OFFICIAL "SERVER PROBLEMS" THREAD

[Madpoo]

Originally Posted by Xyzzy

A fun party trick is to use telnet to get web pages. It is really simple but most people don't even know what telnet is.

Another (unrelated) trick: In a previous life, we used to dial a phone using the hook switch. The phone in question had a lock on the dial.

Good times!

Been there, done that (the phone thing).

A long long time ago (maybe 10-12 years back?) I found myself regularly using telnet to port 25 to test sending emails on our SMTP server. I don't remember why, but that seemed the easiest way at the time to check and make sure it was working okay.

[Madpoo]

Originally Posted by retina

Also, when are you gonna fix the off-by-one error in the PrimeNet Activity Summary?

57000000 55901  1 | 35999   152 19747           2 |                 3    43 |                   19704 |

That '2' does not match the '3'.

That info come from one of George's things... I didn't know it was off until just now.

I guess I can take a look.

[chalsall]

Originally Posted by Madpoo

A long long time ago (maybe 10-12 years back?) I found myself regularly using telnet to port 25 to test sending emails on our SMTP server. I don't remember why, but that seemed the easiest way at the time to check and make sure it was working okay.

Been there; done that. Still regularly do.

I remember teaching a Linux course several years ago to (mostly WinBlows) SysAdmins where I demonstrated the technique. There were literal gasps from the students when I started typing SMTP and HTTP protocol lines and got responses (to different ports, obviously).

One actually exclaimed "No Way!!!" in a loud voice -- clearly most of them didn't understand that TCP is TCP; doesn't matter the tool used so long as the protocol is followed.

[Madpoo]

Originally Posted by Madpoo

That info come from one of George's things... I didn't know it was off until just now.

I guess I can take a look.

Well, if I'm looking at the code that displays those results, it seems like there's just a funky little bug that accidentally subtracts the # of primes in that range from the total untested results when displaying.

I'll examine it a bit more and make sure that's really the problem, but I think it is. And of course it makes sense because there is a prime in that range.

I'm going to check with George on that though... he may have done that for a reason.

[retina]

Originally Posted by Madpoo

I'll examine it a bit more and make sure that's really the problem, but I think it is.

So another data point for when a new prime is discovered. We just look for the off-by-one errors to narrow down the range.

Originally Posted by Madpoo

And of course it makes sense because there is a prime in that range.

I'm not clear about which part is making sense?

[Uncwilly]

Originally Posted by Xyzzy

A fun party trick is to use telnet to get web pages. It is really simple but most people don't even know what telnet is.

Another (unrelated) trick: In a previous life, we used to dial a phone using the hook switch. The phone in question had a lock on the dial.

You phreak.
BTW, back in the day we have used a PC and a terminal program to access a mini-computer. And also played around with gopher back in the 1st half of the 90's.
300 Baud on to a BBS anyone?

[LaurV]

Originally Posted by Uncwilly

300 Baud on to a BBS anyone?

never, when I "started" to play with that is was already 2400 (and most probably at that time you had 9600 or higher in US) (edit: and netscape, hehe)

[Madpoo]

Originally Posted by retina

I'm not clear about which part is making sense?

I meant that it's clear why the (probably?) bug or whatever in the display is causing it to be off by one. Not that it makes sense to be off by one in the first place. LOL

Coming up here at the top of the next hour I'm going to try modifying the report to "fix" it... that way if I totally screw it up I can roll back and run again without (hopefully) anyone noticing. :)

[Xyzzy]

Originally Posted by Uncwilly

300 Baud on to a BBS anyone?

We had a 300 baud modem through high school.

Our first computer exposure, playing Colossal Cave, was on a terminal with a thermal printer for the "display" and a 110 baud acoustic modem for the connection. We used to save the scrolls of paper to evaluate our game when we were at home. We only got to play an hour or so every few weeks.



Edit: Fun trivia - www.tldp.org/HOWTO/Modem-HOWTO-23.html

[Madpoo]

Originally Posted by Madpoo

I meant that it's clear why the (probably?) bug or whatever in the display is causing it to be off by one. Not that it makes sense to be off by one in the first place. LOL

Coming up here at the top of the next hour I'm going to try modifying the report to "fix" it... that way if I totally screw it up I can roll back and run again without (hopefully) anyone noticing. :)

Ah... well, I did that... removed the "decrement by one" for primes in that range, and now I see why George must have done that. Now there's an equal count of "no LL" for every range where there's a known prime. Doh!

So, I'm going to put that back and re-run this hour's report. So... I'm not sure why that count would be off if it's counting the prime # in the first place.

[retina]

Originally Posted by Madpoo

So, I'm going to put that back and re-run this hour's report. So... I'm not sure why that count would be off if it's counting the prime # in the first place.

It must be a new hidden prime discovered in there!