Monthly Archives: April 2014

Net Neutrality & Whitehouse.gov petition

Posted on by
Reply

There’s a Whitehouse.gov petition posted about Net Neutrality. It’s a little bit of a rant, but I agree with its punchline: No bandwidth modifications of information based on content or its source.

This relates to a comment from Philip Greenspun’s blog (How many times do we have to pay for the same internet service?) If I’m paying my Internet Service Provider (ISP) to provide bits from the Internet to my home, and content providers pay an ISP for getting their bits into the Internet, what’s the problem? Why do the ISPs ask to be paid more for certain content, say, from Netflix?

The problem is that most ISPs (cable company, DSL/phone company, etc.) seriously underprovision their facilities. If every home subscriber ever attempted to use the service (at 3 megabits/second or 7, or 15, or 100, or whatever) that the ISPs advertise, there would be dramatic slowdowns. The ISPs simply don’t have sufficient capacity in place. The “easy out” for the ISP is to brand Netflix and other content providers as “bandwidth hogs” and using “more than their share” of bandwidth.

Two questions come from this:

  1. If, Netflix, say, did pay more, would my ISP promise to provide great service that didn’t slow down? (I wouldn’t bet on it. They don’t like to promise anything…)

  2. Why shouldn’t we consumers treat these bandwidth claims as false advertising? ISPs take our money while promoting a service that they know they have no ability or intention of providing. Wouldn’t that be a fun class-action suit? 🙂

In any event, you can read and sign the Whitehouse.gov petition at http://wh.gov/lwhFt They got almost half the signatures they need in a week; they need another 60K signatures by 24 May to get an official response from the White House. The more publicity on this issue, the better.

LibreSSL fork of OpenSSL

Posted on by
Reply

A small team of well-known developers from the OpenBSD team is working on a fork of OpenSSL, to be named LibreSSL.

This group is going through the OpenSSL source code base and removing old/ancient distributions, reformatting the code to KNF (Kernel Normal Format), removing dead code, fixing bugs and improving the package documentation.

They’re aided by the freedom to abandon old cruft that will never again be used, but there’s a certain amount of enjoyment to be had in reading snarky commit comments such as:

ASN1_STRING cleanup - realloc has handled NULL since I had a mullet
and parachute pants ...

and

This only works on systems where calloc() does the integer overflow
check, but if your system doesn't do this, you need to ask your vendor
WHY THEY ARE 10 YEARS BEHIND IN BEST PRACTICE?

and

I'm glad to know that Ultrix CC has a bug optimizing switch() statements
lacking an explicit `case 0:' construct. But Ultrix has been dead for more than
15 years, really. Don't give it any reason to move out of its coffin.

and

12 years ago, old_des.h was used to provide compatibility with libdes.
The man page says "Compatibility des_ functions are provided for a short
while" and indeed even the original commit message says "The compatibility
functions will be removed in some future release, at the latest in
version 1.0." So here we are, a short while later.

Now I've only been an OpenBSD developer for 11 years, one year less than
this header has existed, but in that brief time, I've learned a thing or
two about deleting obsolete code. It doesn't delete itself. And worse,
people will continue using it until you force them onto a better path.

(To read more from the complete check-in history, see OpenBSD CVSweb)

I, for one, am glad to see a dedicated team look at this code base with the freedom to make it better, smaller, and auditable. I wish them the best, and have thrown a few simoleons into their kitty.