Re: Packet and Crossband repeater
Greetings- I thought your reply was interesting. I for one only voted once and I could say the same thing about packet voters but I believe the vast majority of amateurs are honest enough to vote only once. We are both biased towards our own interests, I guess this is how negotiations work, hi. Well, anyway, please try to provide ample time for crossband repeat using the existing equipment. Thanks, pat n2oeq
------- Original Message -------
From : Ransom, Kenneth G. (JSC-OC)[BAR][mailto:kenneth.g.ransom@nasa.gov]
Sent : 5/22/2007 10:15:13 AM To : sarex@amsat.org Cc : Subject : RE: [sarex] Re: Packet and Crossband repeater
I would be very wary of that poll providing any useful data since it was set up so that anyone could vote numerous times. The results are very likely skewed.
In the long term, I expect the crossband repeater function will be enabled more often (maybe full time?) once the complete compliment of hardware is on board. The current operations are base on available hardware and crew interest.
Numerous procedures and even a quick reference guide for both radio systems are available for the crew to use should they be interested.
Kenneth - N5VHO
-----Original Message-----
I tested the system to verify the validity of the poll and voted a few dozen times during my check. It is not the honest hams that concern me. It is the one person that voted 700 times trying to sway opinion.
BTW, reply emails to you directly are bouncing.
Kenneth - N5VHO
-----Original Message----- From: Patrick McGrane [mailto:N2OEQ@aceweb.com] Sent: Tuesday, May 22, 2007 11:11 AM To: Ransom, Kenneth G. (JSC-OC)[BAR]; sarex@amsat.org Subject: RE: [sarex] Re: Packet and Crossband repeater
Greetings- I thought your reply was interesting. I for one only voted once and I could say the same thing about packet voters but I believe the vast majority of amateurs are honest enough to vote only once. We are both biased towards our own interests, I guess this is how negotiations work, hi. Well, anyway, please try to provide ample time for crossband repeat using the existing equipment. Thanks, pat n2oeq
------- Original Message -------
From : Ransom, Kenneth G.
(JSC-OC)[BAR][mailto:kenneth.g.ransom@nasa.gov] Sent : 5/22/2007 10:15:13 AM To : sarex@amsat.org Cc : Subject : RE: [sarex] Re: Packet and Crossband repeater
I would be very wary of that poll providing any useful data since it was set up so that anyone could vote numerous times. The results are very likely skewed.
In the long term, I expect the crossband repeater function will be enabled more often (maybe full time?) once the complete compliment of hardware is on board. The current operations are base on available hardware and crew interest.
Numerous procedures and even a quick reference guide for both radio systems are available for the crew to use should they be interested.
Kenneth - N5VHO
-----Original Message-----
Ransom, Kenneth G. (JSC-OC)[BAR] wrote:
I tested the system to verify the validity of the poll and voted a few dozen times during my check. It is not the honest hams that concern me. It is the one person that voted 700 times trying to sway opinion.
So the from IP address is recorded as part of the HTTP transaction for each form submission. Thus, the results reporting could, in fact just take the last vote for each IP address and report such results. Thus, it wouldn't have to complain about duplicates. But, if you voted repeatedly and saw the numbers changing per your voting attempts, then it's clearly not configured to be smart about taking votes only once for each IP address.
Gregg Wonderly W5GGW
It still has a small hole if you have a dynamic IP system and every time it changes, you can vote again. I wish the site just permitted members to vote once.
Kenneth - N5VHO
-----Original Message----- From: Gregg Wonderly [mailto:w5ggw@cox.net] Sent: Tuesday, May 22, 2007 11:56 AM To: Ransom, Kenneth G. (JSC-OC)[BAR] Cc: sarex@AMSAT.Org Subject: Re: [sarex] Re: Packet and Crossband repeater
Ransom, Kenneth G. (JSC-OC)[BAR] wrote:
I tested the system to verify the validity of the poll and voted a few
dozen times during my check. It is not the honest hams that concern
me.
It is the one person that voted 700 times trying to sway opinion.
So the from IP address is recorded as part of the HTTP transaction for each form submission. Thus, the results reporting could, in fact just take the last vote for each IP address and report such results. Thus, it wouldn't have to complain about duplicates. But, if you voted repeatedly and saw the numbers changing per your voting attempts, then it's clearly not configured to be smart about taking votes only once for each IP address.
Gregg Wonderly W5GGW
I'd recommend being a little careful about what you conclude from an IP address. Employees at a large company are all going to look like they have the same IP address once their traffic hits the internet, by virtue of their corporate firewall.
Greg KO6TH
----Original Message Follows---- From: Gregg Wonderly w5ggw@cox.net Reply-To: w5ggw@wonderly.org To: "Ransom, Kenneth G. (JSC-OC)[BAR]" kenneth.g.ransom@nasa.gov CC: sarex@AMSAT.Org Subject: [sarex] Re: Packet and Crossband repeater Date: Tue, 22 May 2007 11:56:25 -0500
Ransom, Kenneth G. (JSC-OC)[BAR] wrote:
I tested the system to verify the validity of the poll and voted a few dozen times during my check. It is not the honest hams that concern me. It is the one person that voted 700 times trying to sway opinion.
So the from IP address is recorded as part of the HTTP transaction for each form submission. Thus, the results reporting could, in fact just take the last vote for each IP address and report such results. Thus, it wouldn't have to complain about duplicates. But, if you voted repeatedly and saw the numbers changing per your voting attempts, then it's clearly not configured to be smart about taking votes only once for each IP address.
Gregg Wonderly W5GGW ---- Sent via sarex@amsat.org. Opinions expressed are those of the author. Not an AMSAT member? Join now to support the amateur satellite program! Subscription settings: http://amsat.org/mailman/listinfo/sarex
_________________________________________________________________ PC Magazines 2007 editors choice for best Web mailaward-winning Windows Live Hotmail. http://imagine-windowslive.com/hotmail/?locale=en-us&ocid=TXT_TAGHM_migr...
Especially if said firewall is a NAT router. :) One IP, many many machines. (Usually there'll be something in the log indicating what IP address the machine itself had when it hit the server, and if that begins with 10., 172., or 192., it's behind a NAT router. You'll see a lot of addresses looking like 192.168.1.2 or 192.168.100.2 in such a situation. NAT usually behaves like a firewall just as an artifact of how it works, unless the admin has set up some kind of DMZ or port mapping to direct incoming traffic to a specific machine, incoming connectino attempts will just drop in the bit bucket.
(Sometimes it's really amazing what you can figure out just by looking at a given machine's IP config, if you know what to look for ..)
On May 23, 2007, at 11:18 PM, Greg D. wrote:
I'd recommend being a little careful about what you conclude from an IP address. Employees at a large company are all going to look like they have the same IP address once their traffic hits the internet, by virtue of their corporate firewall.
Greg KO6TH
participants (5)
-
Bruce Bostwick -
Greg D. -
Gregg Wonderly -
Patrick McGrane -
Ransom, Kenneth G. (JSC-OC)[BAR]