next message in archive
no next message in thread
previous message in archive
previous message in thread
Index of Subjects
Index of Subjects On Thu, 12 Aug 1999 aa935@chebucto.ns.ca wrote: > The numbers recently gleamed from the IP database are not statistics, but an > accounting. They were computed from a system that is not fully understood, and > can only be classified as interesting and as a subject for discussion. Until > other information is gathered and combined with this first accounting they are > virtually useless. Just to clarify the origin of the numbers listed from the IPdb. They were not computed but gathered by hand. I went into the IP database's admin page where all current entries in the IPdb are listed. These include accounts in every stage of creation from freshly applied with nothing further done to completely created. I checked the status of every single entry there with the exception of the four IP Training sites. This gave me the dates and numbers used. Where an IP entry had not completed the process, I listed the most recent activity as the creation date for the purposes of this exercise. Where an IP entry had been listed as 'Moved' I used the IP creation date or most recent status prior to creation as the date where no creation date was listed. For 'Removed', I used the IP creation date or most recent status date prior to creation if no creation date was listed as the creation date. Many IP sites are in place that are listed as not having been created in the IPdb, hence the need to personally inspect every IP's directory. For the various statuses that I listed, 'Removed' were labelled as such in the database itself and their directories were found to be empty. 'Moved' were sites that were listed as having moved as well as sites that upon inspection proved to be on non-CCN servers. Where a site was found to be at a new domain name, I did a DNS lookup on the domain name and found where it really was. I did not count domain names that are on CCN as having moved. I did count as 'Moved' any IP where the sole CCN content consisted of a notice that the site was elsewhere. 'Not Used' were IPs which did not have sites up despite being logged as having completed the IP registration. 'Incomplete' were IPs who had not completed the IP process and had no files in place. In all cases, I inspected the IP site's listed home page then the IP directory, in case the listed home page was not the actual site, as was the case in several instances. The results of this inspection and tallying were accurate as of August 10 1999. These results may be independently verified by any interested party. They are not opinion but fact. The caveat about these numbers not counting previously deleted accounts was made when the figures were given and I have since found the location of the deleted IP accounts so it is possible to in fact make another assessment which would include these. I make no guarantees however that these deleted accounts are all the deleted accounts as there is no way to verify that. What I produced was a snapshot of what was going on in the IP database as of last weekend. This is not a matter of personal interpretation but of inventory. I'm glad that I put the time in on it because it answered several questions that I had had and examining every IP site was in itself enlightening. Andrew
next message in archive
no next message in thread
previous message in archive
previous message in thread
Index of Subjects