Path: utzoo!utgpu!jarvis.csri.toronto.edu!mailrus!umich!samsung!brutus.cs.uiuc.edu!psuvax1!psuvm!VTVM1!VALDIS From: VALDIS@VTVM1.CC.VT.EDU (Valdis Kletnieks) Newsgroups: bit.listserv.policy-l Subject: Re: Topologies Message-ID: Date: 12 Feb 90 05:33:45 GMT Sender: Discussion about BITNET policies Reply-To: Discussion about BITNET policies Organization: Virginia Polytechnic Institute Lines: 23 Approved: NETNEWS@PSUVM Gateway Comments: To: Discussion about BITNET policies In-Reply-To: Message of Sun, 11 Feb 90 23:24:34 EST from On Sun, 11 Feb 90 23:24:34 EST Andrew T. Robinson said: >Valdis, > >The idea that BITNET routing descisions should be tied to LISTSERV is >very bothersome to me--kind of a tail-wagging-the-dog situation. > >Andy Andy: I agree with what you said here. Unfortunately, Listserv is 30,000 lines of code. And there are (for political reasons) already two versions. It *is* the tail wagging the dog - but can we implement new schemes without being DAMN sure that we don't totally screw up one of the most sucessful services on Bitnet? If you need convincing, just look at the debacle we had a while ago when all the core Listserv traffic got dumped on ORION. That incident is EXACTLY the kind of thing I'm worried will happen again unless we get Eric and Turgut to cooperate in this changeover. And then we'll have to make sure the various sites INSTALL it, etc etc etc... It almost makes me wish for the days when Bitnet was only 400 nodes. Amazing what 5 years of changes will bring... Valdis