lyndon@cs.AthabascaU.CA (Lyndon Nerenberg) (11/10/89)
In article <2728@uceng.UC.EDU> mfinegan@uceng.UC.EDU (michael k finegan) writes: >A group for image disbursement should really be a group that documents where >images can be ftp'ed from. If you don't have ftp, then arrangements should be >made for individual uucp (or whatever) connections to some hybrid site. E-mail >uses a lot of disk space, and images will make the matter worse! Show me *ONE* site that provides uucp access to images. One of the main reasons for proposing the images group was that it would allow sites without an Internet connection to access things like the Voyager images. I've sent numerous queries to people about getting these images via uucp. No way. I ended up getting them through email from someone at an Internet connected site. -- Lyndon Nerenberg VE6BBM / Computing Services / Athabasca University {alberta,decwrl,lsuc}!atha!lyndon || lyndon@cs.AthabascaU.CA The Connector is the Notwork.
rae%alias@csri.utoronto.ca (Reid Ellis) (11/12/89)
billd@fps.com (Bill Davidson) writes: |Unfortunately, there are a *LOT* of sites that are still on 1200 and |2400 baud feeds (albiet mostly not full feeds). Images are inherently |bandwidth expensive (to say nothing of my disk space). Sites with insufficient bandwidth don't have to subscribe to the group. As you say, a "full 1200 baud feed" is an oxymoron. Reid --- Reid Ellis, 264 Broadway Avenue, Toronto ON, M4P 1V9, Canada rae%alias@csri.utoronto.ca +1 416 487 1383
chip@ateng.com (Chip Salzenberg) (11/12/89)
According to lyndon@cs.AthabascaU.CA (Lyndon Nerenberg): >Show me *ONE* site that provides uucp access to images. [...] >I've sent numerous queries to people about getting these images via uucp. >No way. Okay. Let me see if I've got this straight. 1. Images are big. 2. UUCP sites don't distributed images via anonymous UUCP, evidently because they're too big. 3. Let's make a newsgroup so we can use those sites for Usenet transport! Down with bandwidth theft! Vote NO to comp.graphics.images. -- You may redistribute this article only to those who may freely do likewise. Chip Salzenberg at A T Engineering; <chip@ateng.com> or <uunet!ateng!chip>
allbery@NCoast.ORG (Brandon S. Allbery) (11/13/89)
As quoted from <613@alias.UUCP> by rae%alias@csri.utoronto.ca (Reid Ellis): +--------------- | billd@fps.com (Bill Davidson) writes: | |Unfortunately, there are a *LOT* of sites that are still on 1200 and | |2400 baud feeds (albiet mostly not full feeds). Images are inherently | |bandwidth expensive (to say nothing of my disk space). | | Sites with insufficient bandwidth don't have to subscribe to the group. As | you say, a "full 1200 baud feed" is an oxymoron. +--------------- I hate to tell you folks, but ncoast gets a full feed... and occasionally has to drop back to 1200 baud to get it. The rest of the time, we get it at 2400 baud. ++Brandon -- Brandon S. Allbery allbery@NCoast.ORG, BALLBERY (MCI Mail), ALLBERY (Delphi) uunet!hal.cwru.edu!ncoast!allbery ncoast!allbery@hal.cwru.edu bsa@telotech.uucp *(comp.sources.misc mail to comp-sources-misc[-request]@backbone.site, please)* *Third party vote-collection service: send mail to allbery@uunet.uu.net (ONLY)* expnet.all: Experiments in *net management and organization. Mail me for info.
ewiles@netxdev.DHL.COM (Edwin Wiles) (11/14/89)
In article <1228@atha.AthabascaU.CA> lyndon@cs.AthabascaU.CA (Lyndon Nerenberg) writes: >Show me *ONE* site that provides uucp access to images. One of the >main reasons for proposing the images group was that it would allow >sites without an Internet connection to access things like the >Voyager images. I've sent numerous queries to people about getting >these images via uucp. No way. I ended up getting them through email >from someone at an Internet connected site. As a different poster has said, the reason most sites don't want images transfered over news is that each image uses up a LOT of bandwith and disk space for a minimal return. This is sad since I have an Amiga and would dearly love cheap access to various images (I could get them from CI$, but would prefer not to pay that much), but I cannot see forcing others to pay the large costs images would generate. The various special purpose binaries and sources groups do not fall under this ban: Although a given site may need only the 'ibm.pc' groups, they exchange courtesy with other sites (for providing the 'ibm.pc' groups in the first place) by also carrying all the other groups. Show me the potential for "mutual courtesy" with respect to the proposed images group, and I may change my opinion. And to answer your "Show me" question: Site "uunet" carries images that are available via uucp. I don't know if they have the voyager stuff, but I do know that they have 'facesaver' images. (Digitized images of people who showed up at some *nix conference, or other.) The problem with this is that you have to be a "uunet" customer before you can use uucp. "Who?... Me?... WHAT opinions?!?" | Edwin Wiles Schedule: (n.) An ever changing nightmare. | NetExpress Comm., Inc. ..!uunet!netxcom!ewiles (I'm certain!) | 1953 Gallows Rd. Suite 300 OR ewiles@iad-nxe.global-mis.DHL.COM (I think!) | Vienna, VA 22182
rick@ofa123.FIDONET.ORG (Rick Ellis) (11/18/89)
In a message of <Nov 17 01:01>, Brandon S. Allbery (1:102/161) writes: >I hate to tell you folks, but ncoast gets a full feed... and occasionally >has to drop back to 1200 baud to get it. The rest of the time, we get it at >2400 baud. How long does it usually take at 2400? -- Rick Ellis ...!{dhw68k,conexch}!ofa123!rick rick@ofa123.FIDONET.ORG 714 544-0934 2400/1200/300
allbery@NCoast.ORG (Brandon S. Allbery) (11/20/89)
As quoted from <65.25647EF1@ofa123.FIDONET.ORG> by rick@ofa123.FIDONET.ORG (Rick Ellis): +--------------- | In a message of <Nov 17 01:01>, Brandon S. Allbery (1:102/161) writes: +-----------------------------------------------------^^^^^^^^^ ? Someone's Fido gateway software is confused. NCoast.ORG is not on the Fidonet, and if it were it'd be in Net 157. I suspect that this field should not be filled in in the case of a message gatewayed from the Usenet. +--------------- | >I hate to tell you folks, but ncoast gets a full feed... and occasionally | >has to drop back to 1200 baud to get it. The rest of the time, we get it at | >2400 baud. | | How long does it usually take at 2400? +--------------- If someone will give me a ballpark figure for the size I should use, I'll tell you. I can break it down in a number of different ways, but you'd have to tell me what measure to use. So far today (12:00 AM - 8:28 PM EST), we have received 2.4MB of news in compressed batches from our primary newsfeed. Estimating 70% compression (probably conservative), this translates to about 3.5MB. But a daily measurement isn't very accurate; a weekly one would do a better job because of the peculiarities of the connections from ncoast to the NNTP "backbone" through various sites; and this ignores news arriving from other sites (e.g. weekly calls from hoptoad and fmsrl7 produce many duplicate older articles, but their current articles are more current than hal.cwru.edu's are). ++Brandon -- Brandon S. Allbery allbery@NCoast.ORG, BALLBERY (MCI Mail), ALLBERY (Delphi) uunet!hal.cwru.edu!ncoast!allbery ncoast!allbery@hal.cwru.edu bsa@telotech.uucp *(comp.sources.misc mail to comp-sources-misc[-request]@backbone.site, please)* *Third party vote-collection service: send mail to allbery@uunet.uu.net (ONLY)* expnet.all: Experiments in *net management and organization. Mail me for info.
davidsen@crdos1.crd.ge.COM (Wm E Davidsen Jr) (11/20/89)
In article <65.25647EF1@ofa123.FIDONET.ORG> rick@ofa123.FIDONET.ORG (Rick Ellis) writes: | How long does it usually take at 2400? I'm sure Brandon will answer for himself, but I can provide some stats from a few sites I run or feed. Average xfer rate is about 210 bytes/sec at 2400. This is a quarter MB/hr. Figuring a 60% increase in size for decompression, you can approximate the effective transfer rate at 1.2MB/hr. Actual observed xfer is very close to this, but varies by content to values of 800KB-1400KB (per hour). The one site I feed at 1200 is getting just about half of this rate, so it appears fairly linear. Note that data content and system load (and uucp tuning) have a lot to do with this. This is representative of machines doing the xfer at a light load time, over local connecrtions and/or MNP modems, with uucico set for seven buffers on all machines. I hope this is useful. -- bill davidsen (davidsen@crdos1.crd.GE.COM -or- uunet!crdgw1!crdos1!davidsen) "The world is filled with fools. They blindly follow their so-called 'reason' in the face of the church and common sense. Any fool can see that the world is flat!" - anon