Xref: utzoo news.admin:12998 news.software.b:7297 news.misc:6352 news.sysadmin:3611 Path: utzoo!utgpu!news-server.csri.toronto.edu!rpi!usc!elroy.jpl.nasa.gov!ames!vsi1!zorch!xanthian From: xanthian@zorch.SF-Bay.ORG (Kent Paul Dolan) Newsgroups: news.admin,news.software.b,news.misc,news.sysadmin Subject: Re: Distribution Not Working Keywords: Distribution news Message-ID: <1991Mar30.130202.25811@zorch.SF-Bay.ORG> Date: 30 Mar 91 13:02:02 GMT References: <1961@news.tcs.com> Organization: SF-Bay Public-Access Unix Lines: 57 gwu@tcs.com (George Wu) writes in news.admin: > I came across the included article in rec.skiing. I notice that the > distribution line is reasonable, so why did I get it out here in > California? Could someone notify the "proper" authorities, or send me > their addresses? I just thought I'd help reduce someone's phone bill . > Distribution: nj Distribution as a mechanism is poorly designed for a network full of antique software and poorly maintained sites. It depends on every single site in the desired distribution area reliably respecting and copying the Distribution line. If as few as one site doesn't copy the line, or doesn't respect it, the article leaks out of the area desired and is seen on the net. Since your example shows an intact distribution line, _every_ site on the path to you outside New Jersey failed to respect the distribution, and kept forwarding the article rather than junking it or whatever the proper action might be. As long as one such path of sites exists between the originator and you, a frequent occurrence on a heavily cross-connected net, you get to see articles meant for narrower distribution. The only places where distribution provides some certainty of not leaking by is at the highly bandwidth cost sensitive sites, such as the ocean crossing gateways, which do tend to have software designed and maintained to cull out articles not meant to cross the water. The working way to limit distribution is to post to a group that only _exists_ on local sites, perhaps an "nj.wanted" or some such. Distribution as designed is just too broken to fix. It would be best if the "Distribution" mechanism were either removed as misleading, or redesigned so that it works in the real world. A first step toward a _much_ superior design would make the default distribution "local" rather than "world", so that a lost distribution line would halt distribution of that clone of the original article, while copies with intact distribution lines continued to propagate within the desired region. The same choice would stop sites that incorrectly parsed the distribution line from passing it on, one is allowed to hope. When the net began, a default distribution of "everywhere" made sense; with the current traffic levels, it is an active canker in worsening the cost of operating the net, since a big part of material posted could happily see only a limited part of the net. Similarly, Pnews or whatever should be modified to make "local" the default distribution. Actually having to type in a wider distribution for each posting might encourage authors to think a little harder about just who needs to see each article, saving bandwidth everywhere. Kent, the man from xanth.