[lugm.org] Upcoming meetup

Mon Jul 28 14:12:30 UTC 2014

On 28 Jul 2014, at 10:54 AM, selven <pcthegreat at gmail.com> wrote:

> :) Replied since it is you, as i thought i already left this discussion since a long time ago! Not interested, not motivated.

and. i think the last few words in the phrase above made my point :-(

> 
> On Mon, Jul 28, 2014 at 2:02 AM, Nishal Goburdhan <ndg at ieee.org> wrote:
> On 01 Jun 2014, at 8:21 PM, selven <pcthegreat at gmail.com> wrote:
> 
> > And yes, very little recognition is given on the island for people who volunteer their time for opensource.
> 
> the nature of being a volunteer [1]  is that you don't need, or ask for credit afterwards, eh?  :-)
> 
> In any form of volunteering, there needs to be some forms of incentives, an example, logan's contribution to the opensource mostly attracted flames rather than 'hey gj'.    Just my opinion, you are free to disregard and believe all is fine and beautiful.

sure, but i don't think logan/ajay/sm/whomever is motivated (or de-motived) by a random sampling of people saying "gj" - or not.  i can't claim to speak for them.
i'm guessing most here are familiar with maslowe's hierachy of needs;  well, where do you think volunteerism fits in there ?

> > But still if we start giving out free consultancy to CORPORATES, at some point why would they feel the need to hire IT staffs? This is something that will be denigrating to IT people.
> 
> i think you misunderstand the difference between volunteering some clueful suggestions, and offering to perform an IT overhaul...i volunteer suggestions to "corporates" all the time.  i see it as my responsibility, as a user of the internet.  don't you report things that don't work?  do you expect to be thanked/remunerated for doing that?  it's the same concept really  - volunteer suggestions, and some practical advice on how to fix it, and leave it to them to sort out the rest.
> it's when you _make the offer to fix it_, that you start cutting into their internal IT staff time.  pointing out things that are Just Plain Wrong is, just being polite.  at best, they take your voluntary suggestions to heart.  at worst, they ignore you, and you can continue snickering behind your $favourite_beverage about how you know more than they do.  c'est la vie.
> 
> I think you haven't been following this whole defimedia obsession. As a user, one's responsibility is to constantly RANT about how crappy a service is, and as an Advanced IT user, one's responsibility is to constantly RANT using factual metrics. 
> But that's doesn't mean one should rant and propose solutions. If they don't want to invest in getting an analyst, despite getting user rants, it means they don't care about their users. If despite getting valuable metrics from advanced users, well then just too bad, people cannot and should not come into your office and shove proper procedures to you.

ok.  i guess this is where our paths diverge.  
i suspect that a complaint, backed by intelligence data, is met much better than just a "ZoMG, u sux0rz!!"  type complaint on a forum somewhere.  ymmv.
and if they ignore you enough, then, simply vote with your wallet.  (/hi SM, who has heard me say this many, many times!).
and tell everyone you know why.  MU is small enough for it to matter :-)

> > Analogy, A carpenter might decide to create new ways to make a kind of furniture, he might even be willing to teach carpenters the know how, but it would be very weird if he starts dedicating his time giving great furniture for free to MCB because MCB has shitty furniture for example.
> 
> that seems quite incomplete as an analogy.  because, the natural extension to this, is that MCB sees that this is actually a great piece of furniture, and then contracts the carpenter to make more of these.
> 
> Nopes, that won't be a natural extension, that would be ONE possible scenario. Just like another possible scenario is, "play dead and see how much i can extort for free", but business is business, cutting down costs is the new trend.

fair enough.  one possible scenario, that could lead to a potential great gain for your carpenter.
i can think of quite a few more, btw.  :-)   
but i don't think that the central point of this discussion is related to that.

> > On Sun, Jun 1, 2014 at 10:13 PM, selven <pcthegreat at gmail.com> wrote:
> > dot mu really sux though. We can't havea dot mu hosted in bulgaria...
> 
> do you mean the performance of .MU sucks for you?  it doesn't for me at home in JNB:
> katala:~ nishal$ date
> Sun Jul 27 23:45:48 SAST 2014
> katala:~ nishal$ dig +nssearch mu | awk -F ' ' '{print $11, $12, $13, $14 }'
> 2001:500:14:6010:ad::1 in 18 ms.
> 204.61.216.10 in 19 ms.
> 193.0.9.98 in 186 ms.
> 2001:67c:e0::98 in 195 ms.
> 195.253.64.5 in 210 ms.
> 77.72.229.254 in 212 ms.
> 2a01:5b0:4::5 in 220 ms.
> 2a01:3f0:0:306::53 in 228 ms.
> 
> .MU doesn't sucks for you... awesome, you live in JNB right. (personally even in your example, too much latency )

not really;  18ms to the name-server here in JNB, over my home-wifi, and VDSL, is great.  
if you can make light move faster, then i have a business proposal for you!!    :-) 
but, read more below.  i think you've missed my point...

> Doesn't seem logical for someone living in Mauritius to have this much latency:
> dig +nssearch mu
> SOA udns1.tld.mu. hostmaster.nic.mu. 2014072822 21600 3600 604800 86400 from server 193.0.9.98 in 221 ms.
> SOA udns1.tld.mu. hostmaster.nic.mu. 2014072822 21600 3600 604800 86400 from server 204.61.216.10 in 296 ms.
> SOA udns1.tld.mu. hostmaster.nic.mu. 2014072822 21600 3600 604800 86400 from server 77.72.229.254 in 310 ms.
> SOA udns1.tld.mu. hostmaster.nic.mu. 2014072822 21600 3600 604800 86400 from server 195.253.64.5 in 401 ms.
> ;; connection timed out; no servers could be reached
> 
> I don't know, do you see the above output as Awesome when you are actually on THE island that the dot mu is supposed to represent?

i agree that's it's not great for people in MU.  but you seem to have completed ignored what i wrote below ....so,  again - read (in particular the questions) below :-)

> a quick look at the ns-set for this, tells me that this (.MU) is pretty well anycast.  there are some well known operators there.  perhaps you have a problem with _how_ and _where_ this is anycast, since it seems (from my limited network view) that there isn't a node inside mauritius.  so, imho, a more correct question should be:  why is it that, of the four (3) anycast providers that are carrying .MU, none of them are present on-island?   and, how can we change that?  after all, surely that's the most logical place to be, and if it's anycast, well, it's really quite trivial to deploy a new node, right...?
> 
> i can immediately see one way to improve this for me, in JNB, and i'll be writing to the relevant operator after this.  (no - i don't even resolve domains in .mu often at all, but, i can spot an (obvious to me) problem, and, i want to do the Right Thing, and will voluntarily report this to the operator in question...and no, that's not free consulting...it's called making my small portion of the internet more resilient!  which will hopefully make things better for other people too.  and we all profit.  qed)
> 
> Reporting to the operator here will end you with a guy called Johnny, he will ask for your number, call you, to eventually tell you that nothing can be done. I can understand, since he doesn't own the ISP. As for fixing things here the proper way, i have given up all hopes, I sincerely believe people should start doing finding technical flaws around to exploit whatever they can to ease their life. Trying to make things good the right way will just waste too much time off their lifetime.

perhaps i should have said "DNS operator" instead, and that would help you understand my point better.
why do you need johnny (presumably MT) to anycast this?   from my reading of the ns-set, this has nothing to do with MT.  and they are 1 of just several organisations that are on island that could do the "needful" to help make this better for everyone.  
-- is it difficult to find the contact information for the DNS operators that are offering this for MU, (and, presumably, a lot of other TLDs) and ask them to come host a node in MU? 
-- do you think they would have a problem with that ?   
-- do you think it's difficult to do this  (anycast);  or to work with them, to get this done?
(the generic "you" here, is the challenge to anyone who wants to make this better -- not you personally, selven)

or, do you need help with any of this ?   (oh dear, that's me volunteering again...)

but hey - it's much easier to sit back and blame MT, isn't it?  :-)
(for all their faults, MT is not to blame here.  you could argue that the tech contacts for .MU _should_ have gotten at least one server on-island, but, there's an equally strong (perhaps stronger) argument for these being globally spread, in a resilient manner, amongst so manner anycast operators.  what wrong (if it hasn't been obvious to you yet,) is that none of these global anycast operators have a node in MU.  so, i refer you to my questions above...and add a new one:
-- what's stopping you from working to get this done, today ?   

i mean - surely the benefit is tangible enough to everyone here, right? 

> > On Sun, Jun 1, 2014 at 8:36 PM, Keshwarsingh Nadan <keshwarsingh.nadan at servihoo.net> wrote:
> > Blah blah blah & blah. The LUGM mailing list is not the proper list to discuss about slowness of whatever site.
> 
> true.  it's probably the wrong place to pick on _a_ particular website.  but, if in the process of doing that, some people that aren't as familiar in the relevant technologies as you might be, learn something, then isn't that a good thing, and, in itself, fulfilling a core objective of the lugm?  i am not an application person, but the post earlier on was interesting enough for me to bookmark to read up about later.  so, thank you to the poster!
> 
> > @S Moonesamy ,sorry, that stinks. I highly appreciate your contribution to RFCs, but acting as a dumbass including your previous attempts in criticizing the .mu tld is simply a waste of time.
> 
> i think i missed a post in this thread....
> i've known SM to be obtuse at times  :-)  and, quite often very stubborn.  i've never known him to be a "dumbass" though.  at least not intentionaly.  and i'd disagree with you;  there are several things that _could_ be fixed w.r.t .MU that can only come out of constructive criticism.  if not from you (the informed locals), then where from ... ?
> 
> --n.
> 
> [1]  verb [ no obj. ]
> freely offer to do something: he volunteered for the job | [ with infinitive ] : I rashly volunteered to be a contestant.
> • [ with obj. ] offer (help): he volunteered his services as a driver for the convoy.
> • [ reporting verb ] say or suggest something without being asked: [ with obj. ] :it never paid to volunteer information | [ with direct speech ] : “Her name's Louise,” Christina volunteered.
> • work for an organization without being paid.
> • [ with obj. ] commit (someone) to a particular undertaking, typically without consulting them: he was volunteered for parachute training by friends.
> 
> Volunteering is an act based purely on selfishness :) even if it might seem to be a selfless act.
> Interestingly, the researchers have also found that people who have more seemingly "selfish" motivations--esteem enhancement, personal development and understanding--are more likely to stick with a volunteering organization longer than people with more "other focused" motivations, such as values, according to Omoto.
> http://www.apa.org/monitor/dec06/helping.aspx
> Humans needs incentives, otherwise we wouldn't have such a nice dopamine system.

and, yet again, i refer you to maslowe's pyramid, and ask you:  "where do you think volunteerism fits".   that should be fairly obvious;  it's self actualisation.
and yes, the sense of personal achievement helps!  
so, do i get a kick of out helping out someone, and seeing the good that it does for them?   absolutely!
do i feel "good" about it?   (ie.  my "selfish" benefit from doing "selfless" work.).  you bet!! 

is this a requirement up front, for me to offer assistance?   absolutely not   
(and, how can it be, when you don't know _upfront_ whether, or not, the time you invest in something is going to work out, to add benefit to that particular project!)

again, ymmv.

--n.