Path: utzoo!utgpu!NDSUVM1!NETNWS-L Date: Tue, 20 Feb 90 15:48:08 EST Reply-To: NETNWS-L Netnews List Sender: NETNWS-L Netnews List From: Jim McIntosh Subject: Re: Proliferation of bit groups To: UofToronto LAN redistribution References: Message of Fri, 16 Feb 90 13:38:00 EST from Message-ID: <90Feb21.032139est.57543@ugw.utcs.utoronto.ca> Newsgroups: list.netnws-l Distribution: ut Approved: devnull@gpu.utcs.toronto.edu On Fri, 16 Feb 90 13:38:00 EST Linda Littleton said: >Currently PSUVM gateways about 130 Listserv lists into Netnews. Historically, >we have added these gateways whenever anyone asked for them. Should we have >more controls on adding bit groups or should we (and other Netnews sites) >continue to add them as people request them? Let's discuss. I was not aware that the bit.listserv.all groups were moving onto Usenet. As a simply internal BitNet vehicle I think the NETNEWS distribution makes a lot of sense. I have found that groups of users will subscribe to a Listserv list at the same time. I would imagine that someone tells his or her friends about a list they've found, or a professor mentions a list in class. (Sometimes these clustering of subscriptions don't make much sense. Over half of our mainframe computer operators, for example, are subscribed to the MEDNEWS list.) A significant amount of our spool space is dedicated to incoming e-mail, and most of this is Listserv traffic. A scan of the mail waiting in our spool shows that much of the mail is coming from the same lists. Since we have a backbone Listserv here, we don't save network bandwidth by using NETNEWS if any of our neighbors have users subscribed to the list, but we do save spool space. Our users gain a much nicer user interface; their mailboxes are reserved for personal mail; they get a built-in 14 day archive; and they have the ability to read list traffic without having to subscribe to a list. I have, therefore, moved our Listserv documentation into the background, and have tried to promote NETNEWS as the tool for people to keep current on list traffic. I have subscribed NETNEWS to those lists which had more than a couple of subscribers. This was, as I said, without realizing that the groups were being passed to Usenet. I find it a little frightening that I can create a Usenet newsgroup, although I guess everyone has that power in the alt.all groups. The groups I recently added all had multiple subscribers here at AUVM. I could have added them as au.bit.ls.all (which would not be distributed to other NETNEWS sites) and could always rename them if other sites have no interest in them. I'm not sure, however, how to determine whether a group is widely read (or would be if it were available in NETNEWS). Perhaps only lists which have more than "50" subscribers (or some arbitrary number) should be sent to NETNEWS as a whole. If a list has less than "x" subscribers then a site should add it as a local group if they wanted to make it available to local NETNEWS users. The number of subscribers can be obtained by asking the host listserv "REVIEW listname (SHORT". This could be enforced (if we need to have it enforced) by only gatewaying groups into NETNEWS at PSUVM (since they are doing the majority now) or some other central site. I'd be willing to check the number of subscribers to the lists I added here, if others think that it is a good idea. Jim McIntosh (JIM@AUVM) The American University Washington DC 20016 USA