dbb@aicchi.UUCP (Burch) (11/02/85)
Well, it seems that we have missed the point yet again. What we all want is reduction of the cost of USENET to sites that pass on the largest proportion of the traffic. To this end, we have decided to reduce the volume of postings (we hope) by limiting the number of groups and reducing the number of postings via mod.* groups. Well, what about making the whole mess more efficient? To this end; 1. Stargate; This seems like the best way for backbone sites to ship stuff. It has the advantage of being "free" and allowing the creation of "erzatz backbones" that have cable and can suck the stuff off CNN for their own use and for those sites that they feed. 2. Buy some better modems; there are some pretty neat 9600 bps modems that don't require special circuits. Yes, this is some up front money, but the payback will be very,very short, especially if the old modems are sold or re-used 3. Fix NETNEWS. It spawns a subprocess for each article. It could be MUCH better! Also, data compression is likely to yield rapid payoffs. 4. Find "interested sites". Maybe Apple woulld pay for some of the costs of net.sources.mac, and such like. Maybe some site with vested interest in net.flame will offer to be a special backbone for that group. Anyway, lets look at these sorts of things before we destroy too much. -Ben Burch "Opinions are mine alone, and not those of my employer."
friesen@psivax.UUCP (Stanley Friesen) (11/05/85)
In article <598@aicchi.UUCP> dbb@aicchi.UUCP (Burch) writes: > >Well, what about making the whole mess more efficient? >To this end; >1. Stargate; This seems like the best way for backbone sites to ship stuff. > It has the advantage of being "free" and allowing the creation of > "erzatz backbones" that have cable and can suck the stuff off CNN for > their own use and for those sites that they feed. Sounds nice, but at present Stargate does not allow "discussion" groups, only moderated ones, so it is not sufficient on its own to provide for the needs of the whole net. >2. Buy some better modems; there are some pretty neat 9600 bps modems that > don't require special circuits. Good idea!! >3. Fix NETNEWS. It spawns a subprocess for each article. It could be MUCH > better! Also, data compression is likely to yield rapid payoffs. Another good idea, but it requires a volunteer to rewrite the news software! Are you volunteering? >4. Find "interested sites". Maybe Apple woulld pay for some of the costs > of net.sources.mac, and such like. Possible, but how would it be administered? also: 5. Restructure net connectivity to reduce the number and cost of the long distance connections, replacing them with a greater number of moderate to short distance connections. 6. Have the recieving sites pay for the news as a service provided by the feed site, sort of like paying for cable telivision. >Anyway, lets look at these sorts of things before we destroy too much. YES!! -- Sarima (Stanley Friesen) UUCP: {ttidca|ihnp4|sdcrdcf|quad1|nrcvax|bellcore|logico}!psivax!friesen ARPA: ttidca!psivax!friesen@rand-unix.arpa