[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]

FW: [atlarge-discuss] Re: [wg-web] Re: [atlarge-discuss] Opening of the WG-Web mailing list



Jeffsey, 

Why not set this up good once and for all, and who cares about anything
after that, let's do it the way "we used to do it" : 

The domain is registered through enom, who, if I'm not to misinformed,
have (like most others) a nice web tool with which can manage the domain
servers.

In doing so we give in 4 dns servers, particular order?, well if it was
up to some we would have a vote on it, but I sincerely believe the panel
is capable of deciding the order

Whoever is gonna be #1 (primary) makes the zone files on his server, and
edits his named.conf accordingly, so does the secondary,and so on.

Ideally you spread this around the world, I will gladly set you any one
of the 4 up, will take me about 2 minutes.

Now it would even be nicer if the servers that ran dns also hosted the
website (yes all of them) why ? Because in that case, all servers could
handle a round-robin-resolve. And also users could make a choice for
fastest connections, like users in Turkey do all the time, because their
dns resolves faster (and is their routing) through the usa then through
europe.

Now if we setup the primary as master, and the remainder as slave and we
say yes to a "notify" then at least part 1 is robust.

So if the primary also hosts the primary site, then the others simply
setup a cron job to wget all files at set intervals, and all sites are
that way easily updated.

One out ? No problem, at least 3 left.

Tiem to set this all up ? Excluding the file loading, 3 mintues per
server.

This was considered rocket science quite some time ago, now it is taking
a stroll in the park.

If you wanna use my primary: uk1.able-towers.com will do fine, and yes,
run tests to see if it is working fine or not :))

As for access to the website, let it be clear that the panel should
always have access, one way or another. As for the WG, it is so easy
(again) to setup differentiated access for different members and tasks,
this should not be only the webmasters task, it is a group thing, if
Sotiris is kind enough to do a section, then he should be able to upload
that whenever he sees fit, after all it is his responsibility, and he is
grown-up. He also does not need to access any other part of the site,
henceforth he has access to one part. Webmaster and panel have access to
all parts of the site.

And the host ? He doesn't care one way or the other, not even when ICANN
would threaten with legal force over IP problems. Well at least I don't
:P


Kind regards


Abel Wisman



-----Original Message-----
From: J-F C. (Jefsey) Morfin [mailto:jefsey@club-internet.fr] 
Sent: 29 October 2002 20:23
To: Stephen Waters; James Love
Cc: At-Large Discussion List; wg-web@icann-at-large.org
Subject: Re: [atlarge-discuss] Re: [wg-web] Re: [atlarge-discuss]
Opening of the WG-Web mailing list


Dear Stephen,
this is some frustration by someone who suffered a lot of frustrations
on 
this issue. Today we have a situation where the WG-Web acting chair has
no 
access to the site, nor even relations with the Webmaster, where the 
registered owners do not know how to update the site DNS, where no one 
knows how the site works. So let keep calm and relax.

1. let try to have it working. Tim proposed to do that. I am sure Hans
will 
help.
2. let have a WG-Web chair and devise a quick charter and have it
approved 
by the Panel
3. let have members of the WG-Web taking responsbility for some pages of

the site
     - forum
     - user registration
     - special topics
     - mailing lists
     - panelist support
     and update procedures adopted together with an internal linking 
strategy to permit security.

The tension we met was not needed. We want to achieve somehing together.

Notto just dispute over by-laws, quick and dirty sites, and ICANN :-)

Look at Sotiris beautyfull site on Greeck Philosophy. It would be great
if 
he picked the News Page. But we need a procedure to have the things
clean, 
simple, workable.
All this takes time.
cheers.
jfc

jfc


At 19:58 30/10/02, Stephen Waters wrote:

>Jamie,
>
>I think this is just in response to the current level of [neglect?
>disorganization? not-set-up-edness?]. I gather it's more of an 
>accountability-focused committee (currently) and will gradually narrow 
>its focus to being a place to talk about technical concerns, ideas, and

>frustrations... but only after a sufficient level of accountability is 
>reached.
>
>I agree with the minimalist approach for the most part (just fire them
>if they do a lousy job), but I think there is some call for 
>procedure/policy on official website content so that we actually know 
>what constitutes a lousy job.
>
>-s
>
>On Wed, 2002-10-30 at 07:14, James Love wrote:
> > Ok people.  After we have dozens or hundreds of people on the
> > committee to manage the web site, what next?  Isn't this pretty 
> > silly?  Can anyone
> point
> > to even one organization that has a similiar structure to manage an
> > organization web site?   Maybe we need to grow up a bit and think
about 
> what
> > we are trying to manage.   Jamie
>
>
>
>
>---
>Incoming mail is certified Virus Free.
>Checked by AVG anti-virus system (http://www.grisoft.com).
>Version: 6.0.408 / Virus Database: 230 - Release Date: 24/10/02




---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: atlarge-discuss-unsubscribe@lists.fitug.de
For additional commands, e-mail: atlarge-discuss-help@lists.fitug.de