From firegrif at linkor7k.ru  Wed Sep  4 06:37:23 2024
From: firegrif at linkor7k.ru (=?UTF-8?Q?=D0=9F=D0=B0=D0=B2=D0=B5=D0=BB?=)
Date: Wed, 04 Sep 2024 20:37:23 +0700
Subject: Mirror Announcement
Message-ID: <440238559f228f238caee26c1aa47f77@linkor7k.ru>

Good day! I have created a full mirror of downloads.openwrt.org and 
archive.openwrt.org. downloads.openwrt.org is synchronized daily.
The server is located in the Russian Federation, accessible at 
http://openwrt.linkor7k.ru/ or https://openwrt.linkor7k.ru/


From koen.vandeputte at citymesh.com  Fri Sep  6 02:23:59 2024
From: koen.vandeputte at citymesh.com (Koen Vandeputte)
Date: Fri, 6 Sep 2024 11:23:59 +0200
Subject: Forum host upgrade - proposal
In-Reply-To: <879b3589-c3c8-44de-964b-92f97c3db126@linux-ipv6.be>
References: <6693add5-82d0-40e1-9a5b-4a4903fe6122@linux-ipv6.be>
 <9D22D049-2697-4491-81C3-720149ABC387@aparcar.org> <CAPh3n82RJNWAX1y0m3Sd3uHRhhp62RNZFYQXkhEZLffRwXbB0A@mail.gmail.com>
 <CAPh3n81VHCKbuHzviJANUdaTdBfSnErqT=ijGZhdOPq_5OGkCg@mail.gmail.com> <879b3589-c3c8-44de-964b-92f97c3db126@linux-ipv6.be>
Message-ID: <CAPh3n814c1mKx7Gsrm8PkBDqYftS0YSGyGf1ZfsV2Ym6wPyEOQ@mail.gmail.com>

On Fri, Aug 30, 2024 at 9:01?PM Stijn Tintel <stijn at linux-ipv6.be> wrote:
>
> On 20/08/2024 19:03, Koen Vandeputte wrote:
> > On Tue, Aug 20, 2024 at 5:48?PM Koen Vandeputte
> > <koen.vandeputte at citymesh.com> wrote:
> >> On Sat, Aug 17, 2024 at 10:13?AM Paul Spooren <mail at aparcar.org> wrote:
> >>> Hi,
> >>>
> >>>> On 16. Aug 2024, at 21:49, Stijn Tintel <stijn at linux-ipv6.be> wrote:
> >>>>
> >>>> ?Resend because someone decided to send HTML email which tricked my email client to sending HTML email as well, which resulted in my response being rejected.
> >>>>
> >>>> Please people, stop sending HTML email, and while at it, stop top-posting.
> >>>>
> >>>>> On 16/08/2024 21:37, Koen Vandeputte wrote:
> >>>>>
> >>>>>
> >>>>> Op do 15 aug. 2024 01:06 schreef Hauke Mehrtens <hauke at hauke-m.de>:
> >>>>>
> >>>>>     On 8/12/24 22:11, Stijn Tintel wrote:
> >>>>>     >
> >>>>>     > On 8/12/24 15:33, Robert Marko wrote:
> >>>>>     >> On Sat, 10 Aug 2024 at 17:54, Ted Hess <thess at kitschensync.net>
> >>>>>     wrote:
> >>>>>     >>> Hi all -
> >>>>>     >>>
> >>>>>     >>> Those of you who visit the forum have probably noticed its,
> >>>>>     sometimes
> >>>>>     >>> extreme, sluggishness over the last several months. Since
> >>>>>     April, I have
> >>>>>     >>> worked on and applied a number of attempts at tuning, cleanup and
> >>>>>     >>> storage re-arrangement to try and alleviate these issues. As
> >>>>>     best as I
> >>>>>     >>> can determine, we have have just simply exceeded the capacity
> >>>>>     of the
> >>>>>     >>> current Droplet CPU and RAM. To upgrade to a system with 2X
> >>>>>     CPU/RAM
> >>>>>     >>> (4vCPU/8GB -> 8vCPU/16GB) will increase cost from $48/mo to
> >>>>>     $96-112/mo.
> >>>>>     >>> The difference in cost is a "Regular Intel" vs "Premium Intel"
> >>>>>     >>> processors. The Premium (latest Xeon) option will provide
> >>>>>     enhanced NVMe
> >>>>>     >>> SSDs which would improve DB performance (a bit). I think it
> >>>>>     would be
> >>>>>     >>> worth $112/mo for maximal impact on the responsiveness of the
> >>>>>     forum. AMD
> >>>>>     >>> vs Intel - cost is the same. AMD may be slightly higher GHz.
> >>>>>     >>>
> >>>>>     >>> Are there any objections / reasons why we shouldn't go ahead
> >>>>>     and do the
> >>>>>     >>> upgrade. There are a couple of methods available however, the
> >>>>>     down-time
> >>>>>     >>> will probably be 1-3hrs. if no problems. This isn't the first
> >>>>>     system
> >>>>>     >>> upgrade we have done, so I expect no issues.
> >>>>>     >>>
> >>>>>     >>> If any of you wish to see some of the forum performance stats,
> >>>>>     I can
> >>>>>     >>> post another message with numbers and personal observations. A
> >>>>>     quick
> >>>>>     >>> overview of what our daily forum activity looks like:
> >>>>>     >>>
> >>>>>     >>> * Serving 120-160K page views. (about 25% attributed to
> >>>>>     crawlers - a
> >>>>>     >>> different discussion)
> >>>>>     >>> * 6-8K mail messages generated
> >>>>>     >>> * ~1100 User visits (signed-in)
> >>>>>     >>> * ~200 engaged users (liked or posted)
> >>>>>     >>> * ~500 new posts
> >>>>>     >>>
> >>>>>     >>> Footnote on bandwidth usage... (DO charges bandwidth on aggregate
> >>>>>     >>> Droplet use)
> >>>>>     >>> Proposed Droplet upgrade will add 3TB to our total.
> >>>>>     >>> I don't have per-Droplet stats, but last month we transmitted
> >>>>>     ~29TB of
> >>>>>     >>> our 25TB allowance. A $40 overage cost.
> >>>>>     >> Hi Ted,
> >>>>>     >> I am for upgrading the droplet as forum is probably the main
> >>>>>     point of
> >>>>>     >> interaction
> >>>>>     >> in the OpenWrt community.
> >>>>>     >>
> >>>>>     >> But, like others pointed out, we maybe should look for a more
> >>>>>     >> affordable host
> >>>>>     >> then DO as they are quite expensive.
> >>>>>     >
> >>>>>     > We use DO because they sponsor us USD 5000 to use their
> >>>>>     services. If you
> >>>>>     > look at the current costs, upgrading another droplet will cause
> >>>>>     us to
> >>>>>     > use up the USD 5000 before they expire. Please keep that in mind
> >>>>>     before
> >>>>>     > doing anything that will increase cost.
> >>>>>     >
> >>>>>     > Stijn
> >>>>>
> >>>>>     Hi,
> >>>>>
> >>>>>     I think it is fine if we invest some money into the server for the
> >>>>>     forum. From my point of view it is fine to upgrade the server from
> >>>>>     4vCPU/8GB -> 8vCPU/16GB for an additional ~70$ per month.
> >>>>>
> >>>>>     We should consider to move some resources to other providers like
> >>>>>     Hetzner, but we can do this later.
> >>>>>
> >>>>>
> >>>>>     Hauke
> >>>>>
> >>>>>     _______________________________________________
> >>>>>     openwrt-adm mailing list
> >>>>>     openwrt-adm at lists.openwrt.org
> >>>>>     https://lists.openwrt.org/mailman/listinfo/openwrt-adm
> >>>>>
> >>>>>
> >>>>> Hi all,
> >>>>>
> >>>>> Is there any interest in my proposal for hosting the forum at Citymesh? (Free of charge)
> >>>>> Datacenter team has given a Green Light internally.
> >>>>>
> >>>>> Thanks,
> >>>>>
> >>>>> Koen (Mobile)
> >>>>>
> >>>>>
> >>>> Hi Koen,
> >>>>
> >>>> While I appreciate the offer, I am hesitant to accept it. I remember one of the main driving factors of the LEDE fork all too well. One of them was the downtime of key OpenWrt infrastructure, with the inability of all but one OpenWrt team members to solve said downtime, due to the rest not having access. This is something we absolutely have to avoid from happening again in the future. That said, I would be open to accepting the offer, if the following conditions are met:
> >>>>
> >>>> At least 3 (preferably 5) OpenWrt team members who are currently involved in maintaining the OpenWrt infrastructure should have full access. As to full access, this includes the ability to call someone at any given time of day to recover something that is broken.
> >>>>
> >>>> Keeping in mind that cyber attacks are currently happening everywhere, phishing-proof 2FA must be mandatory. In my opinion, the only standard that provides this, is FIDO2 hardware keys.
> >>>>
> >>>> A signed statement from a major stakeholder at Citymesh, that if a decision is made to retract the offer, we are guaranteed to have at least six months to migrate everything elsewhere.
> >>>>
> >>>> I know I am harsh on this, but we should learn from the past.
> >>> I did not follow the whole thread but when it comes to having a more powerful machine at DO, I could migrate away the ASU server to another provider. It?s less critical infrastructure and rather costly due to CPU and storage requirements.
> >>>
> >>> It?s rather trivial to setup so I could move it within days. Please let me know if that would be of help.
> >>>
> >>> Best,
> >>> Paul
> >> Hi Stijn & all,
> >>
> >> I totally understand your arguments and fully respect the requirements.
> >>
> >> I've forwarded this internally to the right people to check your requirements
> >> and will come back to you on that.
> >>
> >> If this would be rejected for some reason, maybe we can aid in
> >> different needs which are less mission critical in the future. :-)
> >>
> >> Thanks,
> >>
> >> Koen
> >
> > Hi all,
> >
> > And I already got a reply back internally ..
> >
> > Please clearly state following requirements:
> >
> > - Network: estimates of current throughput + monthly volume
> > - Disk space currently required
> > - CPU (speed + cores)
> > - RAM (amount)
> >
> > Stijn,
> >
> > Please provide more details about this part:
> > - Keeping in mind that cyber attacks are currently happening
> > everywhere, phishing-proof 2FA must be mandatory. In my opinion, the
> > only standard that provides this, is FIDO2 hardware keys.
>
> Hi Koen,
>
> I was mostly thinking about what we currently have at DO.

Which is? :-)
Could someone (you? Ted?) clearly list up using template above what
your requirements are (cpu, memory, bandwidth, ..)
so I can pass it on directly to the Datacenter team.

Thanks again!

Koen


> We currently
> have 9 admins there all with 2FA enabled, but this is to access the
> control panel. Might not be relevant if your company doesn't have such a
> control panel to deploy e.g. VM instances. It's also not using phishing
> resistant 2FA it seems, as it appears I'm using TOTP there.
>
> What I would recommend is that everyone of the team gets at least 2 FIDO
> keys and we start using FIDO2 backed SSH keys [1] on all our servers,
> but that's not directly related to this discussion.
>
> >
> > Your other requirements are fine and reasonable.
> > Communication would also happen with the DC team and/or support
> > directly, not through me ofc to avoid single point of failure.
> Excellent!
> >
> >
> > If the resource specifications are accepted, I would propose to loop
> > some of you in with the DC team for further discussion if that's ok.
>
>
> Thanks,
> Stijn
>
>
> [1] https://developers.yubico.com/SSH/Securing_SSH_with_FIDO2.html
>


From info at maai.co.id  Mon Sep 23 17:26:26 2024
From: info at maai.co.id (Saudi Aramco Petroleum)
Date: 24 Sep 2024 03:26:26 +0300
Subject: VENDORS EOI
Message-ID: <20240924032626.92A263462FE40981@maai.co.id>

Greetings Sir/Madam,

We are extending an invitation to your valued company to register 
as potential a Vendor/suppliers and partners for the Aramco 
Petroleum Refineries 2024?2025 projects.

These initiatives offers a remarkable opportunities for 
cooperation and are accessible to businesses from across the 
world. We respectfully ask that you request the Vendors 
Questionnaire and EOI (Expression of Interest) if your 
organization is interested in participating in this endeavor.

We will give you the information you need to commence your 
registration with these projects upon your request. Our dedicated 
team will then reach out to guide you through the subsequent 
steps.

We appreciate your interest in this invitation and look forward 
to receiving your prompt response.

Kind Regards,

 TALAL OMAR
 Vendor Coordinator 
Group Procurement & Contracts Shared Services Center 
Saudi Aramco P.O. Box 5000, Dhahran, 31311, 
 Kingdom of Saudi Arabia.
projects at aramco-tender.com


