Messages in this thread | | | Date | Thu, 7 Aug 1997 00:46:39 -0400 (EDT) | From | "Albert D. Cahalan" <> | Subject | Re: Usenet gateway? |
| |
Christoph Lameter writes: > On Tue, 5 Aug 1997, David S. Miller wrote: >> From: Christoph Lameter <clameter@waterf.org>
[quoting reordered because new stuff belongs last]
>>> I will make that petition drive if we cannot agree even on >>> this limited less dangerous version than dejanews of making >>> the content public. >> >> Fine, you do what you think is necessary. I will say finally that >> dejagnus gets the posting at their site before me or anyone else does, >> I even bypass all of the exploders and make vger deliver directly to >> their archive machine. >> >> I will stop running vger and shut it down, if the petition decides >> that usenet is necessary. Of course, I will provide the subscription >> and configuration files for the lists to whoever wants to run it >> instead. > > Please confirm that you really intend to go against what I think is a > big group of linuxers needs. What you are doing is blackmail. > > I would wish you would assert your copyright to these things as > Alan said. That would be great thing for my petition. What you do > here flies straight in the face of the goals of the Linux Software. > > In that case I think we cannot cooperate any further and I will > shut down everything I am running for you.
Whoa people! Grow up! (both of you & others)
The mailing list is very important, as is an official 1-way gateway. These do-it-yourself gateways are causing problems. They must go away. They _will_ go away if an official gateway exists. Isn't vger overloaded? The "no gateway" policy adds more subscriber load, including people that only need read-only access. Others give up because the traffic is too much for normal mail software and people take vacations sometimes.
Gateway properties include:
1. officially approved 2. vger -> usenet ONLY 3. destroy email addresses (headers, body...) 4. no posts on usenet side (moderater is FAQ autoresponder) 5. remove MIME, PGP, and HTML patch corruption for usenet 6. support X-Keep-Email: header for those that tolerate spam 7. enforce read-only nature with automatic cancel 8. fast, with priority above other exploders
Are there really any serious objections to that?
| |