The Super Pocket packs power, fantastic controls, and a strong selection of built-in games from either Capcom or Taito into an attractive pocket-size package. The low price tag and full ...

Super Pocket review - portable perfection

Converge completed a sweep of the pre-season pocket tournament it organized after holding off Phoenix, 97-93, on Tuesday, Oct. 17 at the Gatorade Hoops Center. Converge completed a sweep of the pre-season pocket tournament it organized after holding off ...

Converge sweeps pre-season pocket tourney

Are you looking for a reliable way to manage your schedule? Look no further than pocket calendars! These small, portable calendars offer a tangible and customizable way to keep track of your daily ...

9 Best Pocket Calendars for 2023

Converge overcame a sluggish start and drew the much-needed offense from import Tom Vodanovich, Jerrick Balanza and rookie Deschon Winston to subdue Phoenix, 97-93 and sweep the the FiberXers-sponsored pocket tournament on Tuesday, October 17 at the ...

Converge sweeps pocket tournament, frustrates Phoenix

If you’re looking for a plastic surgeon who can help you achieve your body goals, look no further than Dr. Ramsen Azizi. With double board certification and a focus on body contouring, mommy ...

Dr. Ramsen Azizi

The Strange Case of Dr. Jekyll & Mr. Hyde, written by Joe Dickinson and directed by Staci Ingram, is now showing at Pocket Sandwich Theatre through November 11. Starring Travis Cook (left in ...

THE STRANGE CASE OF DR. JEKYLL & MR. HYDE Opens at Pocket Sandwich Theatre

D.R. Horton is an award-winning, family-owned construction business headquartered in Dallas, Texas. The company was founded in 1978 and is now one of the largest homebuilders in the United States.

D.R. Horton Homes Reviews

The DJI Pocket 2 was a runaway success when it launched in 2020, and it quickly became the go-to camera for vloggers and content creators alike. But now, it’s been almost three years since the ...

DJI Osmo Pocket 3 specifications, launch date emerge online

Eleven student athletes are the latest recipients of scholarships from sprint legend Shelly-Ann Fraser-Pryce's Pocket Rocket Foundation, which is now celebrating its 10th year of existence.

Shelly continues to support student athletes through Pocket Rocket Foundation

Linguist and lexicographer Ben Zimmer analyzes the origins of words in the news. Read previous columns here. What does it mean to be “out of pocket”? There are at least a few different ways ...

‘Out of Pocket’: Unavailable? Strapped for Cash? Or Going Wild?

DrPOCKET

drpocket

The Adventure of the Egyptian Tomb

The Ray of Madness

El rayo de la locura

Le rayon de la folie

पागलपन की किरण

レイ・オブ・マッドネス

O Raio da Loucura

疯狂之光

In 2021, hosted the first-ever awards!! HackerNoon Startup of the Year The goal of this campaign was to give recognition to the hardworking startups who pulled through the pandemic -- growing and thriving (despite all of the challenges). More than 44,000 startups were nominated all across the globe! They were selected from over 4,553 cities, with a total number of * cough * “4 billion” votes. Insane, right? To see who is a winner in each respective city, visit and pick a city. The name at the top of the list is the winner. (Awards, with compromised reviews, are under review.) startups.hackernoon.com The will announce the winners per region in their respective cities. Startups Winners Announcement Series Apparently, South America startups did incredibly well in that regard. With so many, until now, uncrowned jewels, it’s time we present to you... * drumroll* 🥳 The South America Startups of the Year Winners! Santiago, Chile Chile is known for being the most stable country to do business in Latin America, ranking 13th in The Economist’s Business Environment Index. Moreover, according to the Global Innovation Index, Chile ranks first in Latin America for innovation and is recognised as Chilean Silicon Valley with Santiago being the central city. The winner is…. QCObjects It is the 1st world class open-source framework made in Latin-America. São Paulo, Brazil And the winner of Brazil’s vibrant financial center is... Innvo Digital Their mission is to create the best ecosystem for a technology professional to work and undertake while sharing it with our customers and society. São Carlos The absolute leader of Sao Carlos seems to be: Predify Predify is an online software for optimizing pricing proccess and improving profits with AI and Big Data Analytics. Belo Horizonte, Brazil With a more than noble goal, Belo Horizone’s winner is: CM Tecnologia CM Tecnologia is an online scheduling system for healthcare providers in Brazil. Porto Alegre, Brazil With the focus on data protection, Porto Alegre, Brazil’s winner is…. Privacy Tools Privacy compliance platform, based on AI/Blockchain, which helps global companies to keep compliant with the data protection requirements. Brasil, Brazil With the focus on EdTech, Brasil is bringing us: Awari Awari is a YC-W21 company focusing on education for the Tech Industry. The company is growing at a fast pace and has gathered experts from all leading tech companies into a full education experience to prepare the next cohort of tech talent. Quito The capital of Ecuador, and also the closest capital to the actual equator, as the winner brings us: Agrodemanda The most comprehensive agricultural directory in Ecuador. Rio De Janeiro, Brazil Rio de Janeiro has more than 300 startups and is ranked 3rd in Brazil in terms of startup ecosystem development. The city is famous for the startups in the spheres of education, energy & environment and foodtech. Their winner is…. Bybrand Bybrand is the simplest way to save time and avoid frustration when managing your employee's email signatures. Buenos Aires, Argentina Buenos Aires, Argentina is not only the cosmopolitan capital with a vibrant history. It’s also Latin America’s most important port. Which makes their winner actually a very logical choice. Please meet: Liftit Liftit is the leading technology platform to automate and execute last-mile truck deliveries across Latin America. Curitiba, Brazil With a more noble mission and sustainability in mind, Curitiba, Brazil, as the winner brings us... Discrepante is the marketplace for a more human and sustainable economy Discrepante.com Florianópolis, Brazil Would you really be surprised one of the Brazil’s winners is related to football training? We neither. Please meet... Fútbol Fit Club Football FitClub® is a fitness training firm that gives fitness training to improve like a professional football player. Medellín, Colombia And the first Colombian Startup Winner is is a data intelligence solution powered by a high quality team. Meet... LogComex Market intelligence for international trade in Latin America Montevideo, Uruguay The host of inaugural FIFA world cup of 1930 comes through when it comes to innovation even in 2021. I’d like to introduce you to: Drop Technologies First electronic hand antiperspirant device Lima, Peru Lima, Peru, has in 2021 delivered some amazing results when it comes to blockchain technology. Their winner is very well deserved: RSK Labs RSK is the first open-source smart contract platform São Carlos Do Pinhal Well this is a unique case. The absolute unanimous winner of São Carlos Do Pinhal is: brain4care brain4care solution enables monitoring intracranial compliance noninvasively anywhere Blumenau, Brazil We’re sensing a theme here. Another stellar EdTech winner is coming from Blumenau, Brazil. Please meet... Uniasselvi Uniasselvi is a Brazilian distance-learning company that offers more than 60 undergraduate and postgraduate courses, in person and distance. Bogotá, Colombia Startups of Bogotá, Colombia definitely showed they’re not to be underestimated. With a very noble mission, let me introduce you to: Risü Risü is an online platform that links online consumption to donation to social institutions. Campina, Brazil If there’s one typo of business we’d single out as taking the biggest hit out of the pandemic, it would have to be small businesses. Thankfully, the winner of Campina, Brazil, operates with small businesses in mind Superlógica Tecnologias Ltda. Superlogica is a management system company created for small service businesses. Cerqueira César, Brazil Swooping half the points from the entire City, this year’s winners of Cerqueira César are InfoPrice INFOPRICE is a business intelligence company focused on physical retail pricing. Governador Valadares, Brazil The same can be said for the winners here. Let’s hear it for: Grupo KPG Saas, Payment, Manufacture, Pharmaceutical, E-commerce, Marketplace, Logistics Caxias Do Sul Known for wine making and Italian cultural influence, Caxias Do Sul brings as an interesting winner. Studio 360 Studio 360 is a proptech focused on easing the purchase experience for real state companies, brokers, and costumers. Sorocaba From Sorocaba, we have an interesting concept coming. Looking forward to seeing it further develop. Let’s meet: Quinto Quinto is a social network that represents the collective opinion of society—to help democracy evolve through technology Viña Del Mar To be a venue-oriented business and survive through the pandemic definitely deserves some recognition. In the name of that, let’s meet: SonicPollen SonicPollen, based in Chile, is a web-based booking platform that connects bands with venues and organizers. Lages Learn more about high-growth startups in Lages, South America. and the winner is…. Qualiall Qualiall develops technologies for training in operational processes such as work security, equipment maintenance, and more. Córdoba, Argentina Another gem from Argentina brings us unique agricultural solutions. Please meet: Kilimo Kilimo is a Big Data solution for water management in agriculture. São José Dos Campos, Brazil Another great agricultural solution comes this time from Brasil. Meet São José Dos Campos Startup winner: TerraMagna TerraMagna is a fintech company that focuses on risk mitigation for agribusinesses. São Leopoldo, Brazil Event-oriented businesses that have survived in the previous years should definitely bottle their perseverance and start selling it. One of those is definitely this winner: Wedy Wedy offers a one-stop-social marketplace for weddings. Pelotas, Brazil Medical scheduling platforms are definitely something we need to see more of. So glad Pelotos winner comes from this particular niche. Fácil Consulta Fácil Consulta is a booking platform that allows people to schedule an appointment with a Specialist Physician in their area. Santa Maria Could you believe how versatile the startups of South America are when we are only now coming across a game development studio? Let’s meet them Imgnation Studios Imgnation Studios is a game development studio that focuses on virtual reality. Asunción, Paraguay A FinTech solution coming from Paraguay. Meet Asunción Startup of the Year winner Vision Banco Vision Banco is a solid and growing financial institution serving the financial needs of the micro, small and medium enterprises. Caracas Venezualan food delivery app that seemed to have your heart. Meet Caracas Startup of the Year winner Yummy Inc. First Food Delivery App in Venezuela Recife A suitable combo between gaming and education, Recife Startup of the Year winner brings revolutionary solutions. Let’s meet them. Joy Street Joy Street offers develops video games focused on educational needs. Rosario, Argentina The winner of Rosario Startup of the Year award for 2021 is... Gbot Gbot is an autonomous robot that controls weeds without using agrochemicals. We also collect data in fields and generate precision maps. Vila Olímpia, Brazil The winner of Vila Olímpia Startup of the Year award for 2021 is... Seekr Seekr operates in the Information Technology sector, providing tools for managing and monitoring of brands. Barueri The winner of Barueri Startup of the Year award for 2021 is.... Glic Brazilian mhealth (web/app) platform for diabetes management Brasília The winner of Brasília Startup of the Year award for 2021 is... Ticies Ticies is a social network that helps people plan where to go with their friends, relatives and acquaintances, in all cities of the world. Juiz De Fora The winner of Juiz De Fora Startup of the Year award for 2021 is... Qranio Qranio is a gamified mobile learning platform for enterprises that rewards learning and stimulates users to engage with educational content. La Paz The winner of La Paz Startup of the Year award for 2021 is... Jukumari Advice 360 photo based market place for responsible tour operators Temuco The winner of Temuco Startup of the Year award for 2021 is... GoFeels GoFeels is the first independent hospitality network in the world. We promote collaborative work among hotels around the world. Vitacura The winner of Vitacura Startup of the Year award for 2021 is... MeatMe MeatMe delivers meats and accessories to have a culinary experience. Barranquilla The winner of Barranquilla Startup of the Year award for 2021 is... Mandaos Mandaos is a digital platform that connects companies and people with a network of independent messengers Ceará The winner of Ceará Startup of the Year award for 2021 is... Caroá Caroá is a cooperative that sells 34 varieties of vegetables, organic fruits, and vegetables. Chapecó The winner of Chapecó Startup of the Year award for 2021 is... HortiAgro HortiAgro is a seed and fertilizer market. Chile Chico The winner of Chile Chico Startup of the Year award for 2021 is... Gleengo Gleengo connects children with their favorite toys, through a tiny device and an application based on text-to-voice. Goiânia The winner of Goiânia Startup of the Year award for 2021 is... Auvo Auvo is an external teams management software. Itá The winner of Itá Startup of the Year award for 2021 is... TISSUELAB Tissuelab is a research and development center focused on biotechnology, and systems for reconstructive musculoskeletal surgery. Jardim Paulista The winner of Jardim Paulista Startup of the Year award for 2021 is... DiviCom DiviCom is a digital video networking company that designs, integrates, and markets complete systems. João Pessoa The winner of João Pessoa Startup of the Year award for 2021 is... YupiPlay YupiPlay develops and offers an educational gaming platform. La Reina The winner of La Reina Startup of the Year award for 2021 is... INTI-TECH INTI-TECH is the fastest growing renewable energy in Chile and the world's leading unconventional source. Leme The winner of Leme Startup of the Year award for 2021 is... EcoStart EcoStart focuses on manufacturing sustainable electric bicycles, fans, and accessories. Loja The winner of Loja Startup of the Year award for 2021 is... Enerwi Corporation Keeping people connected and secured through wireless charging novel solutions Manizales The winner of Manizales Startup of the Year award for 2021 is... Porter Metrics Porter Metrics has developed an automated solution for generating social media reports in minutes. Nova Lima The winner of Nova Lima Startup of the Year award for 2021 is... Biomimetic Solutions Biomimetic Solutions is an innovative tissue engineering company. Paraná The winner of Paraná Startup of the Year award for 2021 is... Laura Laura is a provider of artificial intelligence and predictive analytics platform for hospitala and clinics to prevent damage & reduce costs. Salvador The winner of Salvador Startup of the Year award for 2021 is... Sanar Sanar is a platform that focuses on being the doctor's guide and support, offering specialized content that helps in their development. Santa Catarina The winner of Santa Catarina Startup of the Year award for 2021 is... DrPOCKET Sunchales The winner of Sunchales Startup of the Year award for 2021 is... Eolo Pharma Eolo Pharma focuses on developing drugs targeting the molecular and cellular basis of inflammation-related diseases Valparaiso The winner of Valparaiso Startup of the Year award for 2021 is... Invitta Invitta transforms plastic waste into a high-performance construction material for manufacturing sustainable urban furniture. Vila Velha The winner of Vila Velha Startup of the Year award for 2021 is... OneGrid OneGrid is a developer of hardware and software solutions focused on energy management. Indaiatuba The winner of Indaiatuba Startup of the Year award for 2021 is... DWUL Energy Renewable Energy Campinas, Brazil The winner of Campinas Startup of the Year award for 2021 is... Ativy Ativy is an IT company specialized in cloud computing, data centers, IT outsourcing, service desk, and IT management. Las Condes, Chile The winner of Las Condes Startup of the Year award for 2021 is... # MuvPass Subscription services that allows it's users unlimited access to fitness classes in the best gyms and studios in Latin America. Pinheiros, Brazil The winner of Pinheiros Startup of the Year award for 2021 is... GuiaBolso GuiaBolso is a personal finance platform that empowers people to take control of financial well-being. Rio, Brazil The winner of Rio Startup of the Year award for 2021 is... EmCasa EmCasa is a vertically-integrated platform that helps customers buy and sell a home in Latin America, starting in Brazil. Guayaquil The winner of Guayaquil Startup of the Year award for 2021 is... Sabroso Online platform for LatAm's enterprises to order low-cost meals Jundiaí The winner of Jundiaí Startup of the Year award for 2021 is... Sintecsys Sintecsys offers a fast and effective detection, reducing losses and costs with fire brigades. Minas Gerais The winner of Minas Gerais Startup of the Year award for 2021 is... Rizoflora Biotechnology Rizoflora Biotechnology is a producer of biological product designed for nematodes control. São Caetano Do Sul The winner of São Caetano Do Sul Startup of the Year award for 2021 is... Wevo 1 iPaaS in Latam - Enabling companies to be truly digital companies with APIs, systems and data integrated into a single platform Canoas The winner of Canoas Startup of the Year award for 2021 is... ContaÁgil ContaÁgil facilitates and reduces bureaucracy in accounting routines of companies. Chile The winner of Chile Startup of the Year award for 2021 is... Unight Unight is the future of nightlife social media. Israelândia The winner of Israelândia Startup of the Year award for 2021 is... Matchpool Matchpool is a platform that creates human connections. La Plata The winner of La Plata Startup of the Year award for 2021 is... Pixivus Pixivus offers a community-based application that enables its users to collect, store, and share pictures of events. Novo Hamburgo The winner of Novo Hamburgo Startup of the Year award for 2021 is... Devorando Devorando offers an online food ordering system and menus available in restaurants based in Brazil. Pernambuco The winner of Pernambuco Startup of the Year award for 2021 is... Redu Redu is a distant learning platform which is built on a social networking structure. Providencia The winner of Providencia Startup of the Year award for 2021 is... # TrainFES TrainFES is a medical Devices for the rehabilitation of people with paralysis. Ribeirão Prêto The winner of Ribeirão Prêto Startup of the Year award for 2021 is... AllyHub Ally is a sales distribution channel technology that connects Schools and Service Providers with Education Agencies. Santa Cruz De La Sierra The winner of Santa Cruz De La Sierra Startup of the Year award for 2021 is... Mobi Latam Mobi Latam is a clean energy startup that focuses on transportation systems based on electric mobility. Santana De Parnaíba The winner of Santana De Parnaíba Startup of the Year award for 2021 is... MercadoLivre.com is an e-commerce technology company providing solutions to individuals and companies buying, selling, and more online. MercandoLivre.com More Information If you’re a winner, please answer ! If you’re a reader, participant, just a curious individual, consider answering one of our interviews . this interview here Read the FAQs about or . Startups here here To see all of the winners you may visit , pick any city and view the name that appears at the top. this site If you’re interested in partnering with us, we invite you to look through some of these or reach out to our business department. unique sponsorship options Perhaps creating your very own tickles your fancy or maybe you have a whole new idea for how we can partner! writing contest Thank you to all of our sponsors! We truly appreciate your contribution to the tech world and thus the future! The Startups Awards are sponsored by: , , , , , , , , , , Blockster Brex FreeCodeCamp LaunchDarkly Coil Udacity Udemy Vercel Asia Pacific Transgender Network Bybit Everscale Network This post was written/compiled by Shreya Kundu and Katarina Andrejević! If you have any questions or concerns or would like to report a discrepancy please email ellen@hackernoon.com.

Meet the Winners of Startups in South America

On breaking monopolies 🤔 Rethink Mobile Search, 10–100x faster. Introducing WonderSwipe 👆🏼

Docker is a framework which enables users to configure and deploy containers based on templates called images. Images then run within containers through virtualized operating systems, forming a stabilized environment for the application. Therefore, containers tend to provide a consistent environment by separating and deploying subsets of code working within an application, or the application itself. Cloud services frequently employ containers for its lightweight nature and scalability. Docketeer 2.0: Docketeer is an open-source GUI for Docker provided through Open Source Labs and functions as a monitoring platform for managing Docker images and container health. Docketeer offers several features at the user’s disposal: While, at the bottom of the navbar, the Docker-Compose tab provides a seamless user-interface for uploading docker-compose-yaml files to build multi-container applications. Within the images tab, the user is able to import images from DockerHub by providing the repository and repository version in the text field and clicking pull. From the settings page, the user customizes each container as well as connects containers to specified github repositories. Within the images tab, the user is able to import images from DockerHub by providing the repository and repository version in the text field and clicking pull. Docketeer also offers a system prune within the navbar to clear ‘dangling’ or unused containers. As a result, developers are better able to efficiently manage and allocate their resources. Docketeer 3.0: Here and Now Throughout the current iteration of Docketeer, we’ve emphasized security, customizability, and reliability. Docketeer 2.0 was capable of monitoring containers that existed on the user’s local machine. User Permissions: Docketeer 2.0 was a standalone application. If someone wanted to monitor their running containers, they had to deploy Docketeer and containers on the same machine. In our latest version, we’ve emphasized dispersing notifications and updates around container health to a geographically disparate team of developers. In Docketeer 3.0, we introduced user roles. The user setting up the Docketeer instance is given a system administrator role and then defines which users have access. The added roles create greater security measures for local developers and further prepares Docketeer for use with enterprise-level endeavors. Through the enhanced notification system (outlined in the following subheading) combined with user roles, Docketeer 3.0 is well equipped for use on a greater scale. Notifications & Monitoring: Although Docketeer’s prior versions had a notification system that supported SMS messages, we have incorporated notifications via email.  Previously, Docketeer 2.0  defaulted to notifying users once a container surpassed 80% of its allotted CPU or memory usage. In our updated version, Docketeer 3.0 allows the user to define their own processing and memory threshold. What this means for developers using Docketeer, is that they are able to more thoroughly monitor the amount of processing power and memory storage allocated. In a group setting, this allows for multiple users to be notified with greater frequency for more sensitive use cases. A feature which encourages all users to adopt best practices in managing container health. Increased Reliability: In Docketeer 3.0 the status of the container is checked every five seconds, preparing and sending notifications when an issue occurs. These notifications can be received by any user via email or text. Additionally, we’ve implemented user-defined intervals for the sending of notifications, so although Docketeer 3.0 makes regular checks for threshold breaches, the team will be notified according to a user’s preference. Furthermore, through the implementation of the observer design pattern, we equipped our notification system with greater efficiency and reliability. The observer design pattern describes a system centered around a notification provider and several registered subscribers. The provider listens for a state change then emits a notification distributed to each subscriber when a state change occurs. As the result of adhering to the observer design pattern, registered users are notified each time that there’s a breach. The pinnacle of Docketeer 3.0 is a platform devised to provide users peace of mind about the health of their containers. Docketeer 3.0’s newest features have optimized the application for use in a business environment. Users are invigorated, monitoring containers with greater breadth and dynamic user-defined modifications. The latest version of Docketeer distributes a platform for monitoring containers to scale with enterprise-level development. Co-Authored by: Catherine Larcheveque: https://github.com/clarcheveque https://www.linkedin.com/in/clarcheveque/ Lorenzo Guevara: https://github.com/lo-guevara https://www.linkedin.com/in/lorenzoguevara/ Charles Ryu: https://www.linkedin.com/in/charcharryu/ https://github.com/charcharryu Alex Smith: http://www.linkedin.com/in/ajsmith925 https://github.com/ajsmith925 Griffin Silver https://www.linkedin.com/in/griffin-silver-1ab675140/ https://github.com/griffinrogersilver Also published . here

Introducing Docketeer 3.0: A Helpful Tool to Manage Docker Containers

Investigating Ad Targeting on YouTube: Implications and Legal Analysis

Authors: (1) William P. Wagner IV, Claremont Graduate University. Table of Links Abstract & Introduction Definition of Key Terms Fundamentals of Internet Operation Encapsulation Usage-Based Economic Models Net Neutrality Legal History Researcher Conclusions Areas for Further Exploration & References 9. Areas for Further Exploration • Net Neutrality at the State and Local Level. • Legislation affecting local municipalities providing public internet. • Effects of Net Neutrality on 5G deployment and vice versa. • The mechanism for resolving inter-ISP disputes. • The effects of stimulus on supply-side or demand-side economics. References [1] FCC Adopts a Policy Statement Regarding Network Neutrality, Tech Law Journal, 2005, No Author Cited, http://www.techlawjournal.com/topstories/2005/20050 805.asp [2] FCC Passes Compromise Net Neutrality Rules. December 21, 2010. Wired, Sam Gustin. https://www.wired.com/2010/12/fcc-order/ [3] Net Neutrality Explained: What It Means (and Why It Matters). November 23, 2017. Fortune, Andrew Nusca. [4] Net Neutrality in Canada & The Telus Incident Of 2005, December 7, 2017, Sarah Bauer, https://www.navigatormm.com/blog/net-neutrality-incanada-the-telus-incident-of-2005/ [5] Why is the Internet so Important? Reference.com https://www.reference.com/technology/internetimportant-db9d1faab5337241 [6] 47 U.S.C. § 230(b)(2). [7] 47 U.S.C. § 230(b)(1). [8] GN Docket No. 17-199 - In the Matter of: Inquiry Concerning Deployment of Advanced Telecommunications Capability to All Americans in a Reasonable and Timely Fashion. FCC 2018 BROADBAND DEPLOYMENT Report. Adopted: February 2, 2018, Released: February 2, 2018. By the Commission: Chairman Pai and Commissioners O’Rielly and Carr issuing separate statements; Commissioners Clyburn and Rosenworcel dissenting and issuing separate statements. Paragraph 15. [9] RFC 3233 Defining the IETF and 3935 A Mission Statement for the IETF. [10] https://github.com/quicwg [11] FCC Global Broadband Deployment Report 2016 [12] Verizon Reply at 63; Letter from Robert C. Barber, AT&T to Marlene H. Dortch, Secretary, FCC, WC Docket No. 10-90. Attach. at 15-19 (filed July 30, 2014) (AT&T July 30, 2014 Ex Parte Letter). [13] FCC POLICY STATEMENT, 2005, [14] FCC 2015 REPORT AND ORDER ON REMAND, DECLARATORY RULING, AND ORDER. Paragraph 29. [15] United States Court of Appeals FOR THE DISTRICT OF COLUMBIA CIRCUIT FILED: MAY 1, 2017. No. 15-1063. UNITED STATES TELECOM ASSOCIATION, PETITIONER v. FEDERAL COMMUNICATIONS COMMISSION AND UNITED STATES OF AMERICA, RESPONDENTS INDEPENDENT TELEPHONE & TELECOMMUNICATIONS ALLIANCE, ET AL., INTERVENORS. This paper is under CC BY-NC-SA 4.0 DEED license. available on arxiv

A Technical Perspective on Net Neutrality: Areas for Further Exploration

Dear reader, please note that this article was written anonymously, as I am a person deep inside the Enterprise Linux ecosystem. I know "anonymous" is a big word, and if anyone wants to identify the author, they can. I'm against changes to RHEL code redistribution, and I believe that Red Hat is as much a "freeloader" on open source as any other company is on the RHEL codebase. However, I would like to share reasons why I will never install Rocky Linux on my servers. ever In this article, I would like to share some of the stories, misdeeds, and bad practices that explain why so many people do not like Rocky Linux. I also want to show that things are a bit more complicated than most Linux users think. Story 0: The original founder of CentOS The central figure in the case against Rocky Linux is Gregory Kurtzer. He is, for many people, the hero of the RHEL rebuild world. Many believe he is the father of CentOS, and Rocky is/will remain his beloved and, more importantly, free child. The term "The original founder of CentOS" comes from Kurtzer himself and has been spread like wildfire by PR companies (more on illegal, in most countries, and shady PR practices later). The only problem with this statement is that, in the opinion of many, including myself, it is not true. My doubts about Rocky Linux came exactly from this point, as one of my much older colleagues said that this was "not entirely true" (his exact expression was a “little” stronger). I would like to present some basic but important facts: Rebuilds started on the RHEL rebuilds mailing list. The name CentOS was announced by Rocky McGaugh. The Kurtzer was not interested in building a Red Hat Enterprise Linux (then Red Hat Linux) clone. The idea of creating a true distribution from RHEL was not his and had been discussed much earlier. Well, you can read a bit more on HN. And it's written by quite a famous person in the Linux world :) So why does Gregory Kurtzer claim to be the "original founder of CentOS?" Mainly because he started the Chaos Foundation, which took over the efforts to rebuild under a common name. [1] https://www.mail-archive.com/redhat-devel-list@redhat.com/msg07038.html [2] https://web.archive.org/web/20040630213827/http://www.caosity.org/pipermail/caos/2003-December/001205.html [3] - Gregory Kurtzer was not interested in building a RHEL clone https://web.archive.org/web/20040824032738/http://www.caosity.org/pipermail/caos/2003-July/000701.html [4] - Idea of creating Distribution on it's own https://www.mail-archive.com/rhel-rebuild-l@uibk.ac.at/msg00022.html [5] https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=33907452 Story 1: The Departure One of the main misconceptions about Gregory is that he left CentOS when, in fact, CentOS left his foundation. The people leading CentOS development didn't want to be part of Gregory's scheme. To this day, some of the "old guard" of CentOS are not "on the best of terms" with him. Fifteen years later, the CIQ CEO is much smarter - but unfortunately for the open-source community, in a very bad way. So, when articles like "What happened to CentOS will not happen to Rocky Linux” make the rounds, I think not only about bad changes to the lifecycle, but also about the fact that CentOS was able to leave the Gregory Foundation, but Rocky Linux cannot. Generally speaking, the person in question himself has a few versions of it; my favorite was presented by himself in the Changelog podcast: I was associated with it until Red Hat sued me. And then he said: It wasn’t a lawsuit, it was a threaten of a lawsuit, which was enough in my book to do it. [1] https://lists.centos.org/pipermail/centos-devel/2005-March/077502.html [2] https://www.reddit.com/r/CentOS/comments/s77p49/comment/ht9v86o/ [3] https://changelog.com/podcast/427#transcript-87 Story 2: Foundation You may know that Rocky Linux is part of RESF—Rocky Enterprise Software Foundation. But if you are familiar with "foundations," especially US-based "foundations,” you know that many of them are broken by design. The Rocky Linux Foundation loosely promised to be a non-profit. But it isn't. It's for-profit and it has a single owner (Gregory Kurtzer). But there is more to the smoke and mirrors surrounding RESF. As you may know, they have governance and bylaws. So look at them and count how many people in that governance are not employed by or connected to the CIQ. By the way, the foundation broke its own statutes by not having a diverse governance :). I'm not going to read the bylaws again to see if they still do that, but if you find it, feel free to comment. Also, remember to read older bylaws and older about pages since it’s changed. The whole story is strong in media and PR. Take, for example, the ITWorld Canada article from 2022 In literally the same paragraph, you have the following sentences: The key for an open source initiative to grow and flourish,
Kurtzer said, is to is to register it as a non-profit organisation,
which is what the cAos Foundation. He did the same with Rocky Linux. And then: The Rocky Enterprise Software Foundation (RESF) is a Public Benefit Corporation (PBC). Do you see the "little" problem here? I do not like to be lied to. And I do not like people being lied to, especially when it is such a primitive lie, literally in the same paragraph. [1] Look at the manipulative language used in this article https://www.zdnet.com/article/rocky-linux-foundation-launches/ [2] https://www.resf.org/about [3] https://www.reddit.com/r/linuxadmin/comments/15p1gbt/comment/jvyat0h [4] https://www.itworldcanada.com/article/what-happened-with-centos-will-not-happen-with-rocky-linux-kurtzer/501239 Story 3: Trademark ownership As I said, have you ever wondered why CentOS could leave the Greg Foundation? Well, one of the main reasons was that there was no clear ownership of trademarks/domains. Unfortunately, for the open-source community, that's not the case with RESF and Rocky Linux. As I said before, RESF has a single owner, and the Rocky Linux project does not have its trademarks. Rocky Linux, as an individual project, if it tries to leave RESF, can't use its name, logo, and other trademarks without permission from the RESF owner. So, good luck. So with CIQ/RESF milking Rocky Linux, there is no way the project can become independent. It's not a community project, it's a corporate project. From this point on, I will use arguments against CIQ/RESF/RL interchangeably. [1] https://www.zdnet.com/article/goodbye-centos-hello-rocky-linux/ [2] https://www.reddit.com/r/AlmaLinux/comments/15dr141/giving_rebuilders_a_bad_name_ciq_and_ansible/ [3] https://www.reddit.com/r/linuxadmin/comments/15p1gbt/comment/jw90zhc Story 4: Buying advertising against community-owned open-source projects These are the early days, and RL is losing to AlmaLinux. AlmaLinux is the first diversely governed foundation (and it is non-profit for real). So, what does CIQ do? They buy ads against several Linux distros, including AlmaLinux and CentOS. Is this legal? Yes, it is! Is this something that a "self-imposed non-profit" (this term is a joke) would benefit from? YES! Is this what the open-source community would do? NO! Buying ads against community-owned non-profit open-source projects while pretending to make one is against the general spirit of open source. Of course, Rocky Linux did not buy these ads; CIQ did, and they did it out of the goodness of their hearts. [1] https://twitter.com/ChrisLAS/status/1460668344156114944 [2] https://twitter.com/ChrisLAS/status/1420123460982894599 [3] https://www.reddit.com/r/linux/comments/qv6mg2/comment/hkw046b/ Story 5: PR without disclosure In many cases, the CIQ/RESF/RL use PR firms to spread the word about themselves. Sometimes, they even sponsor Linux influencers, and they tend to leave out some facts :) (like CentOS leaving the former Kurtzer Foundation or RESF being a for-profit company owned by one person). Anyway, some PR tends not to mention the obvious conflict of interest and that the article is sponsored. And since it's very difficult, if not impossible, to verify the source of the PR, it's very hard to say whether the article is sponsored or not if it's not labeled. In my country and many EU countries, it's legal. Even in the US, it's not a legal problem; it shows poor ethics and morals of the: Writer PR company Publisher The company that sponsored it As I said, it's extremely difficult to catch someone red-handed. However, in the case of RL and CIQ, it has become quite well-known in the Linux community. [1] https://twitter.com/GordonMessmer/status/1675997483573612546 Story 6: Spreading FUD One of the biggest damages done to CentOS Stream has been the FUD spread by CIQ and others. The main point is that CentOS Stream is unstable and will never be production-ready. As someone who regularly compares packages and distributions, I can say this: CentOS Stream is stable and, in many ways, even better than RHEL, and that means it is even better than clones. The number of engineers working on CentOS Stream is greater than that of any other RHEL clone. The amount of testing done on CentOS Stream is orders of magnitude greater than any other RHEL clone. The CentOS Stream gives users real power to fix bugs and influence the future of the distribution. There has also been a lot of FUD spread about AlmaLinux. That AlmaLinux has taken "shortcuts,” especially when it comes to the subscription manager. If you're familiar with Subscription Manager, you know that it's designed to connect to Red Hat infrastructure, and Enterprise Linux clones don't install it by default. So, not including it in AlmaLinux is not a bad shortcut but a good decision. Later, it was added because it might also work with Foreman/Katello/Candlepin. The whole "AlmaLinux takes shortcuts" era was FUD in its purest form. Unfortunately, I can't find the source of this ATM, but I've seen it, and I'm sure one of the readers will be able to add it in the comments section. Other popular FUD spread about AlmaLinux, although I did not find CIQ employees saying it publicly: AlmaLinux uses CloudLinux infrastructure (they used it during the bootstrap phase, and it was very well-known) AlmaLinux is controlled by Russians (this one goes strong after Putler attacks Ukraine). CloudLinux controls AlmaLinux (not that CloudLinux CEO literally stepped down from the foundation; also, AlmaLinux has a much healthier board than RESF) Story 7: Being fu****g hypocrites So, you remember all that Red Hat drama about paywalled GPL sources? When Red Hat a "cancer" on open source? And users were "freeloaders"? One of the people who was very vocal about this was Gregory Kurtzer :). No matter what all the shouting was about: "Rocky going strong." "Protect the community." "Protect open source." Or nice PR from RESF: “I believe that open source should always be freely available and completely stable.
It should never be hidden behind a paywall, nor should it be controlled by a single company,”
states Gregory Kurtzer, founder of the Rocky Linux project and chair of the board of the
Rocky Enterprise Software Foundation, What's worse, they are doing the same or even more restrictive things than Red Hat. And other big words that are not worth mentioning because when it comes to real action, they are not there. Now, CIQ is giving back to the community by putting a paywall around the sources of CIQ Rocky Linux 8.8: Restrictions. The license granted in this Section 3 is conditioned upon
Customer’s and its Authorized Users’ compliance with this Agreement. Customer shall
not and shall ensure its Authorized Users do not: (i) permit any third party to use or
access the Software (except for the Authorized Users as permitted herein); (ii) install the
Software on more than the number of Licensed Hosts permitted under the applicable
Order; (iii) share access to the Software (including log in information or notifications)
with anyone who is not intended to be an Authorized User; (iv) provide, license,
sublicense, sell, resell, rent, lease, share, lend, or otherwise transfer or make available
the Software to any third parties, except as expressly permitted by Ctrl IQ in writing; (v)
except with respect to any access to Software that is licensed under an open source
license, modify, copy or create derivative works based on any content accessed through
the Software; (vi) except with respect to any Software that is licensed under an open
source license, disassemble, reverse engineer, decompile or otherwise seek access to
the source code of the Software; (vii) access the Software in order to build a competitive
product or services; (viii) remove, delete, alter, or obscure any copyright, trademark,
patent, or other notice of intellectual property or documentation, including any copy
thereof; (ix) transmit unlawful, infringing or harmful data or code to or from; or (x)
otherwise use the Software except as expressly permitted hereunder There is more. They made rebuilds of other RH products Red Hat Ansible Tower (or whatever they call it, ATM). They made it closed source. Then, after the community started noticing that it should be open source, after two weeks they decided to release code. So that's it when it comes to open-source heroes and giving back to the community. [1] https://www.reddit.com/r/AlmaLinux/comments/1aurwrr/comment/kri9xpc/ [2] https://www.reddit.com/r/AlmaLinux/comments/15dr141/comment/ju3t9mv/ Story 8: Borrowed content - erratas So the CIQ/RESF/RL use Red Hat content, that's obvious. However, you need to remember that components have different licenses. So, if you are using the source code, the most important and, in many cases, only license is the one that is in the source code. If you are using Red Hat Portal or Support, the new restrictive EULA applies. If you use Red Hat errata, the errata text and content are protected. That's why some vendors have rather empty errata information, including one generated for CentOS. The most important parts of erratas are: List of packages CVEs numbers (for security erratas) The text is not that useful; you should probably read the CVE anyway, but some projects cannot help themselves and cannot be used without any consideration. Have a look at where you can read about it: https://errata.rockylinux.org/RLSA-2023:6818 Rocky Enterprise Software Foundation Satellite is a systems management tool for Linux-based systems. You can also find other examples, such as: Rocky Enterprise Software Foundation Identity Management (IdM) or Rocky Enterprise Software Foundation Entitlement Platform. Is it legal? I do not know. Ask a lawyer. Is it ethical? No. Story 9: Killing Open Source - CIQ versus Sylabs In late August 2023, news broke of a lawsuit against CIQ. Note that if I'm right, it's still ongoing. But for the moment, the court "DISMISSES all of Sylabs' claims WITH LEAVE TO AMEND." I'm not a lawyer, but I am an engineer. An open source engineer who's heard "we won't open it because it might hurt our business" or "it makes us vulnerable" time and time again. And I never liked that, but as I got older and saw people like Gregory Kurtzer, I started to understand. What Gregory did is the worst-case scenario for any company trying to build open-source projects. A company employs Kurtzer as CTO. This company makes software vital to its survival and expansion, just like any software company. Gregory was CTO when the company decided to open source its critical assets. (March 2020). Gregory leaves the company with extensive knowledge of customers, system internals, users, and contacts. As a C-level executive, he literally knows it all. Kurtzer started a new company, took part in the development team, and used it against the former company. Kurtzer profits from the old company code that was open-sourced during his time as CTO. By pulling this kind of stunt, one is killing open source—killing trust in open source companies and developers. You work with people you trust, and you never expect them to be your enemy the next day. It leaves a bad taste in your mouth that's hard to describe. Finally, I do not care about the future of Sylab, CIQ, or who is legally right. I care about the future of open source, and this kind of practice is a mortal wound to open source and free software. [1] https://www.theregister.com/2023/08/24/lawsuit_claims_ciq_was_founded/ [2] https://storage.courtlistener.com/recap/gov.uscourts.cand.408847/gov.uscourts.cand.408847.59.0.pdf [3] https://www.courtlistener.com/docket/66863695/sylabs-inc-v-rose/ Other stories There are other stories, like why EPEL stopped doing count_me analyses for some time and why nobody takes them seriously anymore. Or about some key people officially working in public institutions and de facto doing work for a for-profit foundation. But I think the most important ones are covered. Some of these stories are only known to a small circle of people who go to the conference and know each other. Personally, I have left out some of them because it would literally say who I am or where I work. Summary When Red Hat "bought" the CentOS project, there were many red flags. We all know how it ended. Red Hat was then, and for many still is, the champion of open source. RESF/CIQ/RL was never there and never will be with its current smelly track record. And the sheer volume of red flags regarding them is by far more than it ever was with Red Hat. If you read this and install Rocky Linux, you are not only a fool but a dangerous fool. You are the fool who likes to be lied to and is incapable of understanding the bigger picture. I also omitted the technical part of the CIQ/RESF/RL. Perhaps I will return to this to this topic. In the next article, I will cover the joke called OpenELA.

The Case Against Rocky Linux

রকি লিনাক্সের বিরুদ্ধে মামলা

Der Fall gegen Rocky Linux

El caso contra Rocky Linux

Le cas contre Rocky Linux

रॉकी लिनक्स के खिलाफ मामला

Rocky Linux に対する反論

Rocky Linux에 대한 사례

O caso contra Rocky Linux

Дело против Rocky Linux

Rocky Linux'a Karşı Dava

Vụ kiện chống lại Rocky Linux

针对 Rocky Linux 的案例

Introduction In this article, I'll address a critical aspect of TCP communication: effectively managing scenarios where the server fails to respond. I focus on a specific scenario where the application only sends data over TCP without receiving any application-level response from the server. This exploration covers TCP communication from the application's perspective, highlighting both the application layer and the underlying OS operations. You'll learn how to set effective timeouts to avoid data loss during unresponsive server instances. I’ll provide code examples in Ruby, but the idea stays the same for any language. The Challenge of Silent TCP Servers Imagine you're working with an application that consistently transmits data over a TCP socket. While TCP is designed to ensure packet delivery at the transport level within the defined TCP stack configurations, it's interesting to consider what this implies at the application level. To better understand this, let's construct a sample TCP server and client using Ruby. This will allow us to observe the communication process in action. : server.rb # server.rb
require 'socket'
require 'time'

$stdout.sync = true

puts 'starting tcp server...'

server = TCPServer.new(1234)

puts 'started tcp server on port 1234'

loop do
  Thread.start(server.accept) do |client|
    puts 'new client'
    while (message = client.gets)
      puts "#{Time.now}]: #{message.chomp}"
    end
    client.close
  end
end And the : client.rb require 'socket'
require 'time'

$stdout.sync = true

socket = Socket.tcp('server', 1234)

loop do
  puts "sending message to the socket at #{Time.now}"
  socket.write "Hello from client\n"

  sleep 1
end And let’s encapsulate this setup in containers using this : Dockerfile FROM ruby:2.7

RUN apt-get update && apt-get install -y tcpdump

# Set the working directory in the container
WORKDIR /usr/src/app

# Copy the current directory contents into the container at /usr/src/app
COPY . . and : docker-compose.yml version: '3'

services:
  server:
    build:
      context: .
      dockerfile: Dockerfile
    command: ruby server.rb
    volumes:
      - .:/usr/src/app
    ports:
      - "1234:1234"
    healthcheck:
      test: ["CMD", "sh", "-c", "nc -z localhost 1234"]
      interval: 1s
      timeout: 1s
      retries: 2
    networks:
      - net

  client:
    build:
      context: .
      dockerfile: Dockerfile
    command: ruby client.rb
    volumes:
      - .:/usr/src/app
      - ./data:/data
    depends_on:
      - server
    networks:
      - net

networks:
  net: Now, we can easily run this with and see in logs how the client sends the message and the server receives it: docker compose up $ docker compose up
[+] Running 2/0
 ⠿ Container tcp_tests-server-1  Created                                                                                                                                                                         0.0s
 ⠿ Container tcp_tests-client-1  Created                                                                                                                                                                         0.0s
Attaching to tcp_tests-client-1, tcp_tests-server-1
tcp_tests-server-1  | starting tcp server...
tcp_tests-server-1  | started tcp server on port 1234
tcp_tests-client-1  | sending message to the socket at 2024-01-14 08:59:08 +0000
tcp_tests-server-1  | new client
tcp_tests-server-1  | 2024-01-14 08:59:08 +0000]: Hello from client
tcp_tests-server-1  | 2024-01-14 08:59:09 +0000]: Hello from client
tcp_tests-client-1  | sending message to the socket at 2024-01-14 08:59:09 +0000
tcp_tests-client-1  | sending message to the socket at 2024-01-14 08:59:10 +0000
tcp_tests-server-1  | 2024-01-14 08:59:10 +0000]: Hello from client
tcp_tests-client-1  | sending message to the socket at 2024-01-14 08:59:11 +0000
tcp_tests-server-1  | 2024-01-14 08:59:11 +0000]: Hello from client
tcp_tests-client-1  | sending message to the socket at 2024-01-14 08:59:12 +0000
tcp_tests-server-1  | 2024-01-14 08:59:12 +0000]: Hello from client
tcp_tests-client-1  | sending message to the socket at 2024-01-14 08:59:13 +0000 Pretty easy so far, huh? However, the situation gets more interesting when we simulate a server failure for an active connection. We do this using : docker compose stop server tcp_tests-server-1  | 2024-01-14 09:04:23 +0000]: Hello from client
tcp_tests-client-1  | sending message to the socket at 2024-01-14 09:04:24 +0000
tcp_tests-server-1  | 2024-01-14 09:04:24 +0000]: Hello from client
tcp_tests-server-1 exited with code 1
tcp_tests-server-1 exited with code 0
tcp_tests-client-1  | sending message to the socket at 2024-01-14 09:04:25 +0000
tcp_tests-client-1  | sending message to the socket at 2024-01-14 09:04:26 +0000
tcp_tests-client-1  | sending message to the socket at 2024-01-14 09:04:27 +0000
tcp_tests-client-1  | sending message to the socket at 2024-01-14 09:04:28 +0000
tcp_tests-client-1  | sending message to the socket at 2024-01-14 09:04:29 +0000
tcp_tests-client-1  | sending message to the socket at 2024-01-14 09:04:30 +0000
tcp_tests-client-1  | sending message to the socket at 2024-01-14 09:04:31 +0000
tcp_tests-client-1  | sending message to the socket at 2024-01-14 09:04:32 +0000 We observe that the server is now offline, yet the client behaves as if the connection is still active, continuing to send data to the socket without hesitation. This leads me to question why this occurs. Logically, the client should detect the server's downtime within a short span, possibly seconds, as TCP fails to receive acknowledgments for its packets, prompting a connection closure. However, the actual outcome diverged from this expectation: tcp_tests-client-1  | sending message to the socket at 2024-01-14 09:20:11 +0000
tcp_tests-client-1  | sending message to the socket at 2024-01-14 09:20:12 +0000
tcp_tests-client-1  | sending message to the socket at 2024-01-14 09:20:13 +0000
tcp_tests-client-1  | sending message to the socket at 2024-01-14 09:20:14 +0000
tcp_tests-client-1  | sending message to the socket at 2024-01-14 09:20:15 +0000
tcp_tests-client-1  | sending message to the socket at 2024-01-14 09:20:16 +0000
tcp_tests-client-1  | sending message to the socket at 2024-01-14 09:20:17 +0000
tcp_tests-client-1  | sending message to the socket at 2024-01-14 09:20:18 +0000
tcp_tests-client-1  | sending message to the socket at 2024-01-14 09:20:19 +0000
tcp_tests-client-1  | sending message to the socket at 2024-01-14 09:20:20 +0000
tcp_tests-client-1  | sending message to the socket at 2024-01-14 09:20:21 +0000
tcp_tests-client-1  | sending message to the socket at 2024-01-14 09:20:22 +0000
tcp_tests-client-1  | sending message to the socket at 2024-01-14 09:20:23 +0000
tcp_tests-client-1  | client.rb:11:in `write': No route to host (Errno::EHOSTUNREACH)
tcp_tests-client-1  | 	from client.rb:11:in `block in <main>'
tcp_tests-client-1  | 	from client.rb:9:in `loop'
tcp_tests-client-1  | 	from client.rb:9:in `<main>'
tcp_tests-client-1 exited with code 1 In reality, the client may remain unaware of the disrupted connection for as long as ! 15 minutes What causes this delay in detection? Let's delve deeper to understand the reasons. In-Depth: TCP Communication Mechanics To fully cover this case, let's first revisit the basic principles, followed by an examination of how the client transmits data over TCP. TCP basics Here is the basic diagram illustrating the TCP flow: Once a connection is established, the transmission of each message typically involves two key steps: The client sends the message, marked with the PSH (Push) flag. The server acknowledges receipt by sending back an ACK (Acknowledgment) response. Communication Between the Application and Socket Below is a simplified sequence diagram illustrating the opening of a TCP socket by an application and the subsequent data transmission through it: The application makes two operations: Opening a TCP socket Sending data to the open socket For instance, when opening a TCP socket, as done with Ruby's command, the system synchronously creates a socket using the system call and then establishes a connection via the system call. Socket.tcp(host, port) socket(2) connect(2) As for sending data, using a command like in an application primarily places the message into the socket's send buffer. It then returns the count of bytes that were successfully queued. The actual transmission of this data over the network to the destination host is managed asynchronously by the TCP/IP stack. socket.write('foo') This means that when an application writes to the socket, it isn't directly involved in the network operations and might not know in real-time if the connection is still active. The only confirmation it receives is that the message has been successfully added to the TCP send buffer. What Happens When the TCP Server Goes Down? As the server does not respond with an ACK flag, our TCP stack will initiate a retransmission of the last unacknowledged packet: The interesting thing here is that by default TCP makes 15 retransmissions with exponential backoff which results in almost 15 minutes of retries! You can check how many retries are set on your host: $ sysctl net.ipv4.tcp_retries2
net.ipv4.tcp_retries2 = 15 After diving into docs, it’s becoming clear; documentation says: ip-sysctl.txt The default value of 15 yields a hypothetical timeout of 924.6 seconds and is a lower bound for the effective timeout. TCP will effectively time out at the first RTO which exceeds the hypothetical timeout. During this period, the local TCP socket is alive and accepts data. When all retries are made, the socket is closed, and the application receives an error on an attempt to send anything to the socket. Why Is It Usually Not an Issue? The scenario where the TCP server unexpectedly goes down without sending FIN or RST TCP flags, or when there are connectivity issues, is quite common. So why do such situations often go unnoticed? Because, in most cases, the server responds with some response on the application level. For example, the HTTP protocol requires the server to respond to every request. Basically, when you have code like , it makes two main operations: connection.get Writes your payload to the TCP socket's send buffer. From this point onward, the operating system's TCP stack takes responsibility for reliably delivering these packets to the remote server with TCP guarantees. Waiting for a response in a TCP receiving buffer from the remote server Typically, applications use nonblocking reads from the receiving buffer of the same TCP socket. This approach simplifies matters considerably because, in such cases, we can easily set a timeout on the application level and close the socket if there is no response from the server within a defined time frame. However, when we don't expect any response from the server (except TCP acknowledgments), it becomes less straightforward to determine the connection's status from the application level The Impact of Long TCP Retransmissions So far, we've established the following: The application opens a TCP socket and regularly writes data to it. At some point, the TCP server goes down without even sending an RST packet, and the TCP stack of the sender begins retransmitting the last unacknowledged packet. All other packets written to that socket are queued in the socket’s send buffer. By default, the TCP stack attempts to retransmit the unacknowledged packet 15 times, employing exponential backoff, resulting in a duration of approximately 924.6 seconds (about 15 minutes). During this 15-minute period, the local TCP socket remains open, and the application continues to write data to it until the send buffer is full (which typically has a limited capacity, often just a few megabytes). When the socket is eventually marked as closed after all retransmissions, . all the data in the send buffer is lost This is because the application is no longer responsible for it after writing to the send buffer, and the operating system simply discards this data. The application can only detect that the connection is broken when the send buffer of the TCP socket becomes full. In such cases, attempting to write to the socket will block the main thread of the application, allowing it to handle the situation. However, the effectiveness of this detection method depends on the size of the data being sent. For instance, if the application sends only a few bytes, such as metrics, it may not fully fill the send buffer within this 15-minute timeframe. So, how can one implement a mechanism to close a connection with an explicitly set timeout when the TCP server is down to avoid 15 minutes of retransmissions and losing of data during this period? TCP Retransmissions Timeout Using the Socket Option In private networks, extensive retransmissions aren't typically necessary, and it's possible to configure the TCP stack to attempt only a limited number of retries. However, this configuration applies globally to the entire node. Since multiple applications often run on the same node, altering this default value can lead to unexpected side effects. A more precise approach is to set a retransmission timeout exclusively for our socket using the socket option. By employing this option, the TCP stack will automatically close the socket if retransmissions do not succeed within the specified timeout, regardless of the maximum number of TCP retransmissions set globally. TCP_USER_TIMEOUT On the application level, this results in an error being received upon attempting to write data to a closed socket, allowing for proper data loss prevention handling. Let’s set this socket option in : client.rb require 'socket'
require 'time'

$stdout.sync = true

socket = Socket.tcp('server', 1234)

# set 5 seconds restransmissions timeout
socket.setsockopt(Socket::IPPROTO_TCP, Socket::TCP_USER_TIMEOUT, 5000)

loop do
  puts "sending message to the socket at #{Time.now}"
  socket.write "Hello from client\n"

  sleep 1
end Also, from my observations, the TCP_USER_TIMEOUT socket option is not available on macOS. Now, start everything again with , and at some point, let’s stop the server again with : docket compose up docker compose stop server $ docker compose up
[+] Running 2/0
 ⠿ Container tcp_tests-server-1  Created                                                                                                                                                                         0.0s
 ⠿ Container tcp_tests-client-1  Created                                                                                                                                                                         0.0s
Attaching to tcp_tests-client-1, tcp_tests-server-1
tcp_tests-server-1  | starting tcp server...
tcp_tests-server-1  | started tcp server on port 1234
tcp_tests-server-1  | new client
tcp_tests-server-1  | 2024-01-20 12:37:38 +0000]: Hello from client
tcp_tests-client-1  | sending message to the socket at 2024-01-20 12:37:38 +0000
tcp_tests-server-1  | 2024-01-20 12:37:39 +0000]: Hello from client
tcp_tests-client-1  | sending message to the socket at 2024-01-20 12:37:39 +0000
tcp_tests-client-1  | sending message to the socket at 2024-01-20 12:37:40 +0000
tcp_tests-server-1  | 2024-01-20 12:37:40 +0000]: Hello from client
tcp_tests-client-1  | sending message to the socket at 2024-01-20 12:37:41 +0000
tcp_tests-server-1  | 2024-01-20 12:37:41 +0000]: Hello from client
tcp_tests-server-1  | 2024-01-20 12:37:42 +0000]: Hello from client
tcp_tests-client-1  | sending message to the socket at 2024-01-20 12:37:42 +0000
tcp_tests-server-1  | 2024-01-20 12:37:43 +0000]: Hello from client
tcp_tests-client-1  | sending message to the socket at 2024-01-20 12:37:43 +0000
tcp_tests-client-1  | sending message to the socket at 2024-01-20 12:37:44 +0000
tcp_tests-server-1  | 2024-01-20 12:37:44 +0000]: Hello from client
tcp_tests-server-1 exited with code 1
tcp_tests-server-1 exited with code 0
tcp_tests-client-1  | sending message to the socket at 2024-01-20 12:37:45 +0000
tcp_tests-client-1  | sending message to the socket at 2024-01-20 12:37:46 +0000
tcp_tests-client-1  | sending message to the socket at 2024-01-20 12:37:47 +0000
tcp_tests-client-1  | sending message to the socket at 2024-01-20 12:37:48 +0000
tcp_tests-client-1  | sending message to the socket at 2024-01-20 12:37:49 +0000
tcp_tests-client-1  | sending message to the socket at 2024-01-20 12:37:50 +0000
tcp_tests-client-1  | sending message to the socket at 2024-01-20 12:37:51 +0000
tcp_tests-client-1  | client.rb:11:in `write': Connection timed out (Errno::ETIMEDOUT)
tcp_tests-client-1  | 	from client.rb:11:in `block in <main>'
tcp_tests-client-1  | 	from client.rb:9:in `loop'
tcp_tests-client-1  | 	from client.rb:9:in `<main>'
tcp_tests-client-1 exited with code 1 At ~12:37:45, I stopped the server, and we saw that the client got almost in 5 seconds, great. Errno::ETIMEDOUT Let’s capture a tcpdump with : docker exec -it tcp_tests-client-1 tcpdump -i any tcp port 1234 It's worth noting that the timeout actually occurs in a bit more than 5 seconds. This is because the check for exceeding TCP_USER_TIMEOUT happens at the next retry. When the TCP/IP stack detects that the timeout has been exceeded, it marks the socket as closed, and our application receives the error Errno::ETIMEDOUT Also, if you are using TCP keepalives, I recommend checking out this . It covers the nuances of using TCP_USER_TIMEOUT in conjunction with TCP keepalives. article from Cloudflare

Control TCP Retransmissions: Early Issue Detection to Prevent Data Loss

টিসিপি রিট্রান্সমিশন নিয়ন্ত্রণ করুন: ডেটা ক্ষতি রোধ করতে প্রাথমিক সমস্যা সনাক্তকরণ

Kontrollieren Sie TCP-Neuübertragungen: Frühzeitige Problemerkennung, um Datenverlust zu verhindern

Controle las retransmisiones TCP: detección temprana de problemas para evitar la pérdida de datos

Contrôler les retransmissions TCP : détection précoce des problèmes pour éviter la perte de données

टीसीपी रीट्रांसमिशन को नियंत्रित करें: डेटा हानि को रोकने के लिए प्रारंभिक समस्या का पता लगाना

TCP 再送信の制御: 問題を早期に検出してデータ損失を防止

TCP 재전송 제어: 데이터 손실을 방지하기 위한 조기 문제 감지

Controle retransmissões TCP: detecção precoce de problemas para evitar perda de dados

Управление повторными передачами TCP: раннее обнаружение проблем для предотвращения потери данных

TCP Yeniden İletimlerini Kontrol Edin: Veri Kaybını Önlemek için Sorunun Erken Tespiti

Kiểm soát việc truyền lại TCP: Phát hiện vấn đề sớm để ngăn ngừa mất dữ liệu

控制 TCP 重传：早期问题检测以防止数据丢失

This story was originally published on by Caleb Bedillion, . Co-published with and ProPublica Northeast Mississippi Daily Journal Northeast Mississippi Daily Journal The Marshall Project This article was produced for ProPublica’s Local Reporting Network in partnership with the and . to get stories like this one as soon as they are published. Northeast Mississippi Daily Journal The Marshall Project Sign up for Dispatches In 2017, the Mississippi Supreme Court’s then-Chief Justice William Waller Jr. helped mandate that judges throughout the state explain in writing how they deliver on their duty to provide poor criminal defendants with a lawyer. He hoped the rule would spur improvements in Mississippi’s patched-together public defense system, regarded by many legal experts as among the worst in the country. Now, six years after the rule went into effect, only one of the 23 circuit court districts in the state has responded. The 22nd Circuit Court in southwest Mississippi became the first to comply this summer, according to . the Supreme Court’s docket The requirement was part of a push to move “toward a statewide system,” said Waller, who retired a couple of years after it went into effect. He said he’s partly responsible for not enforcing it. “We should have started going court by court and asking them to show us their plans.” Public defense systems across the country are and , but Mississippi stands out. Nationally, it ranks last in how much money it spends per capita on public defense, according to the Sixth Amendment Center, a nonprofit that advocates for a robust defense for the indigent — those who can’t afford their own lawyer. overburdened underfunded Mississippi is one of only eight states that rely on local officials to fund and deliver almost all public defense for people facing trial, according to the center. Mississippi has long failed to monitor or evaluate local courts to see whether they’re delivering that defense, which is guaranteed by the Sixth Amendment of the U.S. Constitution. Without such oversight, no one knows whether all the state’s courts, especially smaller ones in the vast rural stretches of the state, are doing the job that’s required of them. The Northeast Mississippi Daily Journal, ProPublica and The Marshall Project have identified courts that aren’t following the state Supreme Court’s rules on public defense, including judges who fail to appoint lawyers as early as required, or who deny counsel to defendants for inappropriate reasons. Even once appointed, some lawyers say they do little for defendants and that local judges know this. Such problems show why it’s important for courts to explain how they provide public defense, said André de Gruy, who runs Mississippi’s Office of State Public Defender and has written a that they could adapt to meet their needs. Without these plans, he said, “we can’t say whether we are in compliance with the Constitution.” model plan for local courts “Not Much Lawyering Going On” In the last three decades, there have been repeated efforts to overhaul Mississippi’s public defense system, including four state committees or commissions, two major reports by outside legal experts and numerous pieces of legislation. They’ve been largely unsuccessful. There’s widespread agreement about the systemic problems: Defendants can sit in jail for months at a time without a lawyer. The way that many lawyers are paid gives them an incentive to cut corners. There are few full-time public defenders in the state. “There is not much lawyering going on. I get them through the system and get them out of here,” an unidentified, part-time public defender bluntly told consultants for the Mississippi Bar Association as part of a state government effort to reform the public defense system in the 1990s. Shortcomings in Mississippi’s Public Defense Persist Over 20 Years “There is no statewide oversight of indigent defense in Mississippi, which leads to a hodge podge, county-by-county approach to providing defense services,” wrote the Spangenberg Group, a consulting firm hired by several legal groups to evaluate the state’s public defense system. 1995: The right to counsel is “functionally meaningless in Mississippi, a state which provides almost no regulation, oversight, or funding for indigent defense,” said the NAACP Legal Defense and Educational Fund. 2003: “The state of Mississippi has no method to ensure that its local governments are fulfilling the state’s constitutional obligation to provide effective assistance of counsel to the indigent accused in felony cases in its trial courts,” according to the Sixth Amendment Center. 2018: In a 2003 study, the NAACP Legal Defense and Educational Fund reported that a lawyer on the Gulf Coast said that because by the time he’s been appointed, nine months to a year have typically passed since the crime. he never tried to locate or interview witnesses “By then,” researchers wrote, recounting what the lawyer told them, “crime scenes have changed, witnesses have moved, and memories have faded.” That study of a man arrested in the northeast Mississippi city of Tupelo for possession of crack cocaine. The court appointed three different lawyers in succession. The first two never spoke with the defendant and did not respond to his phone calls or letters. highlighted the case On the day before the trial, the third lawyer told the court that he had not prepared for his client’s case. The evidence against the man was so weak that he was acquitted by a jury after less than 15 minutes of deliberation. He’d spent eight months in jail. From 2000 to 2011, several task forces successfully pressed for a series of reforms, including the creation of a state office to handle death penalty defense and indigent criminal appeals. That’s the office de Gruy now runs. But reforms to public defense in local courtrooms remained out of reach. “I remember being very frustrated,” said Waller, who was part of those efforts after joining the state Supreme Court in 1998. The sheer number of courts across the state, and the lack of coordination among them, is a factor in why it’s so hard to reform the system. “In other states, any discussion of policy change takes place at one or two systems,” said David Carroll, director of the Sixth Amendment Center. “There are nearly 500 indigent defense systems in Mississippi.” New Rules for Public Defense In 2009, Waller became chief justice and went on to play a key role in an ambitious effort to create rules of criminal procedure that would be shared by all courts in the state. Eight years later, those statewide rules went into effect. For the first time, judges were required to write down exactly how they delivered on their obligation to provide lawyers for defendants who couldn’t afford one. The courts were then required to send those plans to the Mississippi Supreme Court for approval. “The intent of the rule was, as much as possible, to have consistency across the state,” Waller said. “A lawyer would be able to look at the rules and know what the practice is, and it would be fairly consistent, and he wouldn’t be memorizing the Magna Carta every time he went into a new court.” Waller knew it was a limited effort. But in the absence of legislation to create a statewide system for public defense or a movement by counties to hire full-time lawyers, the Supreme Court could at least encourage uniformity among courts and reject inadequate plans. In combination with other new rules, including measures to make bonds less onerous and give defendants more opportunities to argue their case before a judge, he hoped counties would move to create full-time public defender offices. That didn’t happen. To date, just seven counties have full-time public defender offices, and only the 22nd Circuit Court has filed the required paperwork laying out its indigent defense system. The Mississippi Supreme Court last month. approved the plan The plan is not lengthy, but it shows that the 22nd Circuit’s lone judge knows what’s required by the Sixth Amendment and that she has developed a process for how she fulfills that duty. It says when appointed counsel should be provided to poor defendants, it directs judges to monitor attorneys’ performance, and it outlines a procedure to ensure that defendants don’t lose representation as their case moves from one court to another. The Northeast Mississippi Daily Journal, The Marshall Project and ProPublica asked the court administrators in all 23 circuit court districts, as well as the county-level clerks in all 82 counties, if they have a written plan for indigent defense. Many would not comment, but clerks in nearly 20 counties said they don’t. Waller called on the current justices to remedy the failure to enforce the public defense rule. Chief Justice Michael Randolph and Justice Jim Kitchens, who heads the court’s criminal rules committee, declined to comment. “I’m Not Too Quick to Pull the Trigger on a Public Defender” At least a few judges aren’t only ignoring the requirement to write down how they provide lawyers for poor criminal defendants. They’re not following state rules on providing those lawyers in the first place. The Daily Journal, ProPublica and The Marshall Project identified two courts that aren’t properly appointing lawyers for indigent defendants, according to Waller, legal experts and the rules of criminal procedure. A lawyer who acts as a part-time judge in the small northeast Mississippi city of Guntown told a reporter that he usually handles defendants’ first appearances over the phone and doesn’t ask if they can afford a lawyer. This contravenes Mississippi’s criminal rules, which require that during a defendant’s initial court appearance, a judge should . find out if that defendant can afford a lawyer and appoint one if not “They hear their charges and get a bond if they deserve one,”said Harry Sumner, the part-time judge. “I do not appoint a public defender at the initial [appearance] at that time.” Told that this practice doesn’t meet the state standard for an initial appearance, Sumner said he believes that defendants waive those requirements when they agree to appear before a judge by phone. If someone wants a lawyer, he said, one could be appointed at a preliminary hearing, although he acknowledged that those hearings are rarely requested. The state’s rules, however, are clear that while defendants held in jail may agree to , the requirements of an initial appearance still apply. appear before a judge by audiovisual means In nearby Yalobusha County, a judge said he doesn’t move quickly to appoint a lawyer if a defendant posts bond and is released from jail. “If they’re arrested on a felony and they’ve made bond, I’m not too quick to pull the trigger on a public defender, particularly if they’ve made a high bond,” said Yalobusha Justice Court Judge Trent Howell. The rules, however, not to base their decision about whether to appoint a lawyer on the ability of defendants or their friends or family to pay money to get them out of jail. Pressed on why he doesn’t abide by that instruction, Howell defended his approach. instruct judges “It’s just human nature” to consider whether someone has been able to raise money for a bond, he said. Even as courts have ignored the requirement to file their public defense plans, the Mississippi Supreme Court recently issued another rule to improve public defense. It’s supposed to eliminate what critics call the “dead zone” — the practice of withdrawing legal counsel from poor defendants after their initial appearance, leaving them without a lawyer as they wait to be indicted. The Daily Journal, The Marshall Project and ProPublica found that either. That suggests that poor defendants will remain deprived of meaningful legal assistance as they wait months or years, often in jail, for prosecutors to decide whether to pursue felony charges. many courts are not prepared to implement that rule De Gruy said the recent mandate to eliminate the dead zone offers courts an opportunity to grapple with much larger problems with public defense in Mississippi. “I was hoping,” he said, “this would be a reminder to the courts that they’ve got unfinished business.” Photo by on Sebastian Pichler Unsplash

Stories, News & Mentions about DRPOCKET

Drpocket’s Stories on HackerNoon

Drpocket's News & Mentions