Relay-Version: version B 2.10 5/3/83; site utzoo.UUCP
Path: utzoo!mnetor!seismo!lll-crg!nike!ucbcad!ucbvax!QUABBIN.SCRC.Symbolics.COM!DCP
From: DCP@QUABBIN.SCRC.Symbolics.COM (David C. Plummer)
Newsgroups: mod.protocols.tcp-ip
Subject: re: ARPAnet "Congestion"
Message-ID: <860930120647.4.DCP@KOYAANISQATSI.S4CC.Symbolics.COM>
Date: Tue, 30-Sep-86 12:06:00 EDT
Article-I.D.: KOYAANIS.860930120647.4.DCP
Posted: Tue Sep 30 12:06:00 1986
Date-Received: Fri, 3-Oct-86 00:47:04 EDT
References: <860929091101.00f@Jpl-VLSI.ARPA>
Sender: daemon@ucbvax.BERKELEY.EDU
Organization: The ARPA Internet
Lines: 42
Approved: tcp-ip@sri-nic.arpa


    Date:    Mon, 29 Sep 86 09:11:01 PDT
    From:     tencati@Jpl-VLSI.ARPA

    I have a purely academic question.  Is anyone considering the fact that there
    are many users on the ARPAnet that are not "official" users?  

My opinions:

The INFO-THIS, INFO-THAT problem is a site administration problem.  Your
site allows your users to receive those lists.  I'm not sure there are
programs to prevent people from getting added, but if somebody were
willing to watch the mail logs and "catch" the people, they could be
told to conform to site policy and get themselves removed from the
lists.  One possible solution is to ask all maintainers of major mailing
lists to completely disallow individuals on the lists and require that
all "recipients" be local redistribution lists at the target sites.
This would allow site managers to restrict incoming mail volume by
disallowing their users to receive lists contrary to site policy.
(Sounds facsist, and it probably is.  I don't know if I believe this,
but it is a possibility.)

The "multiple users receiving the same message on separate connections"
problem has two causes.  The major cause is that the sending site
refuses to send the same message to multiple recipients.  I believe this
was the case with previous Unix software; I don't know if it has ever
been fixed.  A second possible cause is lack of local redistribution.

"Official DARPA business" made a lot more sense back in the NCP days.
With the advent of IP, it can be claimed that you aren't connected to
the ARPAnet, you are connected to the Internet.  The ARPAnet is
logically and physically just a very small part of the entire Internet.
The real problem we are seeing is that it is the backbone of the
Internet.  The solution is obvious (I'm assuming the proliferation of
machines will continually increase traffic): put more bandwidth into the
>>Internet<<.  This could be by adding more ARPAnet capability, or
providing other (redundant) paths.  Who pays for it isn't clear, nor is
the choice of technology.

    I'm not flaming, I just had an extra 2 cents in my pocket...

The 2 cent token is moving around the net...