chris@umcp-cs.UUCP (08/02/83)
CSNet, as it stands now, would collapse instantly under the weight
of netnews. Without some way of distributing the load, the two
relays would not be able to handle all the traffic. That's the
basic trouble with a centralized system, and is the reason for all
the research into distributed computing. You can only squeeze so
much into a single system.
- Chris
PS Don't get me wrong, I think CSNet is actually doing quite well.
It hasn't been around long enough to solve the initial problems
(like slow software). Supposedly MMDF II is a big step in increasing
speed. - ACT
--
In-Real-Life: Chris Torek, Univ of MD Comp Sci
UUCP: {seismo,allegra,brl-bmd}!umcp-cs!chris
CSNet: chris@umcp-cs
ARPA: chris.umcp-cs@UDel-Relaylauren@vortex.UUCP (Lauren Weinstein) (08/27/83)
Oh, I'm sure that some of the people complaining to me about CSNET have an axe to grind! Some have told me so explicitly, and have specifically asked me not to distribute their messages or names since they don't want any hassles with "the authorities" (whoever they are...) I've gotten a number of messages on this topic since my last posting. Many of them agree that various aspects of the reported problems are true to some extent. Once again, more people are complaining about problems getting bugs fixed, and several persons have complained bitterly about the manner in which the code was written (apparently making it rather difficult to understand). One person used the term "baroque" and others used somewhat stronger language. Virtually everyone agrees about the protocol problems. The point here, however, is that I'm acting as a reporter for most of these complaints, and I've been making that clear in every message. I'm not claiming personal experience except with the protocol. You are obviously free to take what I've been reporting on this subject with as many (or as few) grains of salt as you desire. --Lauren--