Roger B.A. Klorese wrote:
> Tucows is creating problems for their customers by underconfiguring
> and dumping the blame on a user who is trying to use resources within
> their allowance.
That's quite a leap to say that because they don't invoke any
restrictions until you cause problems, they must be "underconfiguring
and dumping the blame on a user".
Admittedly, I'm not a big user of the batch system. But I'm not sure I
get how a rate limiter that only comes into play when you are beating
the ever-loving spit out of a system is necessarily a bad thing.
I understand that you feel better with explicitly defined limitations.
Some people would prefer that the police only come around when there's a
problem.
As I understood it, the batch system was designed as a sandbox where
folks could run automated scripts to do things without concern that it
was going to impact the systems devoted to the main line of business
systems. As such, it was always pretty clear to me that there were no
guarantees on availability, but that you had pretty much free reign to
try out things that you would never consider trying on the primary
system. I don't think that Tucows has published anything contrary to
this understanding, but I'm certainly willing to be proven wrong.
Regards,
Eric Longman
Atl-Connect Internet Services
+----------------------------------------------------------+
| Atl-Connect Internet Services http://www.atlcon.net |
| 3600 Dallas Hwy Ste 230 PMB288 770 590-0888 |
| Marietta, GA 30064-1685 support@atlcon.net |
+----------------------------------------------------------+
This archive was generated by hypermail 2.1.3 : Tue Oct 19 2004 - 23:37:53 EDT