Newsgroups: comp.mail.uucp Path: utzoo!utgpu!news-server.csri.toronto.edu!torsqnt!lsuc!iguana!merce From: merce@iguana.uucp (Jim Mercer) Subject: Re: BITFTP grief! Message-ID: <1991May19.052610.10658@iguana.uucp> Organization: Ed (the iguana) Memorial Society References: <1991May17.041635.4503@iguana.uucp> Date: Sun, 19 May 91 05:26:10 GMT In article stanley@phoenix.com (John Stanley) writes: >merce@iguana.uucp (Jim Mercer) writes: >> it's assholes and ignoramuses who absolutely positively have to have THAT >> file, but are not willing to pay their own way. > > If you have a problem with the users of your system, take it up with >them. Don't come out into the world and demand that everyone else give >up what they have just because you can't afford to give it to your >users. If you want THEM to pay their way, well, then, CHARGE THEM. With >all the lawyers you must have floating around there, the legal issues >certainly wouldn't be a problem. oh, for the days of old, when money wasn't the root of all things on the net. i don't want to charge anyone anything. i just want them to be reasonable. >> >> how much of a net.lobby do we have to do to get pucc.princeton.edu to shut >> >> down BITFTP? >> > >> > No! This is a valuable service to the entire UUCP community. Well, at >> >least it is here. >> >> No! BITFTP is a terrible DIS-service to the entire UUCP community. > > Your uucico hosed you while transferring BITFTP mail, so BITFTP is >bad for everyone. That is a grand-daddy of over-generalizations. ok, i should have used the term MBAS. my uucico works perfectly fine for normal loads, as it does on literally thousands of other systems. (it just so happens that the only 3 times our uucp spool overflowed, they were all caused by BITFTP transfers.) > BITFTP makes available a huge amount of information, much of which is >not available in any other way. Alot of the traffic on USENET (one of >those UUCP things, you know) is eliminated by the single posting "X is >available via anonymous ftp at A.B.C.D." The fact that YOU might have to >pass the same thing twice or thrice is more than compensated for by all >the things you won't have to carry AT ALL because they weren't posted. news and mail are two different systems. news is better able to handle large transfers. > When EVERY anonymous ftp site is also available via a mailserver, >THEN you can argue that BITFTP is of NO service to UUCP. It will be a >long time before that happens. Those who set up anon-ftp sites tend to >think in terms of Internet and forget about anyone who can't ftp. you seem to be stuck on another point here. i would prepare that all mailservers (for files) be dropped. they are a plague on the email portion of the network. > You will NEVER be able to make that 'DIS-service' claim stick. the users will probably not like it, but i'm getting a lot of support from admins out there. >> talk to the sites in Ontario, Canada, who are possibly going to lose all >> internet connectivity partially due to increased mail volume (ie. BITFTP). > > And just how is BITFTP going to increase your mail volume when it no >longer accepts mail requests? the problems started way before BITFTP was shut down to user outside of BITNET and EARN. >Or is this your threat for when human >generated mail fills your spool? If I were one of these sites I would >start looking for another feed right now, because you have already >indicated that you aren't happy carrying their mail and are looking for >the next available excuse to cut it totally. i have not dropped any of the sites related to the BITFTP abuse through our system. i have no problem with regular mail volume, or even mailinglist explosion. >> > Your problem (which is the same problem here, BTW) is that a UUCP >> >connection will happily accept that which it cannot store. The BITFTP >> >connection is just a symptom. >> >> excuse me? > > There is none. You bitched about your spool area filling up, mail and >news being lost, and your disk being trashed. You blamed users >downstream from you, and BITFTP. If YOUR uucico didn't accept more stuff >from your feed than there was room on your disk, your disk wouldn't have >been trashed, mail and news would not have been lost, and your spool >area wouldn't have filled. Your system would have processed what it could, >and then, when there was space, would accept more. the problem is not a lack of disk space, but an abundance of traffic. why should i fix my software, if it handles what it was designed for. if you want to redesign the uucp systems, you have a lot of work ahead of you. BTW: my file systems overflowed because of the way news and mail are piped around. if this had been straight file copies, the system would have shut down the modem sooner. >Don't supply mail services to your users and >then tell them that they can't use them, and worse, don't tell the rest >of the world not to do something just because you can't handle it. they can use them, just not abuse them. i read this on the net a long time ago, read it and think about it. abuse of email causes bad karma. -- [ Jim Mercer work: jim@lsuc.on.ca home: merce@iguana.uucp +1 519 570-3467 ] [ "Anarchists Unite!" - seen spray painted on a wall ]