Path: utzoo!utgpu!news-server.csri.toronto.edu!rpi!usc!ucselx!berick!optigfx!sceard!mrm From: mrm@sceard.Sceard.COM (M.R.Murphy) Newsgroups: news.software.b Subject: Re: CNEWS MUST DIE! Message-ID: <1991May21.151256.28101@sceard.Sceard.COM> Date: 21 May 91 15:12:56 GMT References: <1991May18.041319.29490@zoo.toronto.edu> Reply-To: mrm@Sceard.COM (M.R.Murphy) Organization: The Mole and Badger Association of Northern San Diego County Lines: 24 In article mathew@mantis.co.uk (CNEWS MUST DIE!) writes: [...] > >I'll say it again. If *any* program falls over unsafely as a result of *any* >sort of bad input, then that program is *faulty* and should be fixed. Were C News to fail by sending a message to the poster of a non-compliant article, that would be an unsafe failure. Consider the case in which the posting site is connected to a C News site. One site, one message, peachy. If the offending site is connected to a site that doesn't force compliance and that site to a C News site, one message, peachy. The problem arises in a multiply connected net of mixed force-compliance and non-force-compliance sites using a flood algorithm for news propagation, and more than one posting from the non-compliant site. (Which is what we have). Many messages, big burden on sites adjacent to offending site, not so peachy. What C News does is called "The Lesser of Two Evils." BTW, CNEWS MUST DIE!, have you gotten the hint yet that your news software might be putting out ever so slightly idiosyncratic format headers? If I were burdened with the messages complaining about your news non-compliance, I'd be irritated and cut you off. Oh, nuts, I probably wouldn't. I'd probably call on the phone and ask what I could do to help. -- Mike Murphy mrm@Sceard.COM ucsd!sceard!mrm +1 619 598 5874