[news.admin] THe local Distribution Problem

mangoe@mimsy.UUCP (Charley Wingate) (08/24/87)

We're having a severe specifications problem here.  Let's start with
something very basic:

   If an article is posted to comp.x AND to local.x, do we want it to go to
   ANY site outside of the distribution appropriate to "local.*"?

My feeling is that we don't, or at least, that we don't want it to default
to that.  It seems to me that an article which is only of local interest in
the second group is therefore not really of national or global interest in
the first.  If this is the case, stripping the local groupname off is
exactly the wrong thing to do; the correct thing would be to force the
article's distribution to conform to that appropriate for the local group.

C. Wingate

elg@killer.UUCP (Eric Green) (08/29/87)

in article <8113@mimsy.UUCP>, mangoe@mimsy.UUCP (Charley Wingate) says:
> Xref: killer news.admin:831 news.software.b:745
> 
> We're having a severe specifications problem here.  Let's start with
> something very basic:
> 
>    If an article is posted to comp.x AND to local.x, do we want it to go to
>    ANY site outside of the distribution appropriate to "local.*"?
> 
> My feeling is that we don't, or at least, that we don't want it to default
> to that.  It seems to me that an article which is only of local interest in
> the second group is therefore not really of national or global interest in
> the first.  If this is the case, stripping the local groupname off is
> exactly the wrong thing to do; the correct thing would be to force the
> article's distribution to conform to that appropriate for the local group.

This is actually a combination of TWO problems. The first problem is that of
distribution groups. That is, since the second newsgroup is a strictly local
group, all articles posted to it should be of distribution "local" (or,
substitute appropriate organizational or regional distribution here). And
since cross-posted articles are all of the same distribution, the article
should be local in all newsgroups.

Note that I say SHOULD be. But, we all know that what SHOULD be and what IS
are two different things. I suspect that the current news system doesn't
understand the concept of distribution restrictions upon newsgroups.

The second problem is that of cross-posting to newsgroups which do not exist
as part of USENET proper.  For example, a moderator recently complained of
recieving articles cross-posted to a unix-pc newsgroup, which he didn't have
(the unix-pc network is totally seperate from USENET proper). So he, the
moderator, had no choice but to throw away the names of the groups he couldn't
post it to. Whether an automated rendition of such a garbage disposer is
desirable or necessary is another question entirely.

--
Eric Green   elg@usl.CSNET     "... is there anybody in there?
{cbosgd,ihnp4}!killer!elg        can anybody hear me?
Snail Mail P.O. Box 92191        is there anyone home?"
Lafayette, LA 70509                  -PF,_DSOTM_

michael@stb.UUCP (Michael) (08/31/87)

In article <1433@killer.UUCP> elg@killer.UUCP (Eric Green) writes:
>(the unix-pc network is totally seperate from USENET proper). 

Not quite; I receive a few cross postings and I'm sure others do to.

The big question: What does unix-pc discuss (is it just ATnT's unix PC,
80X86 family, or any/all single user unix systems) and where do I
get a feed?
-- 
: Michael Gersten		seismo!scgvaxd!stb!michael
: Copy protection? Just say Pirate! (if its worth pirating)

kathy@wrcola.UUCP (09/02/87)

In article <98@stb.UUCP> michael@stb.UUCP (Michael) writes:
>
>The big question: What does unix-pc discuss (is it just ATnT's unix PC,
>80X86 family, or any/all single user unix systems) and where do I
>get a feed?
>-- 
>: Michael Gersten		seismo!scgvaxd!stb!michael


Three of us in NC started the unix-pc net just over a year ago
as a group for people who own or are interested in AT&T's UNIX pc
*specifically*.  The groups are now distributed to at least a couple
hundred (conservatively speaking) machines, from Hawaii to the
Netherlands.

scgvaxd gets the unix-pc groups - try sending mail to root there.


Kathy Vincent -----> AT&T: {ihnp4|mtune|burl}!wrcola!kathy
              -----> Home: {ihnp4|mtune|ptsfa|codas}!bakerst!kathy