HDTenEightyP/NetNews huggingface dataset:
From: blymn@awadi.com.AU (Brett Lymn)
Newsgroups: news.admin.technical
Subject: Help needed with INN
Date: 6 Nov 92 15:24:42 GMT
Organization: /usr/blymn/.organization

Hello Netters,

I have installed inn recently and have it up and running...sort of.  I
am having a lot of pain with my innd seemingly stalling after is has
run the news.daily script.  What seems to happen is that after the
news.daily my innd just stalls, the process is there and functional
because it will service requests for spawning nnrpd's but it will not
receive news from our newsfeed (via nntp) until after I post an
article.  Is this a known problem?  Is this a FAQ? (my humble
apologies if it is).  My news is not throttled according to innstat
and my newsfeed is reachable and willing to transfer news.

Why is this so?

Under the circumstances mail would be far preferable as my news is
very erratic at the moment.  Thanks in advance.
Xref: sparky news.admin:8465 news.groups:21131
From: hartman@ulogic.UUCP (Richard M. Hartman)
Newsgroups: news.admin,news.groups
Subject: Re: Guidelines discussion: RFD
Date: 10 Nov 92 18:56:22 GMT
Followup-To: news.admin
Organization: negligable

In article <TRSNYDER.92Nov7231333@queen.mcs.Drexel.edu> trsnyder@mcs.Drexel.edu (Bob Snyder) writes:
>>>>>> In article <567@ulogic.UUCP>, hartman@ulogic.UUCP (Richard M.
>>>>>> Hartman) writes:
>
>Much better than "Request for Discussion: rec.m".  Some newsreaders truncate
>Subject lines.  and generally a subject line "RFD: comp.sillyness reorg" should
>provoke enough interest to be read.
>
>Richard> Should the messages that are posted to the affected groups have
>Richard> more detailed, unobfuscated "Subject:" lines?  e.g. (1/2 :) ) :
>
>	> Subject: Your news group may be renamed!!! Speak up NOW!
>
>So when I go to read news.announce.newgroups, I see how many of these headers?
>:-)


Well it was only 1/2 serious...  Got any better ideas?  Perhaps
RFD to news.groups and a seperate msg (& header) to affected
groups referring them to the "real" discussion thread?


	-Richard Hartman
	hartman@ulogic.COM

-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-
"If we shadows have offended, Think but this and all is mended:
 That you have but slumbered here, While these visions did appear.
 And this weak and idle theme, no more yielding but a dream."
Xref: sparky news.admin:8461 rec.music.synth:18224
From: wade@hobbes.ucsd.edu (Wade Blomgren)
Newsgroups: news.admin,rec.music.synth
Subject: Re: *BAD* music group reorg will not be honored
Followup-To: poster
Date: 10 Nov 1992 17:46:42 GMT
Organization: University of California, San Diego
NNTP-Posting-Host: hobbes.ucsd.edu

In an article, dave@jato.jpl.nasa.gov (Dave Hayes) writes:
> 
> Did you ask them? I did. I've got 14 people and counting who oppose
> the name change. 

Dave, when you talk about your precious 14 and counting who oppose
the name change and failed to vote, I think it only fair to mention
those who have contacted you directly who did not vote but FAVOR the
change (me for instance).

To do otherwise makes a mockery of your argument (not that it needs any
help in that regard :-)).

Wade
From: mjo@slee01.srl.ford.com (Mike O'Connor)
Newsgroups: news.admin
Subject: Re: INN
Date: 6 Nov 1992 20:20:34 GMT
Organization: Not an official spokesperson for Ford Motor Co.
Reply-To: "Mike O'Connor" <mjo@fmsrl7.srl.ford.com>
NNTP-Posting-Host: slee01.srl.ford.com

In article <1dct6tINNpvt@banjo.une.edu.au> root@templar.une.edu.au
(System PRIVILEGED Account) writes:

:BTW, I believe NNTP is a protocol for transporting news, not an actual news
:server package. The INN ditribution includes an implementation of NNTP.

This is where it gets confusing.  The most common package that
implements the NNTP protocol is called "NNTP", or in Rich $alz lingo,
the NNTP reference implementation.  

						...Mike

--
 Michael J. O'Connor           |  Internet:  mjo@FMSRL7.SRL.FORD.COM
 Ford Motor Company, OPEO      |  UUCP:      ...!{backbone}!fmsrl7!mjo
 20000 Rotunda, Bldg. 1-3001   |  Phone:     +1 (313) 248-1260
 Dearborn, MI  48121           |  Fax:       +1 (313) 323-6277
Xref: sparky news.admin:8493 comp.mail.uucp:2047
From: clewis@ferret.ocunix.on.ca (Chris Lewis)
Newsgroups: news.admin,comp.mail.uucp
Subject: Re: Any easy way to filter this type of UUCP traffic?
Date: 12 Nov 92 06:18:22 GMT
Followup-To: comp.mail.uucp
Organization: Elegant Communications Inc., Ottawa, Canada

In article <199211120128.AA00604@fnord.wang.com> fitz (Tom Fitzgerald	) writes:
|Please don't direct followups to news.admin.misc.... this is not a new
|administration issue, and the newgroup hasn't reached the far corners of
|the net yet.

I didn't do it explicitly, but I realize now that my news software (trn 2.2)
is somehow *sometimes* automatically selecting the first newsgroup for a
Followup-to.  I have never noticed this before, and I will have to investigate.

I've redirected this to comp.mail.uucp where the rest of this discussion
is occuring.

Sorry for the confusion.

|clewis@ferret.ocunix.on.ca (Chris Lewis) writes:

|> uunet	... <{sitename}>({cost})
|> The angle brackets indicate that nothing should be routed *through*
|> "sitename" to other machines.

|> Furthermore, you shouldn't advertise the uunet link in *your* map entry
|> at all.  Otherwise, large numbers of systems may choose you to get to
|> uunet.

|It would be better to advertise the link but make it really expensive.  If
|you don't advertise it, it's not clear if the 1-way path is a mistake, or
|what.  Some map coordinators insist on bidirectional links.  If you declare
|it instead as

|yoursite uunet(52*WEEKLY)

|it makes things a lot clearer, and the mailers will still never choose to
|route through it.

For each link that pathalias parses, it generates a backlink of 100*DEAD.
It also takes the smallest cost that it ever sees for the link.  So,
by leaving it out, you make the highest possible cost, and any setting
*less* than 100*DEAD just makes it more likely to be used.

While DEAD is a pretty high cost, there are quite a few explicitly specified,
so it isn't that unlikely that a sequence of a few DEAD links would
be preferred by pathalias over an implicit 100*DEAD.

Any map maintainer that insists on bidirectional links is mistaken -
the <> should make it clear that there are restrictions on material
going over the link, and that insisting on a backlink is the wrong
thing to do.  Besides, Henry Spencer used to say something to the effect
that "certain wretchedly stupid mailers refuse to understand that
some links are unidirectional" - ie: some links are *inherently*
unidirectional.

|Actually, if a system has no other path to UUNET except through yoursite,
|it will route through you, but this would happen anyway.  If the maps
|declare an a->b link but no b->a link, pathalias will assume there's a link
|with cost DEAD, and use it if there's no other alternative.

|52*WEEKLY is close enough to DEAD to make no difference.

Yeah, but that isn't the point.  You want it bigger than DEAD. 
-- 
Chris Lewis; clewis@ferret.ocunix.on.ca; Phone: Canada 613 832-0541
Psroff 3.0 info: psroff-request@ferret.ocunix.on.ca
Ferret list: ferret-request@ferret.ocunix.on.ca
Xref: sparky news.admin:8414 rec.music.synth:18084
From: fenner@postscript.cs.psu.edu (Bill Fenner)
Newsgroups: news.admin,rec.music.synth
Subject: Re: *BAD* music group reorg will not be honored
Date: 9 Nov 92 18:18:06 GMT
Organization: Penn State Computer Science

In article <1992Nov9.090122.10836@jato.jpl.nasa.gov> dave@jato.jpl.nasa.gov writes:
|I thought I was dealing with rational folk who might have a chance of 
|perhaps considering that maybe there was an inequity in how it was handled.

The problem here is that there is an understanding gap.  It seems that Dave's
position is that the people who are getting the newsgroup through the gateways
that, for some unknown reason, are not going to change the name of the
newsgroup they're gatewaying, are being left behind.

The people arguing against Dave seem to think that Dave's position is simply
that the name should not be changed, for arbitrary reasons.

This is why we're starting to have this kind of misunderstanding of arguments,
because I don't think Dave sees that most people are discarding the argument
of the gateways, since it would obviously be trivial to change the gateway to
use the new group.

I, personally, think that Dave should go complain to whoever is doing the
gatewaying, and tell them that the name has changed and that they should
start gatewaying the new group.  Dave: if the gateways switch, so that everyone
still has the same access to the group, then do you still have a beef with it?

  Bill
Newsgroups: news.admin,news.sysadmin,news.admin.policy,alt.sex.pictures.misc
From: jbotz@mtholyoke.edu (Jurgen Botz)
Subject: Re: Does USENET condone CHILD PORNOGRAPHY?
Keywords: Pedophelia Child Pornography Porn Immoral Illegal
Organization: Mount Holyoke College
Date: Mon, 9 Nov 1992 15:38:11 GMT

In article <BxBytJ.Epz@news.cso.uiuc.edu> StarOwl@uiuc.edu writes:
>[...]  is illegal to do so in the U.S., and probably in Canada, but
>there are other countries connected to USENET.  Do they have to abide
>by our laws?  If that's the case, the US section of USENET needs to
>abide by the laws of the other countries on the net[...]

 ..and...

>The media in the US and Canada has had a field day from time to time
>regarding just what comes over USENET.  The net lives on.

Altnet is NOT Usenet.

--
Jurgen Botz                  |   Internet: JBotz@mtholyoke.edu
Academic Systems Consultant  |     Bitnet: JBotz@mhc.bitnet
Mount Holyoke College        |      Voice: (US) 413-538-2375 (daytime)
South Hadley, MA, USA        | Snail Mail: J. Botz, 01075-0629
From: siphon@momad.UUCP (Stimpson J. Katz)
Newsgroups: news.admin
Subject: Child Pornography (A proposed solution)
Keywords: Pornography Legal Child Porn
Date: Sat, 07 Nov 92 02:30:42 EST
Distribution: world
Organization: MoDeM MaDnEsS BBS   1-516/295-9435

     I have a modest suggestion for dealing with the child pornography
problem. I hope it is implemented (or something similar) before some
university or BBS get prosecuted for distribution of child pornography.

     I suggest that administrators and system operators who find child
pornography appearing on their systems cancel the offending messages
immediately. I know people are going to scream censorship, but the
alternative is for systems to stop carrying the newsgroups that
encourage (directly or indirectly) the posting of child pornograhy.

     I know there will be complaints about who judges what is and is
not child pornography, but those posting must remember that these
messages get forwarded to many countries and some of them may have
very restrictive laws. The best defense is a good offense.

     You certainly have the right to post what you wish, but if you
break the law, expect action. I hope system operators begin issuing
warnings and then placing restrictions, if necessary. Let's show
the world that we are capable of policing ourselves, and then no
policing from the outside will be necessary.

SJK

The Siphon (SIPHON@momad.uucp)

"I swear, by my life and my love of it, never to live for the
sake of another man, nor to ask another man to live for mine."
Newsgroups: news.admin,news.groups,rec.music.synth
From: dave@jato.jpl.nasa.gov (Dave Hayes)
Subject: Re: *BAD* music group reorg will not be honored
Reply-To: dave@jato.jpl.nasa.gov
Organization: Jet Propulsion Lab - Pasadena, CA
Date: Mon, 9 Nov 1992 19:31:41 GMT

jaapjl@tab00.larc.nasa.gov (J Lee Jaap) writes:
>And perhaps change the Guidelines (if deemed necessary by the net) to
>avoid such a problem _in the future_.  I suggest that the current
>Guidelines have been followed and that the vote not be invalidated due
>to wishful thinking.

I suggest that the spirit of them has by an unclear call for votes
skewing the voter population. The vote was unfair. 

>Dave, why didn't you go campaigning (or informing) in r.m.s during
>the vote?  Or complain during the RFD that your friends in r.m.s
>weren't participating?

There's a lot of reasons. In hindsight, I fucked up big time. I'm human
too. What's wrong with me trying to fix it now?
-- 
Dave Hayes - Network & Communications Engineering - JPL / NASA - Pasadena CA
dave@elxr.jpl.nasa.gov       dave@jato.jpl.nasa.gov         ...usc!elroy!dxh

            Think enough and you won't know anything!
Xref: sparky news.admin:8473 news.software.readers:2165 comp.mail.elm:3266
From: vince@victrola.sea.wa.us (Vince Skahan)
Newsgroups: news.admin,news.software.readers,comp.mail.elm
Subject: can C-news and mail be distributed in binary form ?
Date: 10 Nov 92 21:32:19 GMT
Article-I.D.: victrola.1992Nov10.213219.951
Organization: Vince and Suzie's Underpowered PC

I'm currently running the public domain unix clone Linux at home
and have a normal USENET software setup running quite happily.
(c-news,elm,trn,tin,nn,smail3.1.28)

Several of the projects being done under linux are the assembling
of a number of canned 'collections of stuff' kits for those folks
who don't want to compile the whole thing from sources.

I'm interested in whether it's theoretically possible, assuming
some standard setup (directory structure, domainized headers, etc.)
to come up with a binary-only distribution of C-news, newsreaders,
and 'elm'.

Looking at it, I've reached the following conclusions so far:

	- smail3.1.28 looks probable since you can set the domain
		and header in the runtime 'config' file.

	- C-news looks maybe possible if you can use the mailpaths,
		organiation, whoami, and mailname files.  Is it 
		'that' easy ?

	- elm looks shaky since you have to assume so much when you
		compile it.  In particular, you need to set domainized
		headers or not, append the domain or not, and compile in
		the domain or not (and specify it if yes).  I know you
		could set a .elm/elmheaders file with Reply-To: set on
		a personal basis and workaround some of it, but maybe not
		all of it.  Can somebody fill me in regarding whether it's
		possible to pick the local domain from a file rather than
		from a compilation option...the docs seem pretty shaky
		in that area.

	- newsreaders seem to have lots of things like hostnames and
		domains compiled in, making them questionable. In particular,
		I'm thinking of 'nn', 'trn', and 'tin'. Again, can these
		grab the domain name from a file or something or can C-news's
		posting/mail mechanism take care of filling in the mail
		name.domain for mail replies and the systemname for posts ?

Any responses (via mail would probably be best) would be appreciated.
I'll be happy to summarize anything conclusive...

-- 
     ---------- Vince Skahan --------- vince@victrola.sea.wa.us ----------
    Running Linux/C-news/trn/Elm/Smail - we don't need no steenkin' MS-DOS 
Newsgroups: news.admin,news.sysadmin,alt.binaries.pictures.erotica.d,news.admin.policy
From: alexis@panix.com (Alexis Rosen)
Subject: Re: UUCP over TELNET (was Re: UUCP newss access wanted over Telnet .
Date: Thu, 5 Nov 1992 14:58:41 GMT
Organization: PANIX Public Access Unix, NYC

dawson@willard.waffle.atl.ga.us writes:
>swhite@tybse1.uucp (William C. "Spike" White) writes:
>> The other tricky thing is that TELNET sessions are NOT 8-bit clear paths, lik
>> what UUCP's 'g' protocol expects.  I had to specify to use UUCP's 'e' protoco
>> which expects a 7-bit path.  The 'e' protocol does little or no error-checkin
>> I think.  This wasn't a problem for me, since I was directly connected to the
>> terminal server's port.  Your mileage may vary.

This won't work. 'e' assumes an 8-bit clean connection error-free connection
(like uucpd/IP). You probably meant 'f', which has heavy error-checking and
is 7-bit. And BTW, do NOT count on a direct connection to the ts providing you
with an error-free link. It won't. 99.9999%, maybe, but that's not the same,
and the first time you lose a newsbatch you'll regret it.

>Some telnet implementations do support an 8-bit clear mode... you have to
>explicitly ask for it.  I think the syntax under SunOS is something like
>"telnet -8" ...

Even then you're not in the clear. They may still handle certain control
characters as telnet commands. (In fact, I'm not sure about this, but it may
not be possible to avoid this in any real telnet implementation. See my
posting today in comp.dcom.servers about Annex III <-> Sun Sparc2.)

>> So you're BOTH right :-)

Um.

:-)

---
Alexis Rosen   Owner/Sysadmin,
PANIX Public Access Unix & Internet, NYC.
alexis@panix.com
{cmcl2,uunet}!panix!alexis
From: jmaynard@oac.hsc.uth.tmc.edu (Jay Maynard)
Newsgroups: news.admin
Subject: Re: *BAD* music group reorg will not be honored
Date: 6 Nov 1992 16:29:03 GMT
Organization: UT Health Science Center Houston

In article <23670001@hpsad.sad.hp.com> smithj@hpsad.sad.hp.com (Jim Smith) writes:
>In news.admin, dave@jato.jpl.nasa.gov (Dave Hayes) writes:
>    I also encourage other news admins out there to look into this problem as an
>    example of an officially sanctioned act that will turn out to inconvienence
>    a lot of people. This is bogus, folks.
>This would be WONderful, if everyone does it.  But what if some sites drop
>rec.music.synth and the traffic gets split?  Is there anything that can be
>done about this netwide?  

This is exactly why I think Dave Hayes' unilateral action is a Bad Thing. If
you think the traffic is split now, just wait until the network gets
fragmented.

About the only thing that can be done about this netwide is to honor the
results of the vote, as a large number of admins will be doing exactly that.

>It really has been a devastating month for the rec.music.synth crowd, and
>it's sad to see the group dissipated by this incursion.

What has been devastating about it, besides the actions of a few
obstructionists who won't honor a legitimate result of an open, democratic
process?
-- 
Jay Maynard, EMT-P, K5ZC, PP-ASEL | Never ascribe to malice that which can
jmaynard@oac.hsc.uth.tmc.edu      | adequately be explained by stupidity.
     We survived Jimmy Carter; we'll (probably) survive Bill Clinton.
Xref: sparky news.admin:8411 news.groups:20837
From: rorschak@daimi.aau.dk (Jesper Lauridsen)
Newsgroups: news.admin,news.groups
Subject: Re: *BAD* music group reorg will not be honored
Date: 9 Nov 92 18:09:09 GMT
Organization: Xanth Watch

dave@jato.jpl.nasa.gov (Dave Hayes) writes:

>Your opinion. The central argument I've had...none of you have touched. 
>I'll say it again: "what about the users of rec.music.synth? Don't you care
>about them?"

They got 3 CFV posted to their group which stated exactly how to make
their opinion known to the votetaker. Some did that, some didn't. The
majority was in favour of the rename (even a 2/3 majority).

>>The process was completely open to participation from anyone who was affected.
>>Those who chose to participate were listened to. Those who chose not to were
>>not. It's really that simple.

>Blatantly false. I participated and I'm not being listened to. If you really
>listened to what I was saying, then you'd deal with my central issue (see
>above). You haven't as of yet. 

Many have listended to you, most have shaken their head at the nonsense you
have been pouring into the net lately. And we have dealt with your central
"issue", despite you started out with other complaints.
-- 
Jesper Lauridsen        |  I survived the rec.arts.sf-lovers split
rorschak@daimi.aau.dk   | 
Newsgroups: news.admin,rec.music.synth
From: twpierce@unix.amherst.edu (Tim Pierce)
Subject: Re: *BAD* music group reorg will not be honored
Followup-To: news.admin
Organization: Homosexual Fascist Lobby, Rampant Paranoia Division
Date: Tue, 10 Nov 1992 06:42:49 GMT

Followups are set to news.admin.

In article <1992Nov9.090122.10836@jato.jpl.nasa.gov> dave@jato.jpl.nasa.gov writes:

>I'll say it again: "what about the users of rec.music.synth? Don't you care
>about them?"

As represented by you?  Frankly, I don't.  Perhaps if a few users of
rec.music.synth had come forward after the vote and expressed honest
confusion, there would be more sympathy, or at least fewer harsh
words.  Starting a thread with the subject "*BAD* music group reorg
will not be honored" is not exactly conducive to pleasant, fuzzy
discussion.

>>Those who chose to participate were listened to. Those who chose not to were
>>not. It's really that simple.
>
>Blatantly false. I participated and I'm not being listened to.

In the vote: you participated; you were listened to; you were voted
down.

In this thread: you have not participated in any sort of discourse.
Hence no one has bothered to listen to you.

-- 
____ Tim Pierce                / 
\  / twpierce@unix.amherst.edu / I use antlers in all of my decorating.
 \/ (BITnet: TWPIERCE@AMHERST) / 
Newsgroups: news.admin,news.groups,rec.music.synth
From: dave@jato.jpl.nasa.gov (Dave Hayes)
Subject: Re: *BAD* music group reorg will not be honored
Reply-To: dave@jato.jpl.nasa.gov
Organization: Jet Propulsion Lab - Pasadena, CA
Date: Fri, 6 Nov 1992 23:57:52 GMT

jmaynard@oac.hsc.uth.tmc.edu (Jay Maynard) writes:
>About the only thing that can be done about this netwide is to honor the
>results of the vote, as a large number of admins will be doing exactly that.

And a smaller number won't.

>What has been devastating about it, besides the actions of a few
>obstructionists who won't honor a legitimate result of an open, democratic
>process?

Because the process did not honor those it affected, I cannot call it 
legitimate. If the subject line was clearer, I wouldn't have a leg to
stand on now would I? 
-- 
Dave Hayes - Network & Communications Engineering - JPL / NASA - Pasadena CA
dave@elxr.jpl.nasa.gov       dave@jato.jpl.nasa.gov         ...usc!elroy!dxh

Nearly all men can stand adversity, but if you want to test a man's
character, give him power.
From: mcb@net.bio.net (Michael C. Berch)
Newsgroups: news.admin
Subject: Re: Bathroom monitor Re-dux ...
Date: 8 Nov 92 00:04:33 GMT
Organization: IntelliGenetics, Inc., Mountain View, California, USA

In the referenced article, emcguire@intellection.com (Ed McGuire) writes:
> As I understand U.S. law, letters are also the property of the person
> who received them.  However, the author still holds the copyright,
> just as for any other creative work.  In the U.S., the person who
> received the letter may thus make copies for personal use only.
> Publishing the letter would be a violation of copyright law, and
> potentially grounds for a lawsuit.

Correct, however, as it is often necessary to point out, this only
applies to the intellectual property rights in the letter, and does not
extend to the information contained in it.  Absent any
confidential/fiduciary relationship with the sender, or any agreemnt
not to do so (e.g., trade secret or nondisclosure agreement), the
recipient is perfectly free to disclose the contents of the letter or
any other information contained in it.  Copyright law only protects
intellectual property rights in particular fixed forms of expression --
not ideas, information, or facts.

--
Michael C. Berch
Member of the California Bar
mcb@presto.ig.com / mcb@net.bio.net
Xref: sparky news.admin:8456 news.groups:21056