Re: Inbox size -CBM hackers

From: Cameron Kaiser (
Date: 2004-02-06 20:22:55

> > Don't be deliberately obtuse. I'm referring to people with abominations
> > like Offline Explorer or WebZIP that can, when parallelized, bring 
> > servers to their knees.
> *curious*
> Can not your server place bandwidth caps per ip address of the
> request originator?

It can, but caps don't discourage the behaviour, they only slow it down. IMHO,
anyone who doesn't care about the health of my systems doesn't deserve to
access them.

> Presumably such tools are fair game in instances where the
> person running it has a lower downlink bandwidth
> than the uplink bandwidth of the server they are
> speaking to, and at the end of the day you do not have anything
> against anyone accessing all the files in your archive, as long
> as they are not hogging the line as such?

Correct, that's what they're there for. What I mind is robot copier activity,
particularly in portions of my site that are specifically proscribed. Regular
user requests don't cause that kind of load. As soon as I find an automated
way of distinguishing one from the other, I intend to implement it (right now
a cron job mails me regular server log extracts and an alert process notifies
me when load average is bad and there are a large number of open sockets to
one IP address).

---------------------------------- personal: --
 Cameron Kaiser, Floodgap Systems Ltd * So. Calif., USA *
-- Time wounds all heels. -- Groucho Marx -------------------------------------

       Message was sent through the cbm-hackers mailing list

Archive generated by hypermail pre-2.1.8.