Path: utzoo!utgpu!news-server.csri.toronto.edu!cs.toronto.edu!ietf-nntp-distribution-owner
Message-ID: <9106240016.AA24051@tmc.edu>
From: sob@tmc.edu (Stan Barber)
Date: Sun, 23 Jun 1991 20:16:48 -0400
References: lear@turbo.bio.net (Eliot)
       "IMAGE {opsys}?" (Jun 23,  5: 05pm)
X-Mailer: Mail User's Shell (7.1.1 5/02/90)
Original-To: lear@turbo.bio.net (Eliot), ietf-nntp@turbo.bio.net
Subject: Re: IMAGE {opsys}?
Newsgroups: list.ietf-nntp
Distribution: list
Sender: list-admin@cs.toronto.edu
Approved: list.ietf-nntp@mail.cs.toronto.edu
Lines:       21

Given the experience with FTP, I am not sure that BINARY is a good long
term solution. All the world is not stream oriented.

On other topics:
        I think OPTION is a good idea. If we need shortcuts, we should use
        something like "OPTION LOCAL something" that would set up a bunch of
        options in one transaction.

        
        I am more and more convinced that NNRP needs to happen. I have been
        considering the idea of NNTP slave servers and I am convinced that
        NNRP slave servers make more sense.


        I am going to have more to say about the draft before July 4th.


-- 
Stan           internet: sob@bcm.tmc.edu         Director, Networking 
Olan           uucp: rutgers!bcm!sob             and Systems Support
Barber         Opinions expressed are only mine. Baylor College of Medicine