backtop

Print 21 comment(s) - last by Duwelon.. on May 3 at 8:32 PM
Coders and developers rejoice

D-Link representatives tell us that Poul-Henning Kamp and the company have come to an agreement over the previously reported non-consent of D-Link's use of Kamp's servers.  Poul-Henning Kamp, acclaimed FreeBSD developer, is the owner of a top stratum NTP server.  When D-Link began manufacturing routers and other products that require accurate internal clocks, the devices were programmed to call Kamp's NTP server -- an open server that was intended to feed NTP information to lower tier servers.

Fortunately, it seems like both parties have defused the situation.  The company released the following official statement:

D-Link and Poul-Henning Kamp announced today that they have amicably resolved their dispute regarding access to Mr. Kamp's GPS.Dix.dk NTP Time Server site. D-Link's existing products will have authorized access to Mr. Kamp's server, but all new D-Link products will not use the GPS.Dix.dk NTP timeserver. D-Link is dedicated to remaining a good corporate and network citizen.

Comments     Threshold


This article is over a month old, voting and posting comments is disabled
Slashdot FTW
By Master Kenobi (blog) on 5/3/2006 11:37:15 AM , Rating: 2
Funny... nothing gets resolved for such a long time but as soon as he goes public to slashdot and other big newgroups, D-Link comes to the table and fixes it in short order.....

Well too little too late, most people in the tech circles haven't bought D-Link for years, and will continue to not buy that trash.




RE: Slashdot FTW
By creathir on 5/3/2006 12:05:47 PM , Rating: 1
I personally do not have a lot of problems with DLink products... at least on a home network or small network basis. It is not Cisco equipment, but it is not THAT bad either. I personally like it BETTER than Linksys products due to the interface and tools they provide for configuration. Just my thoughts though.
- Peter


RE: Slashdot FTW
By creathir on 5/3/06, Rating: 0
RE: Slashdot FTW
By The Cheeba on 5/3/2006 12:10:02 PM , Rating: 2
" It is not Cisco equipment, but it is not THAT bad either. I personally like it BETTER than Linksys"

But Linksys IS Cisco!


RE: Slashdot FTW
By creathir on 5/3/06, Rating: 0
RE: Slashdot FTW
By dgingeri on 5/3/2006 4:23:23 PM , Rating: 2
I had a D-link wireless b router for a few years and it worked well, but when I bought a DI-524 for Wireless G access, I had nothign but problems. It would have to be restarted daily due to lock ups. their support consisted of having me turn off various features until it worked ok. I may as well have bought a DI-604 (non-wireless) for all the good it did me. At least I'd have VPN pass-through. they wouldn't replace it because it would work with the wireless and VPN-passthrough turned off, features they advertised on the box. I finally bought a Linksys and everything is fine now. I am having no problems with the Linksys. At least they have support that is somewhat better than trained monkeys, D-link does not.


RE: Slashdot FTW
By ajdavis on 5/3/2006 12:08:57 PM , Rating: 2
O RLY?

I've been using my DL-604 for 2-3 years now. Know that just because you personally dislike a company or how they reacted to a particular issue it doesn't necessarily mean "most people in the tech circles" agree with you.


RE: Slashdot FTW
By DigitalFreak on 5/3/2006 12:32:33 PM , Rating: 2
Agreed. D-Link, or D-Stink as the case may be, products are crap.

Hopefully this guy also forced them to remove his NTP server from their list in a firmware update.


RE: Slashdot FTW
By shadowzz on 5/3/2006 12:48:37 PM , Rating: 2
"D-Link's existing products will have authorized access to Mr. Kamp's server, but all new D-Link products will not use the GPS.Dix.dk NTP timeserver."



Issue resolved but...
By keitaro on 5/3/2006 2:21:01 PM , Rating: 2
Okay, so D-link says their future products will not use that NTP servers... yet the existing ones will stll do? That doesn't make much sense to me...

I know that there are various NTP servers that provide public access to those needing time syncronizations. And all of them have some set of guidelines as to who's allowed to use it and who isn't. That information is located here:

http://ntp.isc.org/bin/view/Servers/WebHome

I thought that the ideal resolution was to simply program the firmware to use a random NTP server from the pool, which would then alleviate the stress or load on Kamp's server. Or at the very least, let D-link set up their own NTP server. It seems that's a better option that'll benefit everyone instead of letting whatever products still functional out there continue to hammer on Kamp's server.




RE: Issue resolved but...
By dgingeri on 5/3/2006 4:33:26 PM , Rating: 2
yeah, a random selection from an available list would be nice. setting it to one particular server might create problems at a later time. If that one is shut down, then the routers fail to operate. I don't think that would work very well. If D-link makes their own, then they get bought out or shut down, and all those people with the old routers are screwed. I think it ought to use the US government time servers. Those aren't likely to get shutdown in the next 20 years or so.


RE: Issue resolved but...
By lemonadesoda on 5/3/2006 5:21:00 PM , Rating: 2
You have not demonstrated that you can understand 2 simple things:

1./ D-link cannot program firmware to randomly select a server. It is too complicated for them to program, and too demanding an application for the processors in their consumer devices.

2./ D-link will not set up their own NTP server, for three reasons a) imagine the expense of the server and connection! (remember D-Link are cheap), b) since they would then be obliged to use it on all their products, they would expose themselves to QoS issues, c) thats way too complicated for them... they OEM most of their components anyway.

If you think these are strong words, they are. D-Link's response demonstrated truth behind these observations. If they were not true, D-link would have come forward with the correct, and ideal, resolution to the issue as poster mentioned. Including the commercially responsible thing to pay Mr Kamp's bandwidth fees.



RE: Issue resolved but...
By Duwelon on 5/3/2006 8:30:40 PM , Rating: 2
I've had very good luck with Dlink stuff and their gaming router is top notch. It can forward it's logs to a syslog server, can prioritize traffic and looks better than most routers.

As someone who installs a lot of network hardware, I love Dlink because they don't throw their god damn wizards at you and let you do exactly what you want, pretty much like Linksys.


RE: Issue resolved but...
By Duwelon on 5/3/2006 8:32:09 PM , Rating: 2
That's consumer devices anyway, anything for a decent sized business is almost 100% cisco for us.


Another Typo
By TomZ on 5/3/2006 12:24:34 PM , Rating: 1
difused -> diffused.

No offense guys, but you need to do some more proofreading and/or spellcheck before posting articles if you really want that "professional" image.




RE: Another Typo
By shadowzz on 5/3/2006 12:26:55 PM , Rating: 2
Surely you meant defused right?


RE: Another Typo
By TomZ on 5/3/2006 12:26:58 PM , Rating: 2
Sorry for the duplicate - the other poster got thei post in several seconds before mine. I also think actually "defused" is correct, not "diffused" as I had suggested.


RE: Another Typo
By dgingeri on 5/3/2006 4:29:20 PM , Rating: 2
Diffused: spread out or scattered, like light from a frosted lightbulb
http://dictionary.reference.com/search?q=diffuse

Defused: disarmed, as in a bomb or 'explosive situation'. IOW "The Cuban missled crisis was finally defused when the Soviet Union agreed to withdraw their nuclear missles."
http://dictionary.reference.com/search?q=defuse

use whatever word is necessary. I just want to point out that both are words. I don't know which was meant, but I don't think it really matters too much.


Edit
By Creig on 5/3/2006 12:23:51 PM , Rating: 1
And now it's time for yet another reader to fill in for the seemingly vacant post of DailyTech Editor.


"a open server" should be "an open server" and "difused" is not word, but "defused" is.




RE: Edit
By fic2 on 5/3/2006 3:09:49 PM , Rating: 2
"is not word" ->> is not a word
LOL when someone makes a typo in their post trying to correct typos in something.


RE: Edit
By TomZ on 5/3/2006 3:41:55 PM , Rating: 2
Difference is, we are just readers, not "professional" journalists.


"You can bet that Sony built a long-term business plan about being successful in Japan and that business plan is crumbling." -- Peter Moore, 24 hours before his Microsoft resignation











botimage
Copyright 2012 DailyTech LLC. - RSS Feed | Advertise | About Us | Ethics | FAQ | Terms, Conditions & Privacy Information | Kristopher Kubicki