Link: Pollution in 1.0.0.0/8
IANA has recently allocated 1.0.0.0/8 to APNIC, which hascaused a certain amount of concern that it is 'polluted' bypeople already using it for various reasons. Pollution in 1/8 is a report from RIPE Labson what happened when they announced routing for some bits of it as partof their debogonising work .
This is clearly going to be what they call 'interesting'.
(via Hacker News .)
How to destroy people's interest in updating documentation
Here is one of the less obvious perils of outdated documentation:
Suppose that you have some documentation that is out of date, but not inan obvious way; for example, you have an out of date network layoutdiagram . Since it's not obvious you don'trealize this right away, so you keep on updating the network layoutdiagram when you make changes to your actual network.
Except that faithfully updating an inaccurate network layout diagram isrelatively pointless. When you realize that it is incorrect, you are
Outdated documentation is especially risky for sysadmins
The obvious traditional risk of outdated documentation in all its formsis that you rely on it and go wrong somehow; you trust the comments inthe source code and write your new code accordingly, and your changesdon't work. I think that this risk is especially acute for sysadmins,for two strongly related reasons.
First, much of our documentation tends to be about procedures, notsimple information. Following what is actually a wrong or incompleteprocedure is a great way to create spectacular failures on the spot.Worse
屬於我們的懷舊
廣告時間: Chicstone Bling bling筆--今晚登陸銅鑼灣mimingmart
失
在商場做清潔工的媽媽正準備上班，像人肉錄音機似的問著天天重複的問題：“點解你出咗去成晚呀？點解你又飲酒呀？你幾時先肯搵份
當你哭時
我很心疼很心疼，
因你哭而想哭。
不懂說窩心的話，
但想你知道，
我總在你身邊，
即使十年二十年三十年過去。
我會讓你一天二十四小時都找到我，
聆聽你最微小的事。
你是我的蘇眉，
直到永遠。
肚腩和時間
What charging credit cards doesn't prove
Every so often, commonly in the context of SSL certificates, someoneputs forward the theory that charging money for things makes thecustomers somehow more identifiable and reliable than giving it topeople for free (with the same other authentication of customers).After all, so the theory goes, when you give people something justbecause they have a particular email address, that's not much, but whenyou've charged their credit card, you have a lot more confidence intheir real identity.
This is wrong.