Xref: utzoo news.misc:1079 news.config:382 Path: utzoo!mnetor!uunet!husc6!bbn!gatech!purdue!spaf From: spaf@cs.purdue.EDU (Gene Spafford) Newsgroups: news.misc,news.config Subject: Re: The USENET Backbone (Last changed: 10 December 1987) Message-ID: <2862@arthur.cs.purdue.edu> Date: 5 Jan 88 00:29:23 GMT References: <2802@arthur.cs.purdue.edu> <14191@oddjob.UChicago.EDU> <2844@arthur.cs.purdue.edu> <14203@oddjob.UChicago.EDU> Sender: news@cs.purdue.EDU Reply-To: spaf@uther.cs.purdue.edu.UUCP (Gene Spafford) Organization: Department of Computer Science, Purdue University Lines: 169 In article <14203@oddjob.UChicago.EDU> matt@oddjob.UChicago.EDU responds: >Gene Spafford writes: > >)...some lines from my original response... > >Typical. A year or more ago I wrote you mail about this. You never >replied. About 5 months ago I posted. You responded, saying that >you never saw my mail. (And my mailer works quite well, young man.) >Now you say you saw neither the very old mail nor the very article >you answered! That kind of makes your following words a little lame: My words have no sign of a limp, that I can tell. :-) 1) I still don't ever recall getting your mail. Just because you have a fine, well-working mailer doesn't mean all your mail gets delivered, especially if it uses uucp. Then again, if it was as testy as your postings, I might have simply discarded it -- no one pays me to read abusive mail. 2) Read my original reply -- I said I do not *recall* any previous posting. I did not claim you didn't make one....simply that it was not memorable (to me). I will probably forget this interchange in a few months, too. I did not realize I had to archive all of your postings. 3) How do you know I'm a young man? Does that change how your mailer works? Or are you trying to imply something about my memory? >My primary objection is that every month you post a message saying "A >backbone site is one which has properties A, B and C." Anyone can >see that there are other requirements which are not mentioned. You >yourself admit that there are. At the time of my first writing there >was a "backbone" site that clearly didn't meet even the publicly- >stated part of the conditions. That one is gone now, but there seems >to be another such. Someone has drawn my attention by mail to >another dubious case. Well why didn't you say so? Why don't you send me mail and ask about the sites in question? Why don't you come up with some suggestions about how to reword the backbone article to clear up the ambiguities you perceive? I get (quite literally) dozens of suggestions for changes to the regular postings every month -- and I consider them all, and incorporate over half. And "...anyone can see..."? Really? >) ... Rather, "backbone" is an informal designation intended to ... >) improve news propagation, ... > >If that is the goal, then maybe the backbone should be defined as >those sites that appear most often in the "Path" lines. Greg Woods answered this -- not every site wants to be listed as a "backbone" site. In fact, some admins of very well-connected sites are worried about being so designated because of "political" hassles that might result. Furthermore, how far back do we check "Path:" lines, and relative to what sites do we perform the analysis? If we took *every* "Path:" line appearing at *every* site over the past 3 years, and then took the ones most often mentioned, I bet we'd come up with something very close to the current list. >) ... find where to obtain the latest news software, ... > >Oh? In that case the backbone is simply uunet! Point everyone there. This is a naive enough statement so that instead of belaboring the obvious, I will just assume you are being sarcastic rather than stupid. >) provide reliable "anchor" service for UUCP mail, > >Like husc6 that for weeks sent out a ".UUX" on the end of uucp >addresses? Like rutgers, which prompted one user at ihlpl to write: > > ps. Please be advised that rutgers eats ALL my personal > correspondents, and if anyone knows how to circumvent that > machine, I'll be eternally greatful. > Your mailer has never broken? Great! Let's have *everybody* route mail through your machine! As to the person who had rutgers eat all of his "personal correspondents," well, I guess that is one way to deal with obnoxious reporters :-) From my experience, rutgers has a pretty reliable mailer, and if someone is having problems it might be interesting to find out how they traced it down to specifically the rutgers system. Casting aspersions on other sites and admins because of intermittent mailer failures does *not* refute my original statement: given a path relative to one of the backbone machines means that your mail can be delivered with a much higher probability, especially if you are dealing with dumb uucp mailers. >) and provide a very knowledgeable and experienced group of news >) users and admins to discuss items of mutual interest and develop >) new software. > >Now we're getting down to the real intent, at least as it is >perceived by the outsiders. The backbone are those people who want >to make the rules, insofar as there are any at all. The folks on the backbone list are perhaps unique in that they really don't *want* to make any rules for anything outside of our own machines. Responsibility for making rules is a burden that none of them need in addition to everything else they have to do. Instead, most of them have been with the net for 4, 5, or more years and would like to see it continue. (In fact, we have the author of the very first news system, and at least one of the authors of each of A, B and C news on the list...it isn't a coincidence that their sites provide backbone-level support.) The backbone discusses very little, and what little is discussed in the mailing list is almost always also discussed in one of the public groups at the same time. Basically, the backbone group (and the moderators group) discusses how they intend to implement things FOR THEIR OWN SITES, and then integrate public comment and suggestions. We then implement whatever we decide AT OUR OWN SITES, suggest it to the net-at-large, and let others make their own decisions. If most sites want to follow the lead of the backbone, because of our experience and perspective, fine. If not, also fine. Why is there a list in the first place? Because no one person wants the BURDEN of making decisions, design or administrative, without feedback from others. Why not just post for feedback by everyone, every time? Because there are too many people on the network who post without knowing what they're talking about, or who flame without good reason, or who post without thinking about consequences. The people on the backbone list have had to administer major sites, including support of mail and news, for a long period of time. Generally, they are not hotheads, they have extensive practical experience, and they respect the opinions of their peers. Further, needs and constraints tend to be similar amongst many of the backbone sites. Different viewpoints and backgrounds allow members of the backbone to see solutions others might not, and cause them to defend different points of view. I could go on, but once again I am faced with the problem of not knowing what your complaint is. Do you not want the members of the backbone list to discuss things? Do you want another group of people added to the list? Do you want the posting modified? Or do you just like to flame? >This has gotten more rabid than I intended to get, but I still stand >by the content. > Matt Crawford Well, fine for you. I'm not interested in debating it further. However, I will offer the following to anyone interested and who has managed to read this far: 1) If you think the wording in the regular backbone posting should be modified, send me mail with your suggestions. Suggestions for changes to the other postings will also be cheerfully considered. It's *your* network! 2) If you think your site qualifies as a backbone site and you wish to be added to the map, send me mail and tell me about it. 3) If you think that you belong on the backbone mailing list even if you don't currently run a backbone site, but you have or believe you have some special insight you can add, let me know. If there isn't a flood of requests, maybe we'll add you to the mailing list; however, we might also expect you to help beta test software or gateway some mailing lists, or answer 10 gazillion (identical) questions from novice users. As Greg put it, be careful what you ask for -- you just might get it. -- Gene Spafford Dept. of Computer Sciences, Purdue University, W. Lafayette IN 47907-2004 Internet: spaf@cs.purdue.edu uucp: ...!{decwrl,gatech,ucbvax}!purdue!spaf