair)
Organization: Dell Computer Corp.
Lines: 15

In article <NAPO.91Mar13202006@vipunen.hut.fi>, napo@vipunen.hut.fi (Hannu Napari) writes:
|> In article <7748@uceng.UC.EDU> pmartin@uceng.UC.EDU (Paul Martin) 
|> On this basis you should remove talk, smtp, nntp...

Fine, and while *you're* removing them, why not just take
your site off of the Internet. You've obviously no clue
what's going on here.

NSFnert, FARRnet, and others are very *CLEAR* in their guidelines



-- 
Steve Blair	DELL	UNIX	DIVISION sblair@upurbmw.dell.com
================================================================


Article: 1268 of comp.unix.admin
Path: NewsServ!fauern!ira.uka.de!sol.ctr.columbia.edu!emory!swrinde!cs.utexas.edu!rice!uw-beaver!milton!waah
From: waah@milton.u.washington.edu (scott machaffie)
Newsgroups: comp.unix.admin
Subject: Re: IRC and Security
Message-ID: <18396@milton.u.washington.edu>
Date: 14 Mar 91 16:56:46 GMT
References: <7748@uceng.UC.EDU> <NAPO.91Mar13202006@vipunen.hut.fi> <7753@uceng.UC.EDU>
Organization: University of Washington, Seattle
Lines: 8

pmartin@uceng.UC.EDU (Paul Martin) writes:

>In article <NAPO.91Mar13202006@vipunen.hut.fi> napo@vipunen.hut.fi (Hannu Napari) writes:
>Sorry but IRC appears to be SOLELY used for entertainment.  This is a
>poor example of how to spend the students and taxpayers money.

We first found out about the San Francisco earthquake over IRC.  Also, some of
my friends found out that their friends down there were okay through IRC.


Article: 1269 of comp.unix.admin
Path: NewsServ!fauern!ira.uka.de!sol.ctr.columbia.edu!samsung!rex!uflorida!mlb.semi.harris.com!mintaka.mlb.semi.harris.com!john
From: john@mintaka.mlb.semi.harris.com (John M. Blasik)
Newsgroups: comp.unix.admin
Subject: Re: IRC and Security
Message-ID: <1991Mar14.195150.1918@mlb.semi.harris.com>
Date: 14 Mar 91 19:51:50 GMT
References: <7748@uceng.UC.EDU> <NAPO.91Mar13202006@vipunen.hut.fi> <7753@uceng.UC.EDU>
Sender: news@mlb.semi.harris.com
Organization: Harris Semiconductor, Melbourne FL
Lines: 7
Nntp-Posting-Host: mintaka.mlb.semi.harris.com

pmartin@uceng.UC.EDU (Paul Martin) writes:
   |   
   |   Sorry but IRC appears to be SOLELY used for entertainment.  This is a
   |   poor example of how to spend the students and taxpayers money.
   |

PISS OFF!


Article: 1271 of comp.unix.admin
Path: NewsServ!fauern!unido!mcsun!sunic!fuug!news.funet.fi!kannel!Kimmo.Suominen
From: Kimmo.Suominen@lut.fi (Kimmo Suominen)
Newsgroups: comp.unix.admin
Subject: Re: IRC and Security
Message-ID: <KIMMO.SUOMINEN.91Mar14190523@kannel.lut.fi>
Date: 14 Mar 91 18:05:23 GMT
References: <7748@uceng.UC.EDU> <NAPO.91Mar13202006@vipunen.hut.fi>
	<7753@uceng.UC.EDU>
Sender: kim@lut.fi (Kimmo Suominen)
Organization: Lappeenranta University of Technology, Finland
Lines: 12
In-Reply-To: pmartin@uceng.UC.EDU's message of 13 Mar 91 22:21:31 GMT
Disclaimer: These are my opinions unless otherwise stated

>>>>> On 13 Mar 91 22:21:31 GMT, pmartin@uceng.UC.EDU (Paul Martin) said:

Paul> Sorry but IRC appears to be SOLELY used for entertainment.  This is a
Paul> poor example of how to spend the students and taxpayers money.

Many are the times I've connected to IRC to get a helpful hint on my
tasks.  The knowledge out there is huge, and most of the time you'll
find people willing to help you!  Perhaps you haven't been on IRC
enough to see all this.
--
Kim                      /  Internet: Kimmo.Suominen@lut.fi
"That's what I think."  /   Bitnet:   KIM@FINFILES


Article: 1272 of comp.unix.admin
Path: NewsServ!fauern!ira.uka.de!sol.ctr.columbia.edu!spool.mu.edu!cs.umn.edu!ariel.unm.edu!nmsu!opus!eoshaugh
From: eoshaugh@nmsu.edu (Erik Oshaughnessy)
Newsgroups: comp.unix.admin
Subject: Re: IRC and Security
Message-ID: <EOSHAUGH.91Mar14130658@dante.nmsu.edu>
Date: 14 Mar 91 20:06:58 GMT
Article-I.D.: dante.EOSHAUGH.91Mar14130658
References: <7748@uceng.UC.EDU> <NAPO.91Mar13202006@vipunen.hut.fi>
	<16415@uudell.dell.com>
Sender: news@NMSU.Edu
Organization: NMSU Computer Science
Lines: 23
In-reply-to: sblair@upurbmw.dell.com's message of 14 Mar 91 15:22:24 GMT

From the keyboard of sblair@upurbmw.dell.com (Steve Blair):
>In article napo@vipunen.hut.fi (Hannu Napari) writes:
>|> In article <7748@uceng.UC.EDU> pmartin@uceng.UC.EDU (Paul Martin) 
>|> On this basis you should remove talk, smtp, nntp...
>
>Fine, and while *you're* removing them, why not just take
>your site off of the Internet. You've obviously no clue
>what's going on here.

Wow! Someone forgot to check the sarcasm bit before they
flew off the handle and posted. Sigh.
_____________________________________________________________________________
		  ~			| Erik O'Shaughnessy
|\/\/\/|  	   ~			| Small Systems 
|      |  	 ~  	       		| New Mexico State University
|   *  |          ~ ()=========		| Las Cruces, NM USA
| (x)(x)  	    	L_l=====	| eoshaugh@dante.nmsu.edu
C      _) 		    ====	|------------------------------------
|  ,___|  		     ====	|"Do not follow the NULL pointer,
|    /    				| for that path leads to chaos, 
/____\    	Die Bart! Die!		| and madness." - me
|     \   				|
-----------------------------------------------------------------------------


Article: 1274 of comp.unix.admin
Path: NewsServ!fauern!ira.uka.de!sol.ctr.columbia.edu!spool.mu.edu!snorkelwacker.mit.edu!bloom-picayune.mit.edu!athena.mit.edu!jik
From: jik@athena.mit.edu (Jonathan I. Kamens)
Newsgroups: comp.unix.admin
Subject: Re: IRC and Security
Keywords: IRC SECURITY
Message-ID: <1991Mar14.212436.10526@athena.mit.edu>
Date: 14 Mar 91 21:24:36 GMT
Article-I.D.: athena.1991Mar14.212436.10526
References: <7763@uceng.UC.EDU>
Sender: news@athena.mit.edu (News system)
Organization: Massachusetts Institute of Technology
Lines: 81

In article <7763@uceng.UC.EDU>, pmartin@uceng.UC.EDU (Paul Martin) writes:
|> 1) IRC is a meeting place for hackers and pirates.

  You just don't seem to be understanding what people are telling you.

  Using this logic, I could go on a crusade to ban pinball arcades, retail
software stores, retail computer stores (got to get rid of those radio shack
computer outlets -- *hackers* and *pirates* meet there!), BBSs, the Usenet,
and the "pizza joints" in many towns.

  Sure, hackers and pirates talk on IRC.  But they talk in a lot of other
places as well.  Blaming IRC because there are hackers and pirates on it is
utterly absurd.

  But, then again, this seems to be a part of the growing trend in this
country to blame inanimate things for problems rather than blaming people.  A
kid shoots himself because a parent leaves a loaded gun in an unlocked drawer?
Blame the gun, not the parent!  Hackers and pirates use IRC to talk about
doing illegal things?  Blame IRC, not the hackers and pirates!

|> 2) People DO give out their passwords to people they meet on IRC.

  Um, so what?  What does IRC have to do with this?  It is our policy that
people should not give out their passwords (and I assume it is yours too), but
our policy doesn't say, "People *especially* shouldn't give out their
passwords on IRC!"  Once again, you're blaming the medium, not the people who
are committing wrong-doings.

  Now, before you say, "But shutting down IRC will make it more difficult for
pirates to pirate, or for people to give out their passwords!" let me remind
you that many people believe that IRC does many good things.  You appear to be
willing to ignore all of those good things because of the bad things you see
about IRC.  Most other people in this discussion are not.  Perhaps you should
listen to what they're saying for a minute?  After doing that, if you still
disagree, then fine, shut down IRC at your site.  But stop asking other people
to do it, because we won't, because we don't see things the same way you do.

|> 3) IRC uses a great deal of bandwitdh.

  See my previous paragraph.  There's nothing wrong with letting a useful
service use bandwidth.

|> 4) 99.9% of the information presented on IRC is used for entertainment.

  And 99.9% of statistics are made up.

|> 5) Much of the network that IRC runs on is paid for by taxpayers.

  And it provides services that are far more "educational" than some other
uses of the net.  Using this argument, I suspect you could shut down the
majority of network traffic today, depending on how strictly you're going to
judge things (and of how much you want to stifle the growth of the "electronic
community" I mentioned in a previous message).

|> 6) IRC does not compare with Usenet News, Talk or E-Mail.
|>    Much of news is dedicated to the spread of knowledge (IE. this group).
|>    Talk and E-Mail normally used by individuals who know each other.
|>    Also these mediums are generally used for communication.

  This is absurd.  People have given you numerous examples of things for which
IRC has been used that can most assuredly be considered "the spread of
knowledge".  Its use during the war and its using during the earthquake are
just two examples.

|> I am sure that people will continue to hack and pirate long after IRC is
|> gone from the earth, however it appears to me from my expeience in using
|> IRC, that IRC makes the problem worse.

  Computer networks in general make the problem worse.  That does not mean
that we should disband the Internet in order to make it harder for hackers and
pirates to hack and pirate.  That's cutting off your nose to spite your face.

|> I do not have a personal vendeta against IRC.

  Um, my impression is that, in fact, you do.

-- 
Jonathan Kamens			              USnail:
MIT Project Athena				11 Ashford Terrace
jik@Athena.MIT.EDU				Allston, MA  02134
Office: 617-253-8085			      Home: 617-782-0710


Article: 1290 of comp.unix.admin
Path: NewsServ!fauern!unido!mcsun!sunic!fuug!fuug.fi!napo
From: napo@vipunen.hut.fi (Hannu Napari)
Newsgroups: comp.unix.admin
Subject: Re: IRC and Security
Message-ID: <NAPO.91Mar15234939@vipunen.hut.fi>
Date: 15 Mar 91 22:49:39 GMT
References: <7763@uceng.UC.EDU>
Sender: usenet@fuug.fi (USENET News System)
Organization: Helsinki University of Technology, Finland
Lines: 60
In-Reply-To: pmartin@uceng.UC.EDU's message of 14 Mar 91 15:31:08 GMT
Nntp-Posting-Host: vipunen.hut.fi


In article <7763@uceng.UC.EDU> pmartin@uceng.UC.EDU (Paul Martin) writes:
>1) IRC is a meeting place for hackers and pirates.
>   If you doubt this statement, logon to IRC and check out the different
>   channels.  I was able to meet as many as five individuals willing to
>   trade software with me in as little as two minutes.

I wonder how many you could have met using talk. Again, this is
the fault of the people, not of the irc software.

>2) People DO give out their passwords to people they meet on IRC.
>   The most visible supporter of IRC was herself guilty at this University
>   for giving out her password to more than twenty people.

So what? I could spread my password using "conventional" means.
And once again, this is the fault of the people, not of the
software. Following your logic one should forbid everything.

>3) IRC uses a great deal of bandwitdh.
>   One of the replies I got back mentioned the as much as 3% of the
>   total NSFNET backbone was used by IRC packets last month.

The byte count of IRC-packets was 1.4% of the total. Most of the band-
width is taken by ftp-packets. I don't see you denying ftp-access.
Imagine how many illegal copies of commercial software is being
transferred right now...

>6) IRC does not compare with Usenet News, Talk or E-Mail.
>   Much of news is dedicated to the spread of knowledge (IE. this group).
>   Talk and E-Mail normally used by individuals who know each other.
>   Also these mediums are generally used for communication.

So we don't communicate when we're using IRC... Interesting fact.
And what is wrong in meeting other people, some of which are complete
strangers to oneself. It seems to me that you consider this somewhat
abnormal...

>But rather than take my word for it, please use IRC for a 
>while so you can draw your own conculsions.  I also know that there are
>many things worse than IRC on the Internet (like the Internet Crack Exchange,
>a pirate BBS on the internet), and I know that there a many worse problems
>in the world, however this is a problem which has simple and easy to
>implement solution.

I've used IRC since the very beginning. And I have drawn my conclusions
about your "facts"...

>I appluade the free flow of information that the Internet is desgined to
>be used for.  I just want to see the Internet being used in the fashion
>that it was intended to be used.

Free flow of information? Your ideas are far from that...

Internet is not a static and stable thing, it evolves all the time.

--
Napo    $ Today I am / a small blue thing / Made of china / made of glass
(leon)  $ I am cool and smooth and curious / I never blink / I am turning
        $ in your hand / Turning in your hand / small blue thing
        $


Article: 1291 of comp.unix.admin
Path: NewsServ!fauern!unido!mcsun!sunic!uupsi!rpi!zaphod.mps.ohio-state.edu!wuarchive!m.cs.uiuc.edu!jjones
From: jjones@cs.uiuc.edu (Joel Jones)
Newsgroups: comp.unix.admin
Subject: IRC Net Bandwidth (was IRC and Security)
Keywords: IRC SECURITY
Message-ID: <1991Mar15.165133.18601@m.cs.uiuc.edu>
Date: 15 Mar 91 16:51:33 GMT
References: <7763@uceng.UC.EDU>
Sender: news@m.cs.uiuc.edu (News Database (admin-Mike Schwager))
Reply-To: jjones@uiuc.edu
Organization: University of Illinois, Dept. of Comp. Sci., Urbana, IL
Lines: 21

pmartin@uceng.UC.EDU (Paul Martin) writes:
>3) IRC uses a great deal of bandwitdh.
>   One of the replies I got back mentioned the as much as 3% of the
>   total NSFNET backbone was used by IRC packets last month.

Here are some figures retrieved from merit.edu, thanks to Scott Cattanac:

Service			  port	  # packets   % month  #bytes       %bytes
J91irc                    6667     50541247   1.316    3942709477   0.640
F91irc                    6667    107960902   2.776    8849122531   1.397

So Paul Martins figures are pretty much correct in terms of # of packets.
However, if we look at bandwidth, irc only accounted for 1.397% of total bytes
sent on the NSFnet.
  Joel Jones
  jjones@uiuc.edu
-- 
Joel Jones      As the advertisment for an exhibition on Leonardo da Vinci said,
jjones@uiuc.edu "They called him a genius, a botanist, a demon, a philosopher, a
                 practical joker, an eccentric, and a visionary.  No wonder he 
                 was such a great engineer."


Article: 1295 of comp.unix.admin
Path: NewsServ!fauern!ira.uka.de!sol.ctr.columbia.edu!spool.mu.edu!munnari.oz.au!goanna!minyos.xx.rmit.oz.au!s900387
From: s900387@minyos.xx.rmit.oz.au (Craig Macbride)
Newsgroups: comp.unix.admin
Subject: Re: IRC and Security
Keywords: IRC SECURITY
Message-ID: <1991Mar15.172208.28120@minyos.xx.rmit.oz.au>
Date: 15 Mar 91 17:22:08 GMT
Article-I.D.: minyos.1991Mar15.172208.28120
References: <7763@uceng.UC.EDU>
Organization: VUT(RMIT), Melbourne, Australia
Lines: 35

In comp.unix.admin you write:

>Now that I have that out of the way I wish to present the following facts:

>1) IRC is a meeting place for hackers and pirates.
>   If you doubt this statement, logon to IRC and check out the different
>   channels.  I was able to meet as many as five individuals willing to
>   trade software with me in as little as two minutes.

I have used IRC quite a number of times and never seen any conversation at all
about pirating software. Sure, if you try to meet people like that, you may
well find them. At the same time, if I walked into my local computer shop I
could probably meet just as many, just as quickly.

>2) People DO give out their passwords to people they meet on IRC.
>   The most visible supporter of IRC was herself guilty at this University
>   for giving out her password to more than twenty people.

So because one person at your University is a dill, everyone else suffers?!

>But rather than take my word for it, please use IRC for a 
>while so you can draw your own conculsions.

Yep, and having used it on and off for many months, I can safely say that I
have seen plenty of entertainment and absolutely no illegal activities. If
some of the people who use pirate bulletin boards are using IRC, they are
not doing so in as obvious a way as elsewhere. Taking away IRC will not impact
upon their activitied at all, but will only affect the activities of those who
are just ordinary users of the facility.

-- 
 _--_|\		Craig Macbride	<uni: s900387@minyos.xx.rmit.oz.au>
/      \			<work: craig@bacchus.esa.oz.au>
\_.--.*/	VUT (RMIT) is responsible for the equipment, not the opinions!
      v


Article: 1297 of comp.unix.admin
Path: NewsServ!fauern!unido!mcsun!sunic!uupsi!rpi!zaphod.mps.ohio-state.edu!sdd.hp.com!spool.mu.edu!news.cs.indiana.edu!ariel.unm.edu!nmsu!opus!afoiani
From: afoiani@hobbes.nmsu.edu (Anthony "Tkil" Foiani)
Newsgroups: comp.unix.admin
Subject: Re: IRC and Security
Message-ID: <AFOIANI.91Mar15153641@hobbes.nmsu.edu>
Date: 15 Mar 91 22:36:41 GMT
References: <7763@uceng.UC.EDU>
Sender: news@NMSU.Edu
Organization: Campus Crusade for Chthulhu
Lines: 22
In-reply-to: pmartin@uceng.UC.EDU's message of 14 Mar 91 15:31:08 GMT


In response to pmartin's points 3-5:

> 3) IRC uses a great deal of bandwitdh.
>    One of the replies I got back mentioned the as much as 3% of the
>    total NSFNET backbone was used by IRC packets last month.
> 
> 4) 99.9% of the information presented on IRC is used for entertainment.
>    Again, if you don't believe this, logon to IRC and see for yourself.
> 
> 5) Much of the network that IRC runs on is paid for by taxpayers.

One question:  Does your campus have a student union building? 

Think about it.
Tony
--
Tony Foiani  a.k.a. Tkil  (afoiani@nmsu.edu) or (mcsajf@nmsuvm1.bitnet)
Supporting:  Unix / DOS / VMS / Macintosh / "What's this?"
 "But, although we make records for a hard world, we make records for
  a hard world that you can get by in, and that you can have fun in,
  that you can get off on." - Andrew Eldritch of The Sisters Of Mercy


Article: 1298 of comp.unix.admin
Path: NewsServ!fauern!unido!mcsun!sunic!uupsi!rpi!zaphod.mps.ohio-state.edu!uakari.primate.wisc.edu!aplcen!boingo.med.jhu.edu!haven!uvaarpa!murdoch!astsun.astro.Virginia.EDU!gl8f
From: gl8f@astsun.astro.Virginia.EDU (Greg Lindahl)
Newsgroups: comp.unix.admin
Subject: Re: IRC and Security
Keywords: ANAL ASSHOLES
Message-ID: <1991Mar15.200235.13575@murdoch.acc.Virginia.EDU>
Date: 15 Mar 91 20:02:35 GMT
References: <7763@uceng.UC.EDU> <1991Mar14.212436.10526@athena.mit.edu>
Sender: usenet@murdoch.acc.Virginia.EDU
Organization: Department of Astronomy, University of Virginia
Lines: 12

In article <1991Mar14.212436.10526@athena.mit.edu> jik@athena.mit.edu (Jonathan I. Kamens) writes:

>  This is absurd.  People have given you numerous examples of things for which
>IRC has been used that can most assuredly be considered "the spread of
>knowledge".  Its use during the war and its using during the earthquake are
>just two examples.

I might note in passing that IRC can be used in educational ways, but
also writing IRC itself has been quite an education for the people
involved. Ever written a fully-distributed mostly-fault-tolerant
database system in an Internetwork enviornment? Loads of fun, I assure
you.


Article: 1318 of comp.unix.admin
Path: NewsServ!fauern!unido!mcsun!uunet!spool.mu.edu!sdd.hp.com!usc!rpi!uupsi!cmcl2!kramden.acf.nyu.edu!brnstnd
From: brnstnd@kramden.acf.nyu.edu (Dan Bernstein)
Newsgroups: comp.unix.admin
Subject: Re: IRC Net Bandwidth (was IRC and Security)
Message-ID: <5152:Mar1805:08:4291@kramden.acf.nyu.edu>
Date: 18 Mar 91 05:08:42 GMT
References: <7763@uceng.UC.EDU> <1991Mar15.165133.18601@m.cs.uiuc.edu>
Organization: IR
Lines: 13

In article <1991Mar15.165133.18601@m.cs.uiuc.edu> jjones@uiuc.edu writes:
> Service			  port	  # packets   % month  #bytes       %bytes
> J91irc                    6667     50541247   1.316    3942709477   0.640
> F91irc                    6667    107960902   2.776    8849122531   1.397
> So Paul Martins figures are pretty much correct in terms of # of packets.
> However, if we look at bandwidth, irc only accounted for 1.397% of total bytes
> sent on the NSFnet.

But it's the packets that cost. A 2-byte packet costs almost as much as
a 500-byte packet. Apparently IRC sends about twice as few bytes per
packet as the average service; this certainly doesn't make it cheaper.

---Dan


Article: 1321 of comp.unix.admin
Path: NewsServ!fauern!unido!mcsun!uunet!elroy.jpl.nasa.gov!swrinde!zaphod.mps.ohio-state.edu!ub!uhura.cc.rochester.edu!rochester!pt.cs.cmu.edu!o.gp.cs.cmu.edu!andrew.cmu.edu!dl2p+
From: dl2p+@andrew.cmu.edu (Douglas Allen Luce)
Newsgroups: comp.unix.admin
Subject: Usefulness of IRC
Message-ID: <wbsyqDC00XQCAMG7lR@andrew.cmu.edu>
Date: 17 Mar 91 22:28:31 GMT
Organization: Class of '91, Carnegie Mellon, Pittsburgh, PA
Lines: 18

One note I'd like to make:

IRC has been invaluable to me for finding spot information in a timely
manner.  Questions of mine that have been answered this month include
"Where can I find GNU AWK for the PC" and "Why does my RT's version of
inetd screw up when I send it a HUP, but not when I reboot?"  There
has also been individuals on who can give me a bigger picture of
network problems, like "why can't I get to llnl.gov today?"

I've been studying these real-time conversation systems on an informal
basis for several years, and I would bet that if taxpayers were to get
a wind of what goes on, they would be all for it.  Perhaps they would
even pay more so they could get a piece of the action (Minitel comes
to mind when estimating this reaction).

Douglas Luce
Chemical Engineering
Carnegie Mellon


Article: 1359 of comp.unix.admin
Path: NewsServ!fauern!ira.uka.de!sol.ctr.columbia.edu!zaphod.mps.ohio-state.edu!swrinde!elroy.jpl.nasa.gov!decwrl!mcnc!uvaarpa!murdoch!turing!jon
From: jon@turing.acs.virginia.edu (Jon Gefaell)
Newsgroups: comp.unix.admin
Subject: Re: IRC and Security
Message-ID: <1991Mar19.173303.20613@murdoch.acc.Virginia.EDU>
Date: 19 Mar 91 17:33:03 GMT
References: <7748@uceng.UC.EDU> <24519@hydra.gatech.EDU>
Sender: usenet@murdoch.acc.Virginia.EDU
Organization: University of Virginia
Lines: 37

In article <24519@hydra.gatech.EDU> scott@prism.gatech.EDU (Scott Holt) writes:
>There are a number of pluses and minuses concerning IRC - however,
>the so-called security problems it causes are problems it has in
>common with any communications medium. I don't think you will find
>any medium which has not been used for some criminal purpose at some
>time in its existance. 
>
>The problems I have with IRC have nothing to do with security, but
>the resources it takes. It has been mentioned that IRC is not a 
>heavy load on resources - to that my reply is b------t. It may be 
>a minor drain on network facilities, but it is a serious drain on other
>resources. 

This sounds like a site specific concern. I urge to to deal with the matter
within your domain in any manner you wish. I also urge you not to make your
problems ours.

>others are waiting - what are we supposed to do, walk around an look
>over everyones'shoulders?

Get more seats, or design, implement, and enforce local policies to eliminate
IRC in your domain. 

>I think the only way to keep IRC and similar facilities from becoming
>more trouble than they are worth is for the folks to manage the relays
>to take more responsibility. For example, if some site administrators
>do not want people using IRC, then they should be able to have the
>relay operators configure the relay to deny access to their sites.

You might consider taking action to restrict use of port 6667, or  
other means.

--
____
\  /       		 Jon Gefaell (jon@Turing.acs.Virginia.EDU)           
 \/ The pleasure of satisfying a savage instinct, undomesticated by the ego,    is uncomparably much more intense than one of satisfying a tamed instinct.      The reason is becoming the enemy that prevents us from a lot of possibilities   of pleasure. 		
		S. Freud


Article: 1360 of comp.unix.admin
Path: NewsServ!fauern!ira.uka.de!sol.ctr.columbia.edu!zaphod.mps.ohio-state.edu!swrinde!elroy.jpl.nasa.gov!decwrl!mcnc!uvaarpa!murdoch!turing!jon
From: jon@turing.acs.virginia.edu (Jon Gefaell)
Newsgroups: comp.unix.admin
Subject: Re: IRC and Security
Message-ID: <1991Mar19.173953.20702@murdoch.acc.Virginia.EDU>
Date: 19 Mar 91 17:39:53 GMT
References: <7753@uceng.UC.EDU> <1991Mar13.232433.3162@athena.mit.edu> <5077:Mar1805:03:4491@kramden.acf.nyu.edu>
Sender: usenet@murdoch.acc.Virginia.EDU
Organization: University of Virginia
Lines: 27

In article <5077:Mar1805:03:4491@kramden.acf.nyu.edu> brnstnd@kramden.acf.nyu.edu (Dan Bernstein) writes:
>contribute so strongly to illegal behavior: any communications medium
>will suffer some amount of abuse. However, a sysadmin paid to maintain
>computers for instruction and research is perfectly justified in cutting
>off the entire IRC system rather than trying to weed out the valid use
>from the chaff. On USENET it's at least practical to carry only comp.*
>and news.*; IRC has no comparable ability.

Design, implement, and enforce local site standards. It's YOUR CONCERN, and
it's YOUR JOB.

>
>You may argue that it's not your responsibility to worry about illegal
>behavior. You just shouldn't criticize those who do.

You are the one calling it illegal behaviour. Those of us with a clue know
better.

>
>---Dan


--
____
\  /       		 Jon Gefaell (jon@Turing.acs.Virginia.EDU)           
 \/ The pleasure of satisfying a savage instinct, undomesticated by the ego,    is uncomparably much more intense than one of satisfying a tamed instinct.      The reason is becoming the enemy that prevents us from a lot of possibilities   of pleasure. 		
		S. Freud


Article: 1361 of comp.unix.admin
Path: NewsServ!fauern!ira.uka.de!sol.ctr.columbia.edu!zaphod.mps.ohio-state.edu!swrinde!elroy.jpl.nasa.gov!decwrl!mcnc!uvaarpa!murdoch!turing!jon
From: jon@turing.acs.virginia.edu (Jon Gefaell)
Newsgroups: comp.unix.admin
Subject: Re: IRC and Security
Message-ID: <1991Mar19.174541.20960@murdoch.acc.Virginia.EDU>
Date: 19 Mar 91 17:45:41 GMT
References: <7763@uceng.UC.EDU> <522@bria> <1991Mar18.174346.26755@murdoch.acc.Virginia.EDU>
Sender: usenet@murdoch.acc.Virginia.EDU
Organization: University of Virginia
Lines: 31

In article <1991Mar18.174346.26755@murdoch.acc.Virginia.EDU> gsh7w@astsun8.astro.Virginia.EDU (Greg Hennessy) writes:
>
>Paul Martin:
>#>I just want to see the Internet being used in the fashion
>#>that it was intended to be used.
>
>uunet!bria!mike:
>#Something about this comment just doesn't sit right with me.
>#Can you say ``fascism''?
>
>Why is is fascist to want a tax supported entity being used in the
>manner that it was intended to be used?

It is facist when ONE person, or a SMALL group of people attempt to 
control everyone else, and make THIER will the Only True Way.

>
>--
>-Greg Hennessy, University of Virginia
> USPS Mail:     Astronomy Department, Charlottesville, VA 22903-2475 USA
> Internet:      gsh7w@virginia.edu  
> UUCP:		...!uunet!virginia!gsh7w


Did you know that we (here at U.Va.) have two IRC servers and about 30 local
users of IRC? Did you know that one is in your department?
--
____
\  /       		 Jon Gefaell (jon@Turing.acs.Virginia.EDU)           
 \/ The pleasure of satisfying a savage instinct, undomesticated by the ego,    is uncomparably much more intense than one of satisfying a tamed instinct.      The reason is becoming the enemy that prevents us from a lot of possibilities   of pleasure. 		
		S. Freud


Article: 1371 of comp.unix.admin
Path: NewsServ!fauern!unido!mcsun!uunet!bria!mike
Newsgroups: comp.unix.admin
Subject: Re: IRC and Security
Message-ID: <530@bria>
Date: 20 Mar 91 02:03:37 GMT
References: <7763@uceng.UC.EDU> <522@bria> <1991Mar18.174346.26755@murdoch.acc.Virginia.EDU>
Reply-To: uunet!bria!mike
Organization: MGI Group International, Los Angeles, CA
Lines: 26
Followup-To:
Keywords:

In an article, astsun8.astro.Virginia.EDU!gsh7w (Greg Hennessy) writes:
>Why is it fascist to want a tax supported entity being used in the
>manner that it was intended to be used?

``There is no greater evil than benign intent.'' -- me

Who's intent?  Yours?  Mine?  This is the same kind of thinking that
invokes such as mindless statements like ``The founders of the Constitution
didn't intend to protect those foul Heavy Metal Groups when they wrote
about the freedom of speech.''

Even if the intent was written out and graven in stone (ie: Government Policy),
it doesn't mean a thing.  Simply because someone else didn't think of it first,
it shouldn't be done?  C'mon now ...

It's intent is it's use.  Let people use it as they see fit.  After all,
they're paying for it just like you are.  Of course, there is always that
great old harp ``if I don't like the way it's being used, then I shouldn't
have to pay for it.''  Too damn bad.

Or, in other words, don't be such a wet blanket.
-- 
Michael Stefanik, MGI Inc., Los Angeles| Opinions stated are not even my own.
Title of the week: Systems Engineer    | UUCP: ...!uunet!bria!mike
-------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Remember folks: If you can't flame MS-DOS, then what _can_ you flame?


Article: 1376 of comp.unix.admin
Path: NewsServ!fauern!ira.uka.de!sol.ctr.columbia.edu!zaphod.mps.ohio-state.edu!rpi!bu.edu!m2c!seqp4!jdarcy
From: jdarcy@seqp4.ORG (Jeffrey D'Arcy)
Newsgroups: comp.unix.admin
Subject: Re: IRC Net Bandwidth (was IRC and Security)
Message-ID: <703@seqp4.UUCP>
Date: 19 Mar 91 16:19:02 GMT
References: <5152:Mar1805:08:4291@kramden.acf.nyu.edu>
Organization: Sequoia Systems Inc., Marlboro, Mass.
Lines: 11

brnstnd@kramden.acf.nyu.edu (Dan Bernstein) writes:
>But it's the packets that cost. A 2-byte packet costs almost as much as
>a 500-byte packet.

Yeah, right.  On an Ethernet, you have a 14-byte Ethernet header, 20-byte
IP header, 20-byte TCP header, a couple of trailers...all told less than
60 bytes, and I can't imagine other data links are that much worse.  That
would seem to make a 500-byte packet about nine times as costly as a 2-byte
packet in terms of transmission time.  Certainly there are per-packet costs
regardless of the packet length, but not enough to make your statement even
nearly true.


Article: 1380 of comp.unix.admin
Path: NewsServ!fauern!unido!mcsun!sunic!uupsi!rpi!usc!cs.utexas.edu!rice!devils.rice.edu!schafer
From: schafer@devils.rice.edu (Richard Alan Schafer)
Newsgroups: comp.unix.admin
Subject: Re: IRC Net Bandwidth (was IRC and Security)
Message-ID: <1991Mar20.154400.9267@rice.edu>
Date: 20 Mar 91 15:44:00 GMT
References: <5152:Mar1805:08:4291@kramden.acf.nyu.edu> <703@seqp4.UUCP>
Sender: news@rice.edu (News)
Reply-To: schafer@devils.rice.edu (Richard Alan Schafer)
Organization: Rice University
Lines: 20

In article <703@seqp4.UUCP>, jdarcy@seqp4.ORG (Jeffrey D'Arcy) writes:
|> brnstnd@kramden.acf.nyu.edu (Dan Bernstein) writes:
|> >But it's the packets that cost. A 2-byte packet costs almost as much as
|> >a 500-byte packet.
|> 
|> Yeah, right.  On an Ethernet, you have a 14-byte Ethernet header, 20-byte
|> IP header, 20-byte TCP header, a couple of trailers...all told less than
|> 60 bytes, and I can't imagine other data links are that much worse.  That
|> would seem to make a 500-byte packet about nine times as costly as a 2-byte
|> packet in terms of transmission time.  Certainly there are per-packet costs
|> regardless of the packet length, but not enough to make your statement even
|> nearly true.

True, if all you're considering is the actual number of bytes send down the
pipe.  But if you consider the effect on anything that has to route the 
packet, everything I've seen suggests that the handling of the packet
headers, etc., is much more of a load than the actual size of the data
in the packet itself.  I.e., if decoding the headers in a 1500 byte
Ethernet packet takes up more time than actually sending the data portion
of the packet, then the size of the data is not necessarily relevant.


Article: 1381 of comp.unix.admin
Path: NewsServ!fauern!ira.uka.de!sol.ctr.columbia.edu!spool.mu.edu!munnari.oz.au!bruce!goanna!minyos.xx.rmit.oz.au!t891368
From: t891368@minyos.xx.rmit.oz.au (Mark)
Newsgroups: comp.unix.admin
Subject: Re: Usefulness of IRC
Message-ID: <1991Mar20.055731.24394@minyos.xx.rmit.oz.au>
Date: 20 Mar 91 05:57:31 GMT
Article-I.D.: minyos.1991Mar20.055731.24394
References: <wbsyqDC00XQCAMG7lR@andrew.cmu.edu>
Organization: RMIT Computer Centre, Melbourne Australia.
Lines: 35

dl2p+@andrew.cmu.edu (Douglas Allen Luce) writes:

>One note I'd like to make:

>IRC has been invaluable to me for finding spot information in a timely
>manner.  Questions of mine that have been answered this month include
>to mind when estimating this reaction).

>Douglas Luce
>Chemical Engineering
>Carnegie Mellon

I also have being using IRC for a long time and the benefits and "side
effects" of it have been quite large. Learning about networks and 
a working knowledge of C are just a few. The more emotive benefits are
the people who I have met and continue to talk to.

Taking a step back one can see IRC as a mini world with its own highs
and lows. Im intrigued by the reactions and actions of people in general
and IRC brings those to the front. Any move to restrict the use of IRC
simply because of the way a few individuals use(d) it would show great
short sightedness IMHO. 

I know a lot of people in here just dont have the time to explore
things like IRC. Can we move the discussion to alt.irc and spare
the admin's here another flame war?

Mark

-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-
Mark Matthewson                     Long distance runners can keep going longer
t891368@minyos.xx.rmit.oz.au             Is your job secure?
mark@gnu.ai.mit.edu                      Do you have the code to prove it?
P.O. Box 487 Essendon Australia 3040     Phone: Yes      IrcNick: Mark
-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-


Article: 1399 of comp.unix.admin
Path: NewsServ!fauern!unido!mcsun!uunet!olivea!decwrl!ucbvax!dog.ee.lbl.gov!elf.ee.lbl.gov!torek
From: torek@elf.ee.lbl.gov (Chris Torek)
Newsgroups: comp.unix.admin
Subject: Re: IRC Net Bandwidth (was IRC and Security)
Message-ID: <11198@dog.ee.lbl.gov>
Date: 20 Mar 91 20:45:21 GMT
References: <5152:Mar1805:08:4291@kramden.acf.nyu.edu> <703@seqp4.UUCP>
Reply-To: torek@elf.ee.lbl.gov (Chris Torek)
Organization: Lawrence Berkeley Laboratory, Berkeley
Lines: 28
X-Local-Date: Wed, 20 Mar 91 12:45:21 PST

>brnstnd@kramden.acf.nyu.edu (Dan Bernstein) writes:
>>But it's the packets that cost. A 2-byte packet costs almost as much as
>>a 500-byte packet.

In article <703@seqp4.UUCP> jdarcy@seqp4.ORG (Jeffrey D'Arcy) writes:
>Yeah, right.  On an Ethernet, you have ....

Two points are important here:

	Most wide-area links are not Ethernet (so you cannot calculate
	packet lengths using Ethernet particulars);

and:

	Much of the Internet within the continental USA (and probably
	also outside it, but I do not know) uses truly horrid IP
	forwarding implementations.  The NSS routers, for instance,
	have (or had; probably this has been fixed by now) such long
	code paths that they could not keep up with T1 (1.44 Mb/s)
	links.

The huge latency introduced by existing Internet routers really does make
small packets almost as expensive as large ones.

This is entirely curable (and in software, no less).
-- 
In-Real-Life: Chris Torek, Lawrence Berkeley Lab CSE/EE (+1 415 486 5427)
Berkeley, CA		Domain:	torek@ee.lbl.gov


Article: 1406 of comp.unix.admin
Path: NewsServ!fauern!unido!mcsun!uunet!ukma!rex!wuarchive!zaphod.mps.ohio-state.edu!think.com!yale!cmcl2!kramden.acf.nyu.edu!brnstnd
From: brnstnd@kramden.acf.nyu.edu (Dan Bernstein)
Newsgroups: comp.unix.admin
Subject: Re: IRC Net Bandwidth (was IRC and Security)
Message-ID: <16929:Mar2121:19:0091@kramden.acf.nyu.edu>
Date: 21 Mar 91 21:19:00 GMT
References: <5152:Mar1805:08:4291@kramden.acf.nyu.edu> <703@seqp4.UUCP>
Organization: IR
Lines: 27

In article <703@seqp4.UUCP> jdarcy@seqp4.ORG (Jeffrey D'Arcy) writes:
> brnstnd@kramden.acf.nyu.edu (Dan Bernstein) writes:
> >But it's the packets that cost. A 2-byte packet costs almost as much as
> >a 500-byte packet.
> Yeah, right.  On an Ethernet, you have a 14-byte Ethernet header, 20-byte
> IP header, 20-byte TCP header, a couple of trailers...all told less than
> 60 bytes, and I can't imagine other data links are that much worse.

By far the largest cost of a packet on the Internet is the cost of
routing. If we upgraded NSFNET to trillion-megabyte-per-microsecond
links, connections over it would run perhaps a few percent faster.

You can shout all you want about ``data links,'' but there aren't any
fixed data links in the Internet except on local networks. How much IRC
data do you think *doesn't* get propagated outside its local network?

> That
> would seem to make a 500-byte packet about nine times as costly as a 2-byte
> packet in terms of transmission time.  Certainly there are per-packet costs
> regardless of the packet length, but not enough to make your statement even
> nearly true.

Rather than making up statistics, why don't you measure what actually
goes on? The cost per byte is very small compared to the fixed cost per
packet.

---Dan


Article: 1407 of comp.unix.admin
Path: NewsServ!fauern!unido!mcsun!uunet!ukma!wuarchive!sdd.hp.com!spool.mu.edu!think.com!yale!cmcl2!kramden.acf.nyu.edu!brnstnd
From: brnstnd@kramden.acf.nyu.edu (Dan Bernstein)
Newsgroups: comp.unix.admin
Subject: Re: IRC and Security
Message-ID: <17186:Mar2121:29:2691@kramden.acf.nyu.edu>
Date: 21 Mar 91 21:29:26 GMT
References: <1991Mar13.232433.3162@athena.mit.edu> <5077:Mar1805:03:4491@kramden.acf.nyu.edu> <1991Mar19.173953.20702@murdoch.acc.Virginia.EDU>
Organization: IR
Lines: 17

In article <1991Mar19.173953.20702@murdoch.acc.Virginia.EDU> jon@turing.acs.virginia.edu (Jon Gefaell) writes:
> >You may argue that it's not your responsibility to worry about illegal
> >behavior. You just shouldn't criticize those who do.
> You are the one calling it illegal behaviour. Those of us with a clue know
> better.

I didn't say that IRC was illegal, only that many of its users appear to
(illegally!) send large amounts of data across it that does *not*
contribute to instruction or research. Sorry, but whimpers like ``those
of us with a clue know better'' don't hold up in court, or with the
Department of Education, or with the administrators who pay the bills.

I don't see IRC taking up noticeable resources here, so I'm not worried
about it. I just think that it's rather idiotic to criticize someone who
does worry about it.

---Dan


Article: 1419 of comp.unix.admin
Path: NewsServ!fauern!ira.uka.de!sol.ctr.columbia.edu!lll-winken!elroy.jpl.nasa.gov!ncar!gatech!mcnc!uvaarpa!murdoch!astsun.astro.Virginia.EDU!gl8f
From: gl8f@astsun.astro.Virginia.EDU (Greg Lindahl)
Newsgroups: comp.unix.admin
Subject: Re: IRC and Security
Message-ID: <1991Mar22.064514.25746@murdoch.acc.Virginia.EDU>
Date: 22 Mar 91 06:45:14 GMT
References: <5077:Mar1805:03:4491@kramden.acf.nyu.edu> <1991Mar19.173953.20702@murdoch.acc.Virginia.EDU> <17186:Mar2121:29:2691@kramden.acf.nyu.edu>
Sender: usenet@murdoch.acc.Virginia.EDU
Organization: Department of Astronomy, University of Virginia
Lines: 7

In article <17186:Mar2121:29:2691@kramden.acf.nyu.edu> brnstnd@kramden.acf.nyu.edu (Dan Bernstein) writes:

>I didn't say that IRC was illegal, only that many of its users appear to
>(illegally!) send large amounts of data across it that does *not*
>contribute to instruction or research.

Dan Bernstein -- judge, jury, and executioner.


Article: 1429 of comp.unix.admin
Path: NewsServ!fauern!ira.uka.de!sol.ctr.columbia.edu!caen!uwm.edu!linac!att!bu.edu!m2c!seqp4!jdarcy
From: jdarcy@seqp4.ORG (Jeffrey d'Arcy)
Newsgroups: comp.unix.admin
Subject: Re: IRC Net Bandwidth (was IRC and Security)
Message-ID: <704@seqp4.UUCP>
Date: 22 Mar 91 16:29:35 GMT
References: <703@seqp4.UUCP> <16929:Mar2121:19:0091@kramden.acf.nyu.edu>
Reply-To: jdarcy@seqp4.UUCP (Jeffrey d'Arcy)
Organization: Sequoia Systems Inc., Marlboro, Mass
Lines: 44

brnstnd@kramden.acf.nyu.edu (Dan Bernstein) writes:
>Rather than making up statistics, why don't you measure what actually
>goes on? The cost per byte is very small compared to the fixed cost per
>packet.

When he wasn't quoting parts of my previous article out of context, Chris Torek
pointed out what I (and probably most people here) already knew: the routers
used by NSFnet have pretty poor performance.  Let's see just how poor they'd
have to be for your original statement (that a 2-byte packet consumes nearly
the same resources as a 500-byte packet) to be true.

If I recall, T1 speed is 1.44 Mb/s, or 180 KB/s.  That means a single byte
takes ~5.5 microseconds to be transmitted.  Therefore, the difference in
transmission time between a 2-byte packet and a 500-byte packet is ~2.8ms.
The per-packet processing time would have to be greater than this in order
to be considered more significant than the transmission time.  Since the
reciprocal of the per-packet processing time is the packets-per-second rate,
the router would have to be limited to a sustained rate of <360pps for your
first statement to be true of routers attached to T1 links.  Arguments about
queuing delay do not apply since we're dealing with *sustained* packet rates
and therefore constant queue lengths.  Also, the break-even packet rate will
be much lower for slower links such as the near-ubiquitous 56Kb.

So, is anyone going to tell me that the NSFnet routers are unable to route
360pps?  I don't think so.  To debunk your specious little argument even
further, you're attempting to compare the *transmission* cost per byte to
the *routing* cost per packet, which is not what I was talking about.  What's
relevant here is the transmission cost *per packet* compared to the routing
cost per packet.  This relationship *will* vary according to packet size,
and for large packets the the routing cost is the lesser of the two.

Since you obviously need help finding valid arguments, I'll give you one for
free.  In the second paragraph above I failed to mention that the routing
delay *for all routers on a path* (not for a single router) would need to be
>2.8ms to be the governing factor.  Thus, on a 10-hop path the routing delay
on *each* router would have to be only 0.28ms, and the native packet rate
would have to be 3600pps.  Also, queuing delay does become a factor now since
the router interfaces are probably not all the same speed.  Nonetheless, I
think your statement as regards IRC is far from proven, especially since (a)
adjacent IRC servers are typically only a few IP hops apart, and (b) it's not
IRC's fault that the Internet has to deal with many unnecessarily small packets
generated by applications (or systems) that don't coalesce packets properly.

Chris, do you know if the NSFnet routers can handle 3600pps in loopback?


Article: 1430 of comp.unix.admin
Path: NewsServ!fauern!ira.uka.de!sol.ctr.columbia.edu!lll-winken!elroy.jpl.nasa.gov!swrinde!zaphod.mps.ohio-state.edu!pacific.mps.ohio-state.edu!linac!att!ucbvax!dog.ee.lbl.gov!elf.ee.lbl.gov!torek
From: torek@elf.ee.lbl.gov (Chris Torek)
Newsgroups: comp.unix.admin
Subject: Re: IRC Net Bandwidth (was IRC and Security)
Message-ID: <11378@dog.ee.lbl.gov>
Date: 23 Mar 91 08:24:21 GMT
References: <703@seqp4.UUCP> <16929:Mar2121:19:0091@kramden.acf.nyu.edu> <704@seqp4.UUCP>
Reply-To: torek@elf.ee.lbl.gov (Chris Torek)
Organization: Lawrence Berkeley Laboratory, Berkeley
Lines: 22
X-Local-Date: Sat, 23 Mar 91 00:24:21 PST

In article <704@seqp4.UUCP> jdarcy@seqp4.UUCP (Jeffrey d'Arcy) writes:
>Chris, do you know if the NSFnet routers can handle 3600pps in loopback?

This is all from my memory of one conversation on a noisy bus (the kind
that carries people around cities, not the kind you find in a computer)
from almost a year ago, and I understand things have been improved (I
certainly hope so!).  In other words, do not assume that this number
represents reality:  At the time the NSS routers peaked out at not much
over 300 packets per second, and certainly under 1000 packets per second.

Another word of warning: this is probably a deduction from a measurement
showing that each NSS hop added an otherwise unaccountable 2 to 4 ms. of
latency to each packet (regardless of packet size).

At the time (and perhaps still), getting a packet from one end of an
NSS to another actually involved sending it through 3 to 5 separate
machines.  There was also mention of someone `getting the packet
forwarding cost down to about 14,000 instructions' (these being on IBM
ROMPs)---apparently this was an improvement that was not yet in place.
-- 
In-Real-Life: Chris Torek, Lawrence Berkeley Lab CSE/EE (+1 415 486 5427)
Berkeley, CA		Domain:	torek@ee.lbl.gov


Article: 1434 of comp.unix.admin
Path: NewsServ!fauern!opal!math.fu-berlin.de!uniol!sol.north.de!terra
From: terra@sol.north.de (Frank Simon)
Newsgroups: comp.unix.admin
Subject: Re: IRC and Security
Message-ID: <507@sol.north.de>
Date: 23 Mar 91 18:10:40 GMT
References: <5077:Mar1805:03:4491@kramden.acf.nyu.edu> <1991Mar19.173953.20702@murdoch.acc.Virginia.EDU> <17186:Mar2121:29:2691@kramden.acf.nyu.edu> <1991Mar22.064514.25746@murdoch.acc.Virginia.EDU>
Organization: Solar System, Ls 441 Oldenburg, FRG
Lines: 21

Hello !

In article <17186:Mar2121:29:2691@kramden.acf.nyu.edu> brnstnd@kramden.acf.nyu.edu (Dan Bernstein) writes:
>I didn't say that IRC was illegal, only that many of its users appear to
>(illegally!) send large amounts of data across it that does *not*
>contribute to instruction or research.
Do U really think, that all sites in the world wide Internet community R 
only Research Institutes or Universities ?  

a) There R a lot of companies and of nd private persons in this global village. 
b) To talk with other ppl is a part of agreement between nations. I think this
   is a kind of instruction too. 

Terra

PS. Don't flame. I know that my english ist bad. :-)
-- 
------------------------------------------------------------------------------
!   Nick: Terra, Real: Frank Simon, Tel: 0441/76206, City: Oldenburg, FRG    !
! CHAMNT@doluni1.bitnet, terra@sol.zer, terra@sol.north.de, mbk1:chaos-team  !
------------------------------------------------------------------------------


Article: 1507 of comp.unix.admin
Path: NewsServ!fauern!unido!mcsun!uunet!sci34hub!gary
From: gary@sci34hub.sci.com (Gary Heston)
Newsgroups: comp.unix.admin
Subject: Re: IRC and Security
Message-ID: <1991Mar21.162220.15612@sci34hub.sci.com>
Date: 21 Mar 91 16:22:20 GMT
References: <NAPO.91Mar13202006@vipunen.hut.fi> <7753@uceng.UC.EDU> <1991Mar13.232433.3162@athena.mit.edu> <5077:Mar1805:03:4491@kramden.acf.nyu.edu>
Reply-To: gary@sci34hub.sci.com (Gary Heston)
Organization: SCI Technology, Inc., Huntsville, Al.
Lines: 39

In article <5077:Mar1805:03:4491@kramden.acf.nyu.edu> brnstnd@kramden.acf.nyu.edu (Dan Bernstein) writes:

>You can toss around ``considerations'' all you want, but it is generally
>illegal to do anything on the academic networks that isn't for research

>Such use of academic networks is almost certainly illegal.

>contribute so strongly to illegal behavior: any communications medium

>You may argue that it's not your responsibility to worry about illegal
>behavior. You just shouldn't criticize those who do.

I suggest you go learn the difference between "illegal" and "improper".

Using some of the academic networks for things like newsfeeds would be
outside the guidelines established for those networks, and therefore
improper. It's not, however, a violation of any law, and describing
it as "illegal" is incorrect and makes you look sensationalist rather
than having a legitimate argument. 

Did you post your article over an acedemic network? If so, why? It's
not research, and therefore, by your own characterizations, it was
illegal. Go turn yourself in to the local internet police office for
booking....  While you're there, you can learn correct terminology.

"Illegal" behavior is that which directly violates LAW, not school
rules (or NSF guidelines). Sending a note to someone across country
that you'll drop by for a visit next week isn't illegal. Giving
several people the password to you account isn't illegal. FTPing a
GIF image of Garfield to someone isn't illegal. They might be in
violation of school policies or NSF guidelines (or stupid), but
they are not crimes and your repeated characterization of them as
such is incorrect. 

-- 
Gary Heston   System Mismanager and technoflunky   uunet!sci34hub!gary or
My opinions, not theirs.    SCI Systems, Inc.       gary@sci34hub.sci.com
I support drug testing. I believe every public official should be given a
shot of sodium pentathol and ask "Which laws have you broken this week?".


Article: 1509 of comp.unix.admin
Path: NewsServ!fauern!unido!mcsun!uunet!ukma!wuarchive!cs.utexas.edu!uwm.edu!bionet!agate!ucbvax!dog.ee.lbl.gov!elf.ee.lbl.gov!torek
From: torek@elf.ee.lbl.gov (Chris Torek)
Newsgroups: comp.unix.admin
Subject: Re: IRC Net Bandwidth (was IRC and Security)
Message-ID: <11813@dog.ee.lbl.gov>
Date: 4 Apr 91 23:14:39 GMT
References: <703@seqp4.UUCP> <16929:Mar2121:19:0091@kramden.acf.nyu.edu> <704@seqp4.UUCP> <27773:Apr420:02:0691@kramden.acf.nyu.edu>
Reply-To: torek@elf.ee.lbl.gov (Chris Torek)
Organization: Lawrence Berkeley Laboratory, Berkeley
Lines: 26
X-Local-Date: Thu, 4 Apr 91 15:14:39 PST

In article <27773:Apr420:02:0691@kramden.acf.nyu.edu>
brnstnd@kramden.acf.nyu.edu (Dan Bernstein) writes:
>I believe Chris's comments confirm that routers are just that poor.

`Were', not `are'.  (No doubt some are still in place; it takes time
to throw out broken equipment and software that is in production use.)

I have some more recent information.  Old NSS routers took 6 to 8 ms.
of cpu time to forward each packet, due to excessive stupidity in the
device driver code.  (The routing time was too small to measure in
these systems; `Almost all the per-packet cpu time was spent in device
drivers'.  In addition the old routers added store-and-forward delays
at each T1-to-NSS boundary, because the T1 boards had onboard 386s doing
copies in and out of onboard buffers.  [Better than Z8s, I guess. :-) ])

The new CNSS/ENSS T3 routers are better.  My source has no timings yet
but `we had no trouble using the T3 backbone to saturate a 10Mb/s
ethernet from a machine 1000 miles away'---saturate here means get
approximately 1 MB/s (8 Mb/s) actual data transfer, host-to-host.
(One host was a Cray, the other a Sun SparcStation, both running
experimental software.)  In other words, the problems may not be
completely fixed yet, but they have definitely receded a comfortable
distance.
-- 
In-Real-Life: Chris Torek, Lawrence Berkeley Lab CSE/EE (+1 415 486 5427)
Berkeley, CA		Domain:	torek@ee.lbl.gov


Article: 1511 of comp.unix.admin
Path: NewsServ!fauern!ira.uka.de!sol.ctr.columbia.edu!zaphod.mps.ohio-state.edu!wuarchive!psuvax1!hsdndev!cmcl2!kramden.acf.nyu.edu!brnstnd
From: brnstnd@kramden.acf.nyu.edu (Dan Bernstein)
Newsgroups: comp.unix.admin
Subject: Re: IRC Net Bandwidth (was IRC and Security)
Message-ID: <27773:Apr420:02:0691@kramden.acf.nyu.edu>
Date: 4 Apr 91 20:02:06 GMT
References: <703@seqp4.UUCP> <16929:Mar2121:19:0091@kramden.acf.nyu.edu> <704@seqp4.UUCP>
Organization: IR
Lines: 18

In article <704@seqp4.UUCP> jdarcy@seqp4.UUCP (Jeffrey d'Arcy) writes:
  [ routers ]
> Let's see just how poor they'd
> have to be for your original statement (that a 2-byte packet consumes nearly
> the same resources as a 500-byte packet) to be true.

I believe Chris's comments confirm that routers are just that poor.

This isn't a big issue. It's just that people writing WAN applications
should be much more worried about the number of packets sent than the
number of bytes sent. Perhaps someday the Internet will consist solely
of fast (10000 packets per second, say), modern routers, and a 2-byte
packet will indeed cost noticeably less than a 500-byte packet. But
until then, a service like IRC that uses 1.5% of the NSFNET bytes and 3%
of the NSFNET packets isn't twice as cheap as average---it's twice as
expensive.

---Dan


Article: 1510 of comp.unix.admin
Path: NewsServ!fauern!ira.uka.de!sol.ctr.columbia.edu!zaphod.mps.ohio-state.edu!wuarchive!psuvax1!hsdndev!cmcl2!kramden.acf.nyu.edu!brnstnd
From: brnstnd@kramden.acf.nyu.edu (Dan Bernstein)
Newsgroups: comp.unix.admin
Subject: Re: IRC and Security
Message-ID: <27540:Apr419:51:0291@kramden.acf.nyu.edu>
Date: 4 Apr 91 19:51:02 GMT
References: <17186:Mar2121:29:2691@kramden.acf.nyu.edu> <1991Mar22.064514.25746@murdoch.acc.Virginia.EDU> <507@sol.north.de>
Organization: IR
Lines: 20

In article <507@sol.north.de> terra@sol.north.de (Frank Simon) writes:
> In article <17186:Mar2121:29:2691@kramden.acf.nyu.edu> brnstnd@kramden.acf.nyu.edu (Dan Bernstein) writes:
> >I didn't say that IRC was illegal, only that many of its users appear to
> >(illegally!) send large amounts of data across it that does *not*
> >contribute to instruction or research.
> Do U really think, that all sites in the world wide Internet community R 
> only Research Institutes or Universities ?  

No. Only a large number of them, and apparently the greatest part of
IRC. I do not know of any legal problem with, e.g., IRC use over
NYSERNet, or by corporations within their own nets. In those cases there
are only a few guidelines which nobody pays much attention to.

However, universities receive huge amounts of money from the Department
of Education. The money must, in general, contribute to instruction or
research. It's the law. If any of that money helps pay for (e.g.)
NYU-NET then NYU-NET cannot legally carry other kinds of traffic.
Period.

---Dan


Article: 1529 of comp.unix.admin
Path: NewsServ!fauern!ira.uka.de!sol.ctr.columbia.edu!spool.mu.edu!think.com!hsdndev!cmcl2!kramden.acf.nyu.edu!brnstnd
From: brnstnd@kramden.acf.nyu.edu (Dan Bernstein)
Newsgroups: comp.unix.admin
Subject: Re: IRC Net Bandwidth (was IRC and Security)
Message-ID: <28077:Apr700:18:3191@kramden.acf.nyu.edu>
Date: 7 Apr 91 00:18:31 GMT
Article-I.D.: kramden.28077:Apr700:18:3191
References: <704@seqp4.UUCP> <27773:Apr420:02:0691@kramden.acf.nyu.edu> <11813@dog.ee.lbl.gov>
Organization: IR
Lines: 11

In article <11813@dog.ee.lbl.gov> torek@elf.ee.lbl.gov (Chris Torek) writes:
> The new CNSS/ENSS T3 routers are better.  My source has no timings yet
> but `we had no trouble using the T3 backbone to saturate a 10Mb/s
> ethernet from a machine 1000 miles away'---saturate here means get
> approximately 1 MB/s (8 Mb/s) actual data transfer, host-to-host.

That's good to hear.

The big question: Can they still do it with 2-byte packets?

---Dan


Article: 1608 of comp.unix.admin
Path: NewsServ!fauern!ira.uka.de!sol.ctr.columbia.edu!zaphod.mps.ohio-state.edu!van-bc!ubc-cs!uw-beaver!mit-eddie!minya!jc
From: jc@minya.UUCP (John Chambers)
Newsgroups: comp.unix.admin
Subject: Re: IRC and Security
Message-ID: <686@minya.UUCP>
Date: 13 Apr 91 14:31:32 GMT
References: <1991Mar13.232433.3162@athena.mit.edu> <28058:Apr420:20:3991@kramden.acf.nyu.edu>
Lines: 57

In article <28058:Apr420:20:3991@kramden.acf.nyu.edu>, brnstnd@kramden.acf.nyu.edu (Dan Bernstein) writes:
> In article <1991Mar21.162220.15612@sci34hub.sci.com> gary@sci34hub.sci.com (Gary Heston) writes:
> > I suggest you go learn the difference between "illegal" and "improper".
> 
> Sure thing. Sending commercial packets over NSFNET, for example, is
> improper. Sending commercial packets over NYU-NET is (as far as I know)
> illegal.

Hey, guys, aren't you missing the most important aspect of any research
project?  I'm talking of course about the most common phrase in most
scientific journals: "Further research is needed".  For instance, consider 
your remarks:

> > Using some of the academic networks for things like newsfeeds would be
> > outside the guidelines established for those networks, and therefore
> > improper.
> Does NYU-NET have guidelines? I sure don't remember seeing any. But NYU
> gets a lot of money from the Department of Education, I believe some of
> that money helps pay for NYU-NET, so any use of NYU-NET must *by law*
> contribute to instruction or research.

A true researcher would look at this and immediately realize that
this is a very good opportunity for further research. It is quite
clear  that  IRC  and   newsgroups   were   worthwhile   research
developments in and of themselves, and furthermore there has been
much opportunity for their use to study human-machine interaction
and  computer-supported  distributed  discussions.   However, the
research nature is seriously eroded when people start using  them
for something of actual value to themselves. At present, there is
no way to easily determine which uses are within the  guidelines,
and  people  are  clearly requesting that Something Be Done About
It.  So we get to the need for further research.

What is clearly needed here is research into software  that  does
content  analysis,  so that we can correctly classify the various
uses according to the rules for the use of  a  specific  network.
This is potentially a large area of research, of course, and will
need accordingly large sums of money.  There  are  a  great  many
different  kinds  of  usage restrictions that might be imposed by
contract or by  law  on  the  use  of  a  network,  and  building
network-management  software  to  detect usage which violates the
rules would be rather difficult  for  many  of  them.   But  with
sufficient  funding,  and a pool of talented software developers,
we should be  able  to  establish  a  network-monitoring  testbed
within  which  we  can  develop  effective content-classification
software.

Or at least it would be many years and many megabucks before  the
funding agencies decided to terminate funding.

Whaddaya think, guys?  Should we apply for some grants?

-- 
All opinions Copyright (c) 1991 by John Chambers.  Inquire for licensing at:
Home: 1-617-484-6393 
Work: 1-508-486-5475
Uucp: ...!{bu.edu,harvard.edu,ima.com,eddie.mit.edu,ora.com}!minya!jc 


