Page 1 of 2

New EFnet Server GaTel...

Posted: Fri Apr 09, 2004 10:47 pm
by dany1
Hello,

I couldn't get a serious answer in the EFnet IRC channel for our german computer magazine, so I'll try here.

Can somebody tell me why the provider Global Acces Telecom (Gatel) with his Reseller Aixit GmbH got the
chance to link a server to EFnet and COLT Telecom not? COLT Telecom is a international company and had never
any problems with warez and other stuff like that, and GaTel...? (yes!)

I mean COLT Telecom int. <> GaTel .. I don´t think u can compare these companies... COLT is a global
player.. and EFnet EU Division voted angainst them..!?



dany1

Posted: Sat Apr 10, 2004 12:48 am
by Hardy
I dont have a vote in EU or a real say in new servers in eu, but i watched both applications come in and i can give you my opinion..

:arrow: Colt didnt have any existing EFnet people involved in the server, while Gator had several, including the gigabell.de ex-admin and a efnet.nl admin, aswell as two experienced opers.

:arrow: Colt`s application was -badly- written, they had left out a lot of things that should be there. They even didnt answer on several questions in the application.. Some homework is expected before you apply with a efnet server.

:arrow: Colt`s traceroutes was really bad. Several of them was even so bad that i would have guessed the server was hosted in asia somewhere :)

:arrow: Colt`s name of the server, born2frag.de didnt really appeal to anyone either..

:arrow: Dont leave the field under connectivity blank... Because its probablyone of the most important fields in the application :)

Gator/Aixit had a good and well worked out application matching the requirements and with staffers on it thats known and trusted. When we select new servers we dont only look at the technical, but if the staff understand what it "really means" to link efnet, and we didnt think the admins of Colt`s server did.

However, this isnt a "offical reason" for its denial, just my personal opinion when i saw colt`s application the first time vs. aixit.

Posted: Sat Apr 10, 2004 10:41 am
by Hardy
Oh, and another thing..

You can reapply again after 6 months, and if you guys do (something i hope you do, because its allways good with stable servers ) i would really recommend to discuss the application and future plans of the server with some experienced oper or admin before sending in a application.

COLT vs GATEL

Posted: Sat Apr 10, 2004 5:51 pm
by Tibar
First off- GATEL itself was not hosting the servers. The servers that were busted for "WaReZ" were rented servers from so stupid web hosting, server rental company that will remain unamed. When we decided to link a server we took every aspect in to mind and used the best practice for every aspect of the server. We didn't throw a server up in a week or something like this. We spent 3 months setting up, testing, and making sure everything was in order. efnet.aixit.de has incredible traceroutes to every server in europe and not bad routes to the United States. Now COLT.NET has nice facilities and I have nothing against them. born2frag is imature and that type of attitude and representation is not needed in efnet. I'm sure if there was an efnet.colt.net or irc.colt.net application w/ help from some experienced admins at one of their nicer facilities (london, or the French facility) i'm sure it would be looked at seriously. If you would like some help in setting this up, please private message me and I would be happy to help you through the process.

Also as for GATEL not being a global company w/ facilities all around europe and small facilities on the East Coast United States and also West Coast of the United states Global Access Communication is a Global Company and improving their presence daily. (GATEL did buy a major chunk of kpnQuest's backbone) .

Anywho.. Just some words for thought.

Posted: Sun Apr 11, 2004 12:49 pm
by dany1
Colt didnt have any existing EFnet people involved in the server, while Gator had several, including the gigabell.de ex-admin and a efnet.nl admin, aswell as two experienced opers.

Not really true... Andreas Bröcking helped a lot of EFnet servers in the EU Union... and he was ready to help COLT.

Colt`s application was -badly- written, they had left out a lot of things that should be there. They even didnt answer on several questions in the application.. Some homework is expected before you apply with a efnet server.

There was a second version, with a lot of good critic.

Colt`s traceroutes was really bad. Several of them was even so bad that i would have guessed the server was hosted in asia somewhere

There was a temporary problem, for 24h a 622MBit/s line (both paths) was down.

Colt`s name of the server, born2frag.de didnt really appeal to anyone either..

That wasn't a real problem?! There was no problem in changing the domain name.

Dont leave the field under connectivity blank... Because its probablyone of the most important fields in the application

Who can read, is clearly in advantage...



Efnet now with the Warez Provider #1

Posted: Sun Apr 11, 2004 2:19 pm
by Gozem
With that attitude i'm happy you didn't get a link.

Sorry.

Posted: Sun Apr 11, 2004 2:38 pm
by Hardy
dany1 wrote:Colt didnt have any existing EFnet people involved in the server, while Gator had several, including the gigabell.de ex-admin and a efnet.nl admin, aswell as two experienced opers.

Not really true... Andreas Bröcking helped a lot of EFnet servers in the EU Union... and he was ready to help COLT.
True, however Andreas (zap) wasnt involved before the second application was sent in.
dany1 wrote:Colt`s application was -badly- written, they had left out a lot of things that should be there. They even didnt answer on several questions in the application.. Some homework is expected before you apply with a efnet server.

There was a second version, with a lot of good critic.
Also true, it did receive some good critics but obviously not enough to get 50% of the servers to vote yes.
dany1 wrote:Colt`s traceroutes was really bad. Several of them was even so bad that i would have guessed the server was hosted in asia somewhere

There was a temporary problem, for 24h a 622MBit/s line (both paths) was down.
Then the application with those traceroutes probably shouldnt have been sent at that time, should it?
dany1 wrote:Colt`s name of the server, born2frag.de didnt really appeal to anyone either..

That wasn't a real problem?! There was no problem in changing the domain name.
It just added the allready bad impression. Wasnt your "single point of failure"..
dany1 wrote:Dont leave the field under connectivity blank... Because its probablyone of the most important fields in the application

Who can read, is clearly in advantage...
I`m sitting here looking at the first application that was sent in and can clearly see that this one wasnt filled out.

2. Connectivity
Please describe your connectivity to your uplinks, and any
additional significant peering. Please also include an IP address of
the server or at least a machine on the same hub/switch:


And even tho it mentioned it was "100mbit/s to the switch" under essay question that doesnt cut it as the answer needed.
dany1 wrote:Efnet now with the Warez Provider #1
I love your attitude... As Tibar allready explained it was a paying customer that ran those machine, not the provider or the people working there. It has been a year since Colt applied, so why dont you guys do your homework and send in a new application instead of bashing another server from your country getting the link you guys didnt.

If you need any help reapplying dont hesitate to ask.

Re: New EFnet Server GaTel...

Posted: Sun Apr 11, 2004 3:01 pm
by dawg
dany1 wrote:I couldn't get a serious answer in the EFnet IRC channel for our german computer magazine, so I'll try here.
I dont understand why this computermagazine would wanna know this much about a denied link-app.

Posted: Sun Apr 11, 2004 4:14 pm
by Manic
Well,

I will not go into my reasons as to why I voted NO, however one thing that springs to mind now, is, if it was associated with colt, why was the server name born2frag ? irc.colt.de efnet.colt.de moo.colt.de are all much more applicable and representative than a 'vanity' domain.

If you are really serious about getting a link, re-apply, if you want, you are more than welcome to ask me to have a look at the application before its submitted and I will help you whereever possible.

Lets quit flaming each other and make some damn progress.

constructive help

Posted: Tue Apr 13, 2004 3:38 am
by Tibar
Thanks Manic!

Also, if you are affiliated w/ COLT there are other EU COLT locations. I Know for a fact there is a nice location in France. Why not consider looking at one of these locations. I too would be happy to lend a hand in what ever way possible. I too second the notion that the vanity domain was really uncalled for. You mihgt get away w/ that w/ US routing but, the EU takes pride in being quite a bit more strict in its guidlines and taking its role very seriously. Take care and good luck in your journey!

Posted: Tue Apr 13, 2004 4:03 am
by corrupt
Uh, plz to hush your clueless little trap about US-ROUTING :)

Posted: Tue Apr 13, 2004 1:28 pm
by dany1
You are right in the point "just make a new apply"...

I'm not the person who made the apply and I'm not in the position to make a new apply...

I don't think that Colt would make a new apply, they are more or less the opinion that EFnet = Warez now.


Just close the thread please.


dany1

Posted: Tue Apr 13, 2004 2:56 pm
by Hardy
dany1 wrote:You are right in the point "just make a new apply"...

I'm not the person who made the apply and I'm not in the position to make a new apply...

I don't think that Colt would make a new apply, they are more or less the opinion that EFnet = Warez now.

Just close the thread please.

dany1
oh no. :cry: .....

Well, they can have that opinion if they want to, but the reason it was denied and wasnt taken to serious is because of an application that wasnt satisfactory to the standards EFnet requests. Something aixit had.

Corrupt

Posted: Wed Apr 14, 2004 8:02 am
by Tibar
I guess I should of put a :) there. I was just joking Corrupt, w/ that US comment.

bleh blah ugh

Posted: Fri May 21, 2004 12:06 pm
by slushey
dany1, i'm not affilited with EFnet at all. I'm just a chatter here. Honestly, what i've seen from you so far is pure inmaturity. You've put all EFnet down to "= WaReZ". EFnet is filled with GOOD people. If you were the admin, I guess it's juts proof that you were the wrong person to be admining the server, therefore the denial of your appication was probably made for a good reason. :roll: