Site Moved

[califdon]

Now that everything is running smoothly, how are we doing on finances? Were there enough donations to cover the out-of-pocket costs? I'm not asking for an accounting, just want to be sure that nobody is stuck with a bill.

[RobertGonzalez]

That is still being worked out. I believe we are in the process of starting a non profit organization to accept the donations. Until that is done, all donations are being directed to Jason Lotito, a founder of our network and the owner of our domain name. He also setup the new server and absorbed the costs associated with the move.

[califdon]

That is still being worked out. I believe we are in the process of starting a non profit organization to accept the donations. Until that is done, all donations are being directed to Jason Lotito, a founder of our network and the owner of our domain name. He also setup the new server and absorbed the costs associated with the move.

Thanks, Everah. Just to put in my 2 cents' worth, I don't think a formal, legal organization is necessary. What are we talking about, $100 a year? It'll cost that much to register an organization with the Sec'y of State. Speaking only for myself, I'm perfectly okay with chipping in $20 bucks every year or so and not worrying about whether I get a tax credit, nor about whether Jason finances a few beers with the surplus. Just my take on it.

[Benjamin]

I agree califdon

[pickle]

It'll cost that much to register an organization with the Sec'y of State.

Jason's in Montreal & it doesn't cost anything to set up a non-profit organization up here.

But I digress - I agree with the not caring too much about the funds.

[Kieran Huggins]

I think most of us are simply waiting to know how much is needed to keep this place running... any idea?

[pickle]

I'm still not getting email notifications.

[RobertGonzalez]

I just sent you an email through the forums. Let me know if you got it. I am testing something.

[VladSun]

I'm still not getting email notifications.

I think it's DNS issue again:

Syntax: [ Download ] [ Hide ]

Syntax: [ Download ] [ Show ]

~#dig devnetwork.net MX

; <<>> DiG 9.2.2 <<>> devnetwork.net MX
;; global options:  printcmd
;; Got answer:
;; ->>HEADER<<- opcode: QUERY, status: NOERROR, id: 58651
;; flags: qr rd ra; QUERY: 1, ANSWER: 1, AUTHORITY: 2, ADDITIONAL: 3

;; QUESTION SECTION:
;devnetwork.net.                        IN      MX

;; ANSWER SECTION:
devnetwork.net.         14326   IN      MX      0 devnetwork.net.


~#dig devnetwork.net

; <<>> DiG 9.2.2 <<>> devnetwork.net
;; global options:  printcmd
;; Got answer:
;; ->>HEADER<<- opcode: QUERY, status: NOERROR, id: 48578
;; flags: qr rd ra; QUERY: 1, ANSWER: 1, AUTHORITY: 2, ADDITIONAL: 2

;; QUESTION SECTION:
;devnetwork.net.                        IN      A

;; ANSWER SECTION:
devnetwork.net.         14285   IN      A       216.32.90.210


~# dig -x 216.32.90.210

; <<>> DiG 9.2.2 <<>> -x 216.32.90.210
;; global options:  printcmd
;; Got answer:
;; ->>HEADER<<- opcode: QUERY, status: NOERROR, id: 29369
;; flags: qr rd ra; QUERY: 1, ANSWER: 1, AUTHORITY: 3, ADDITIONAL: 3

;; QUESTION SECTION:
;210.90.32.216.in-addr.arpa.    IN      PTR

;; ANSWER SECTION:
210.90.32.216.in-addr.arpa. 86292 IN    PTR     210.90.32.216.static.reverse.ltdomains.com.

That's is:
* domain devnetwork.net has mail server at host devnetwork.net which resolves to 216.32.90.210. The problem is that many mail servers will refuse e-mails from mail servers whose record in the reverse zone is absent or not corresponding to its IP and domain resolve.
In our case we have:

MX devnetwork.net which IP points to 210.90.32.216.static.reverse.ltdomains.com.

That's done for SPAM protection.

In other words: we should have a PTR record in the reverse zone like this:

Syntax: [ Download ] [ Hide ]

Syntax: [ Download ] [ Show ]

210       PTR       devnetwork.net

in 90.32.216.in-addr.arpa

Then we would have this result:

Syntax: [ Download ] [ Hide ]

Syntax: [ Download ] [ Show ]

~# dig -x 216.32.90.210

; <<>> DiG 9.2.2 <<>> -x 216.32.90.210
;; global options:  printcmd
;; Got answer:
;; ->>HEADER<<- opcode: QUERY, status: NOERROR, id: 29369
;; flags: qr rd ra; QUERY: 1, ANSWER: 1, AUTHORITY: 3, ADDITIONAL: 3

;; QUESTION SECTION:
;210.90.32.216.in-addr.arpa.    IN      PTR

;; ANSWER SECTION:
210.90.32.216.in-addr.arpa. 86292 IN    PTR     devnetwork.net

Another issue reported by dnsreport.com is:

WARNING: One or more of your mail servers is claiming to be a host other than what it really is (the SMTP greeting should be a 3-digit code, followed by a space or a dash, then the host name). If your mail server sends out E-mail using this domain in its EHLO or HELO, your E-mail might get blocked by anti-spam software. This is also a technical violation of RFC821 4.3 (and RFC2821 4.3.1). Note that the host name given in the SMTP greeting should have an A record pointing back to the same server. Note that this one test may use a cached DNS record.

devnetwork.net claims to be non-existent host 210.90.32.216.static.reverse.ltdomains.com:
220-210.90.32.216.static.reverse.ltdomains.com ESMTP Exim 4.68 #1 Tue, 11 Dec 2007 10:36:24 -0600 220-We do not authorize the use of this system to transport unsolicited, 220 and/or bulk e-

Which I think is closely related to the explanation above...

PS:
Sorry, jason. We all know you hate DNS ...

[staar2]

Good to see that server is back online.

[califdon]

Good to see that server is back online.

Yaaa, I was going into deep depression. At least it's better when it's completely down than r-e-a-l s-l-o-w like it used to be. At least I just do something else for awhile. Thanks, guys, for getting us back up!

[jason]

The hosting provider and data center experienced a DDoS attack yesterday. While I haven't been informed directly that this was the reason our server was down, considering the situation, I wouldn't put it that far away from what happened.