Path: utzoo!utgpu!watmath!clyde!bellcore!rutgers!mailrus!cornell!uw-beaver!ubc-cs!van-bc!sl From: sl@van-bc.UUCP (pri=-10 Stuart Lynne) Newsgroups: news.admin Subject: Re: High Volume Calls For New Approach Message-ID: <2013@van-bc.UUCP> Date: 9 Dec 88 18:37:42 GMT References: <26469@bu-cs.BU.EDU> <267@ssbn.WLK.COM> <486@mccc.UUCP> Reply-To: sl@van-bc.UUCP (pri=-10 Stuart Lynne) Organization: Wimsey Associates, Vancouver, BC. Lines: 27 In article <486@mccc.UUCP> pjh@mccc.UUCP (Pete Holsberg) writes: >In article karl@triceratops.cis.ohio-state.edu (Karl Kleinpaste) writes: >=bill@ssbn.WLK.COM (Bill Kennedy) writes: >=It's more efficient for massfeed sites to have all downstream feeds be >=relatively simple in terms of distribution, as opposed to worrying >=about the Mbyte volume going over the lines. > Is there a way to measure where the breakpoint is? I have leafs >running 20 MB Unix PCs and there's no way they can take a full feed. > I've been doing much the same for the last two years. Basically I balance off the cost of carrying and producing extra batch files against modem time. I've told some sites with 1200 bps modems they *couldn't* have a full feed because we just don't have enough modem time to feed them, and instead give them a subset (usually all news/comp/sci plus rec.humor etc). I've told other small sites with a Telebits that they get a full feed and can throw away what they don't need at their end. I don't want to have to batch anymore than I have to so just give them copies of already batched files. -- Stuart.Lynne@wimsey.bc.ca {ubc-cs,uunet}!van-bc!sl Vancouver,BC,604-937-7532