garyg@hpscdc.HP.COM (Gary Gitzen) (03/31/88)
Chuq writes: >There is code in inews that checks the "Path:" line for a given host name. >If that host name is in the "Path:" line, inews decides that the site's >already seen the message, and won't tranmit again. >I've always felt this is a bug........... This "bug" prevents your transmitting the news items you receive back to your newsfeed. And maybe them sending it back to you, and you to them ...... >It also means that if there is another machine on the net with your >site name on it, you'll never see postings from it, so you may never find >out they exist. Unfortunately, the code is deeply ingrained in the net, so >it's rather hard to change. Sounds like a good reason to register one's sitename. If newsfeeds were routed only to registered sites, the problem wouldn't occur. Gary Gitzen garyg@hpscdc.hp.com hplabs!hpscda!garyg
chuq@plaid.Sun.COM (Chuq Von Rospach) (04/01/88)
>This "bug" prevents your transmitting the news items you receive back >to your newsfeed. >And maybe them sending it back to you, and you to them ...... It prevents transmiting it back, but the loop prevention is the reason why we have the history file. It comes back, it's recognized as a duplicate, it dies. This "bug" also prevents a message published in the name of someone on a given site (a common occurance for moderated groups) from ever being posted on the machine in question or any site downstream of them. On balance, this 'feature' is more of a pain than a convenience. >Sounds like a good reason to register one's sitename. If newsfeeds were >routed only to registered sites, the problem wouldn't occur. Nice idea. Wishful thinking, but nice idea. Since registering is (and always will be) voluntary, registering will never keep this from happening, since both sides of a dispute need to register for the conflict to be resolved. What if I decide to (or don't know I'm supposed to) not register. How do you find out about me?
brian@ucsd.EDU (Brian Kantor) (04/01/88)
Transmission isn't free for most sites. The news software won't send an article to a site that already appears in the Path: header line on the assumption that the article has already been there. If for some reason the article WERE to get to that site, it would probably be rejected as a duplicate by the history mechanism, but you'd have already paid for sending it twice - once needlessly. That's one of the BEST reasons I can think of for having that code in there. Of course, you could take the Path: test out and see what happens; I'll wager you'd see roughly a doubling of your transmission costs - twice the phone bill, or network charge, or whatever - and of all the aspects of Usenet, the real-money-for-the-phone-bill is the hardest one to justify/hide. Brian Kantor UCSD Postmaster & Chief News Weenie UCSD Office of Academic Computing Academic Network Operations Group UCSD B-028, La Jolla, CA 92093 USA brian@ucsd.edu BRIAN@UCSD ucsd!brian
tjw@cisunx.UUCP (TJ Wood WA3VQJ) (03/15/89)
In article <36906@bbn.COM> cosell@BBN.COM (Bernie Cosell) writes: >Oh great -- not only is the forgery trail starting EARLY this year, but >instead of something new and clever we get a repeat of last year's. BOO >HISS!!!!! We want **NEW** hacks!! :-). By the way, here is a diff of this >year's and last year's postings ('<' = this year, '>' = last): > Hey, we could ask JJ to explain how he's an orphan who is the sole support of his parents?!? Then again, let's not. Terry -- (UUCP) {decwrl!allegra,bellcore,cadre,psuvax1}!pitt!cisunx!cisvms!tjw (BITNET) TJW@PITTVMS (or) TJW@PITTUNIX (Internet) tjw@vms.cis.pittsburgh.edu (or) tjw@unix.cis.pittsburgh.edu (CC-Net) CISVMS::TJW (or) 33801::TJW (or) CISUNX::tjw (or) 33802::tjw
tjw@cisunx.UUCP (TJ Wood WA3VQJ) (03/17/89)
> >Hey, we could ask JJ to explain how he's an orphan who is the sole >support of his parents?!? Then again, let's not. > >Terry I understand that I've offended every holder of the "JJ" login id in the country/world. I'm terribly sorry! The JJ in my message I referred to was the former "JJ@portal" who graced us with his whit and wisdom. Terry -- (UUCP) {decwrl!allegra,bellcore,cadre,psuvax1}!pitt!cisunx!cisvms!tjw (BITNET) TJW@PITTVMS (or) TJW@PITTUNIX (Internet) tjw@vms.cis.pittsburgh.edu (or) tjw@unix.cis.pittsburgh.edu (CC-Net) CISVMS::TJW (or) 33801::TJW (or) CISUNX::tjw (or) 33802::tjw
spaf@cs.purdue.EDU (Gene Spafford) (04/01/89)
Warning: April 1 is rapidly approaching, and with it comes a USENET tradition. On April Fools day comes a series of forged, tongue-in-cheek messages, either from non-existent sites or using the name of a Well Known USENET person. In general, these messages are harmless and meant as a joke, and people who respond to these messages without thinking, either by flaming or otherwise responding, generally end up looking rather silly when the forgery is exposed. So, for the few weeks, if you see a message that seems completely out of line or is otherwise unusual, think twice before posting a followup or responding to it; it's very likely a forgery. There are a few ways of checking to see if a message is a forgery. These aren't foolproof, but since most forgery posters want people to figure it out, they will allow you to track down the vast majority of forgeries: o Russian computers. For historic reasons most forged messages have as part of their Path: a non-existent (we think!) russian computer, either kremvax or moscvax. Other possibilities are nsacyber or wobegon. Please note, however, that walldrug is a real site and isn't a forgery. o Posted dates. Almost invariably, the date of the posting is forged to be April 1. o Funky Message-ID. Subtle hints are often lodged into the Message-Id, as that field is more or less an unparsed text string and can contain random information. Common values include pi, the phone number of the red phone in the white house, and the name of the forger's parrot. o subtle mispellings. Look for subtle misspellings of the host names in the Path: field when a message is forged in the name of a Big Name USENET person. This is done so that the person being forged actually gets a chance to see the message and wonder when he actually posted it. Forged messages, of course, are not to be condoned. But they happen, and it's important for people on the net not to over-react. They happen at this time every year, and the forger generally gets their kick from watching the novice users take the posting seriously and try to flame their tails off. If we can keep a level head and not react to these postings, they'll taper off rather quickly and we can return to the normal state of affairs: chaos. Thanks for your support. Gene Spafford, Spokeman, The Backbone Cabal.