[CQ-Contest] Cluster network update - was: Reverse Beacon Network - too much success?
david.kopacz at aspwebhosting.com
Sat Mar 6 09:34:05 PST 2010
K1TTT - I would say virtually impossible. There is just too much
investment in too widely varied configurations by too many independent
operators to switch it to something else. And all it takes is ONE open
web cluster, or one unsecured rf connection for someone to get in to
disrupt the network.
This is simply not true. Modification of existing software to include
authentication would be fairly easy as long as the code is open source.
As far as one open cluster is concerned, simply don't allow any nodes to
connect unless their users are authenticated. Using a few master
replicated databases would make this a simple task. If abuse is
detected, it would be easy to see the node(s) that propagated the abuse.
Once idenified the node operator would be contacted and onformed of the
abuse. If it continues unabated, the node could be cut off from the
system by its peers. A master list of abusive nodes could be maintained
so other node operators would know not to allow these abusers to connect
This isn't rocket science (and we have that down pretty well now). Let's
fix this problem and get rid of the filth on the cluster.
Stop looking for excuses, stop saying it can't be done and be part of
David Kopacz, CTO
Rational Certified Developer, MCSE+I
Microsoft Certified Partner
4044 Fort Campbell Blvd, #308, Hopkinsville, Kentucky 42240
1.888.277.9320 U.S. & Canada
SIP: dial at freecall.aspwebhosting.com
The information contained in this electronic transmission is PRIVILEGED
and CONFIDENTIAL information intended only to be viewed by the
individual, entity or entities named as recipient(s). You are hereby
notified that any dissemination, distribution or copy of this
communication is strictly prohibited and a violation of your service
agreement. If you have received this communication in error, please
notify ASPwebhosting.com, LLC immediately by electronic mail or by
telephone and permanently delete this message from your computer.
From: cq-contest-bounces at contesting.com
[mailto:cq-contest-bounces at contesting.com] On Behalf Of K1TTT
Sent: Friday, March 05, 2010 6:23 AM
To: CQ-Contest at contesting.com
Subject: [CQ-Contest] Cluster network update - was: Reverse Beacon
Network - too much success?
> Yes, it's time to get control over DXCluster. This beast is out of
> Authentication system and registration license based.
> Why couldn't a DX operator just request that no spots be posted for
> them if they don't wish to be spotted. Seems like it shouldn't be to
> hard to do.
> I would dare to say that more than 95% of dxcluster accesses come from
> internet, so, why not to have user/passwords? There are a couple of
> "open id"
> around. We could develop our own, or maybe elect an existing one. That
> would not be that hard to implement.
Same answer to all 3... the existing software and network implementation
won't handle it. Remember, the existing network was derived from the rf
packetcluster network where by law encryption and security were
So all the existing software has an open text backbone structure that
allows easy connection of net nodes to the network. Because of this it
is extremely easy for new software developers to write software that is
compatible with the existing network. This has resulted in a wide
variety of telnet, rf, and web based methods of accessing the network,
some with good filtering capabilities, some with authentication
capabilities, but most with poor filtering and no authentication.
There is also a large world wide infrastructure, many independent nodes,
and a VERY large user base. At this point I don't think anyone can even
estimate how many users may exist, let alone how many node computers may
be on the existing network running how many different software packages.
needless to say, this network will not be easy to modify, I would say
virtually impossible. There is just too much investment in too widely
varied configurations by too many independent operators to switch it to
something else. And all it takes is ONE open web cluster, or one
unsecured rf connection for someone to get in to disrupt the network.
The only way I can see the existing network going away is to design a
new system from the ground up that includes strong backbone security,
not too complicated but secure user identification, and all the other
features that everyone wants to enable opting in/out of spotting,
filters, larger volumes of spots, elimination of bottlenecks and loops,
must run on various versions of windows, linux, mac's, must include
telnet, rf, web, and some kind of new secure user access for future
expansion, must include localized language capabilities and built in
translation of talk/announce/comments, use the new non-ascii url system,
accommodate skimmer spots automatically, allow Unicode character sets,
email and bulletin distribution, emergency disaster overrides, etc, etc,
etc. And then of course all the user logging and other access programs
will have to update to handle whatever the authentication system is.
This is obviously not a simple project... and it won't make the old
system go away until enough nodes are set up and enough users on the old
system see it as being more useful than the old network to abandon it.
If the development started today collecting requirements I would
estimate no less than 5 years to the shutdown of the existing network...
and that assumes a fairly dedicated open development group.
Build a better network, and they will come.
David Robbins K1TTT
e-mail: mailto:k1ttt at arrl.net
AR-Cluster node: 145.69MHz or telnet://dxc.k1ttt.net
CQ-Contest mailing list
CQ-Contest at contesting.com
More information about the CQ-Contest