Hacker News Board Hacker News, browsed like a classic message board
Live data from Hacker News

Freenginx: Core Nginx developer announces fork

mailman.nginx.org

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

491–500 of 501 posts

Re: Freenginx: Core Nginx developer announces fork

#491

Post by colechristensen »

jupp0r wrote: post #447
colechristensen wrote: post #393

Earlier quoted context omitted.

But also, the only thing in most of the organizations I've been in that was using anything other than HTTP 1.1 was the internet facing loadbalancer or cloudflare, and even then not always. Oh yeah we might get a tiny boost from using HTTP/2 or whatever, but it isn't even remotely near top of mind and won't make a meaningful impact to anyone. HTTP/1.1 is fine and if your software only used that for the next 30 years,…

Maybe you just haven't been in organizations that consider head-of-line blocking a problem? Just because you personally haven't encountered it, doesn't mean that there aren't tons of use cases out there that require HTTP/3.

>Maybe you just haven't been in organizations that consider head-of-line blocking a problem?

I have not. It is quite the niche problem. Mostly because web performance is so bad across the board that saving a few milliseconds just isn't meaningful when your page load takes more than a second and mostly is stuck in javascript anyway. Plus everybody just uses cloudflare and having that CDN layer use whatever modern tech is best is very much good enough.

Re: Freenginx: Core Nginx developer announces fork

#492

Post by rvba »

hinkley wrote: post #255
jbverschoor wrote: post #67

Earlier quoted context omitted.

And that's how 100x developers don't get the recognition they deserve.

Philosophically, if a lead developer is doing most of the commits on a project, then they are monopolizing both the code and the decision making process, which is a sure way to kill a project. If the basketball or soccer team captain were also a ball hog, they'd have trouble keeping the bench full. When you become lead, you have to let some of the code go, and the best way I know to do it is to only put your fingers…

Philosophically and realistically if there is no clear management then everyone will do whatever they want and the project will fail.

And yes, there are lots od companies with bad management, bad decisions, or even surviving despitr bad management. But most of the time thr management at least gives some direction.

You sound like one of those freeloader types, who dont contribute.

Re: Freenginx: Core Nginx developer announces fork

#493

Post by jupp0r »

colechristensen wrote: post #491
jupp0r wrote: post #447

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Maybe you just haven't been in organizations that consider head-of-line blocking a problem? Just because you personally haven't encountered it, doesn't mean that there aren't tons of use cases out there that require HTTP/3.

>Maybe you just haven't been in organizations that consider head-of-line blocking a problem? I have not. It is quite the niche problem. Mostly because web performance is so bad across the board that saving a few milliseconds just isn't meaningful when your page load takes more than a second and mostly is stuck in javascript anyway. Plus everybody just uses cloudflare and having that CDN layer use whatever modern tech…

Sure, but there's video streaming, server to server long polling bidirectional channels, IOT sensors and all sorts of other things you probably use every day that can really benefit from HTTP3/quic.

Re: Freenginx: Core Nginx developer announces fork

#494

Post by quesera »

xorcist wrote: post #348
quesera wrote: post #284

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Where does this idea come from? I see it repeated a lot, but it's not correct. rsh was common on internal networks, but almost never used on the wider Internet. telnet was everywhere all across the net. ssh was a revelation and it replaced telnet and authenticated/non-anonymous ftp primarily. And also sometimes rsh, but less importantly.

How could it be in correct? rsh was clearly modelled after rlogin, and ssh was clearly modelled after rsh. The command line options were almost identical for an easy switch. ssh even respected the .rhosts file! Last time I checked, that functionality was still in place. Both the rlogin-family of commands and the telnet/ftp-family were in use across the Internet, certainly in cases where Kerberos was used. I would thi…

Agree that ssh was modeled after rsh. But rsh was a different kind of security problem, which wasn't really relevant on the wider Internet.

ssh solved the "pass credentials in cleartext over untrusted networks" problem. Consequently it replaced telnet and ftp. It also duplicated the functionality of rsh and rcp, so those protocols became irrelevant. But that was not the important goal.

> Kerberos solved authentication for free,

This made me laugh. Kerberos didn't do anything for free. :)

Even in Athena, Kerberos had reliability problems. In the wider world, it was very hard to find a well-managed Kerberos implementation. Things are different now!

Re: Freenginx: Core Nginx developer announces fork

#495

Post by account42 »

hinkley wrote: post #255
jbverschoor wrote: post #67

Earlier quoted context omitted.

And that's how 100x developers don't get the recognition they deserve.

Philosophically, if a lead developer is doing most of the commits on a project, then they are monopolizing both the code and the decision making process, which is a sure way to kill a project. If the basketball or soccer team captain were also a ball hog, they'd have trouble keeping the bench full. When you become lead, you have to let some of the code go, and the best way I know to do it is to only put your fingers…

What an absurd thing to say. You do realize that a single active main developer + a bunch of drive by contributors is the NORM for most open-source projects, right?

Re: Freenginx: Core Nginx developer announces fork

#496

Post by account42 »

GoblinSlayer wrote: post #458
e12e wrote: post #380

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> "Denial of service" is never a security bug. What about serving certificate revocation list, with another system relying on say one day old cache? (Sure, that's "fail open" - but still...). Or proxying LDAP for sync to a central auth/authz system? Ed: proxy giving access to logging system goes down - alert on failed logins silenced, disabling rate limits for brute force attacks?

AFAIK, mandatory OCSP is turned off by default. Exactly because it fails regularly. Try to turn it on and see how it goes.

For how long does it fail? Because I have not seen any availability issues with OCSP stapling (including must staple in the cert) using Let's Encrypt.

Re: Freenginx: Core Nginx developer announces fork

#497

Post by larodi »

Kluggy wrote: post #20
larodi wrote: post #6

Is called "rage-fork" perhaps this. So proposed title: nginx dev rage-forks over security disagreement with boss company But then perhaps he also has every right to do it, even though AFAIR the original author was somebody else.

Rage-fork doesn’t show up anywhere in their announcement, nor does it read like they’re doing something specifically out of rage. Everyone has a right to forking the project. Only time will tell if they get critical mass of developers to keep it going.

Of course it is not mentioned, it is implied. The term "rage-fork" is a made up one, not sure whether anyone else uses it in this form. But if you imply that there was no rage in the decision to fork - well that's something to have doubts about and it very much seems the move was done with some significant emotion in it. although somewhat concealed in the original post.

Re: Freenginx: Core Nginx developer announces fork

#498

Post by frikkie444 »

F5 is spinning this to be about not disclosing CVE's when the truth is more that the experimental code that was flagged was not considered production ready and whomever is running it should know they are on their own. This CVE is an obvious bug, and

when your KPI is CVE's per month every bug looks like a CVE

F5 wants this feature prioritized over what Maxim planned, and Maxim doesn't have to comply, he is a volunteer.

Re: Freenginx: Core Nginx developer announces fork

#500

Post by stop50 »

web3-is-a-scam wrote: post #162

Apache my beloved

I only use apache on one server: as an dav server, since i could not find a simple dav server(nextcloud is for that already too much) and nginx as an frontend for that, since i use some servers with unix sockets which apache still doesn't support.
Post reply on HN