Path: utzoo!censor!geac!jtsv16!uunet!cs.utexas.edu!tut.cis.ohio-state.edu!ucbvax!UCONNVM.BITNET!SEWALL From: SEWALL@UCONNVM.BITNET (Murph Sewall) Newsgroups: comp.sys.apple Subject: Re: APPLE2-L brownvm.BITNET!listserv Message-ID: <8906102130.aa07452@SMOKE.BRL.MIL> Date: 11 Jun 89 02:04:20 GMT References: Organization: The Internet Lines: 84 >This issue is not up for discussion or voting until the moderators of >the APPLE2-L listserv make it so. Just so things don't appear TOO anonymous, Chris Chung and I co-own Apple2-L and Paul Nakada or handles the coordination with comp.binaries.apple2. We welcome discussion (and opinions); as to voting - you tend to get from volunteers what volunteers are willing to provide (or as President Lincoln once said, "There are 12 Ayes, and one nay; the nays have it." :). >The original posting was aimed at those moderators to see if they might >think it a worthy idea. I am not talking about a LARGE report. I wonder if we can arrange for you to manage a list (any list) for awhile, it's LARGER than you think. >As an example; > It could contain one line totals for the month of > a) files requested > b) transfers sent where the message bounced. > c) number of different users making requests. That much sounds reasonable; however, the problem here is LISTSERV collects stats on requests for the server not the individual lists (the stats are there for the maintainer of the server who is more interested in how busy the whole system is rather than how busy some particular list is). > It would also be nice to have a list of; > a) the return address used for transfers that bounced > b) the number of bounces for that requester. Suddenly, the report grows VERY large (at least for APPLe2-L) AND the report would be incomplete because lots of requests that go unfilled do not result in bounced mail (the UUCP gateway to BITNET almost never bounces anything, even gross typo's of host names). >If the network and all its gateways are working properly, the report >shouldn't be more than a few lines any month. There may be a nanosecond or two during the year when these conditions prevail. The typical mailing of APPLE2-L posts generates 5 to 10 'bounces' to perfectly valid hosts, usually because of traffic loads at the gateways. >If the report gets large, some people might wake up to a general >problem and fix it. I haven't counted the lines in even BITNET's list of lists lately (according to InfoWorld, all feeds of USENET news total approximately 3 Mbytes per day), but list volume alone is HUGE. There are known bottlenecks and problems, and lots of talent is working to resolve them. Of course, LOTS more $$$$ would help (any of you taxpayers ready to write your Congresspersons DEMANDING a tax increase to improve net services -- among others?). >A report with this information might actually help those of us who >lose contact with a net node isolate where the problem is. I rather doubt that a general report would uncover many problems that aren't already known. 'cunyvm.cuny.edu' is a seriously overloaded gateway (hardly unknown to the gatemaster) as was 'wiscvm.wisc.edu' before it (they couldn't maintain the load with the resources available and threw in the proverbial towel). Efforts (some of which actually are improving things and others which appear clever if not as obviously helpful) are being made to improve service (often accomplished by unseen volunteers using smoke and mirrors in the absence of money for more hardware and systems programmers). >I posted this to the net news since I can't be sure that my email would >make it to the moderators at APPLE2-L. Kind of makes my point, I think. Why the lack of confidence? Why no confidence that if the mail didn't make it, you'd surely receive a 'mail not delivered' message :-) ? 'Course Chris and I DO take some time off in the summer time (I'm not even on the 'official' payroll from 1 Jun until 1 Sep). Murph Sewall Vaporware? ---> [Gary Larson returns 1/1/90] Prof. of Marketing Sewall@UConnVM.BITNET Business School sewall%uconnvm.bitnet@mitvma.mit.edu [INTERNET] U of Connecticut {psuvax1 or mcvax }!UCONNVM.BITNET!SEWALL [UUCP] (203) 486-5246 [FAX] (203) 486-2489 [PHONE] 41 49N 72 15W [ICBM] -+- I don't speak for my employer, though I frequently wish that I could (subject to change without notice; void where prohibited)