reddragdiva: (Default)
[personal profile] reddragdiva

The IT dept say my Ubuntu laptop will cause "broadcast storms and spanning tree collapses." It's not entirely clear how a device on a single connection can cause a spanning tree to collapse; we'll be asking for a detailed technical explanation. We did ask if it "might induce a FUDstorm." We know they run Ubuntu themselves. My boss is defending this assiduously — "we're a Unix department, a Unix laptop is appropriate, Windows isn't" — mostly because he'd quite like it himself, as would several others in the department.

I have new headphones. Skullcandy Ink'd. Apparently they are hip with the kids. Also decent headphones. Wish I'd gotten ones with a side-entry plug. Also, left and right aren't marked. Very good noise blocking for the Victoria Line.

(no subject)

Date: 2009-11-12 11:22 pm (UTC)
From: [identity profile] pndc.livejournal.com
My fix for unlabelled or unreadable headphones is to stick a figure-of-eight knot into one of the cables to make it identifiable. Simple and effective.

(no subject)

Date: 2009-11-12 11:29 pm (UTC)
bob: (Default)
From: [personal profile] bob
surely at this point you just shout bullshit very loudly and ignore them.

(no subject)

Date: 2009-11-12 11:31 pm (UTC)
From: [identity profile] http://users.livejournal.com/_nicolai_/
They probably think your laptop is automatically going to act like a mad router. Which SunOS 3 and 4 tended to, back in the 80s. And they're retentive drones, but I repeat myself.

(no subject)

Date: 2009-11-12 11:31 pm (UTC)
From: [identity profile] misterfallen.livejournal.com
JVC Gumy ones would have been cheaper. And likely better. And almost certainly more durable (I accidentally caught one in a door-jam and it still functoned perfectly).

(no subject)

Date: 2009-11-12 11:52 pm (UTC)
From: [identity profile] timeplease.livejournal.com
broadcast storms and spanning tree collapses

I smell an excuse calendar at work!

(no subject)

Date: 2009-11-13 12:01 am (UTC)
bob: (Default)
From: [personal profile] bob
a bofh one would be more inventive.

(no subject)

Date: 2009-11-13 12:26 am (UTC)
From: [identity profile] http://users.livejournal.com/_nicolai_/
Some systems in the past have had a feature that the logic runs like this:
Packet enters system via an interface, goes into kernel.
Kernel checks if packet is not destined for the host and packet forwarding (i.e. be-a-router) is on.
If so, kernel looks at its routing table to see where to route that packet.
If no specific route, use default route.

Note the lack of a check for "did it come in this interface?" so the packet can go back out the interface it came in, especially if there's one interface and it's the default exit.

If packet is a broadcast, you can imagine it comes back again. As does any packet on a not totally switched net.
You can get surprisingly large amounts of network out of surprisingly slow CPUs this way...

I expect the only systems with this feature that are still operate are in museums.

(no subject)

Date: 2009-11-13 01:29 am (UTC)
From: [identity profile] arkady.livejournal.com
Maybe someone nicked all the really good pages.

(no subject)

Date: 2009-11-14 11:01 am (UTC)
From: [identity profile] hawkeviper.livejournal.com
Is the DHCP for the network controlled by a windows domain controller? If so, they're probably alluding to the fact that under certain circumstances windows dhcp shits itself so badly that it destroys all network connectivity. This all because a device that doesn't speak active-directory got plugged in and requested an IP address. It's a wonderful system. Absolutely amazing watching an entire network of windows machines pop up with 'there is an ip address conflict' one after another.