Hey Barry - you ran some rather huge NNTP servers, back in the day, you
have any comments on this?
Scott Helms wrote:
Miles,
Usenet was normally asymmetrical between servers, even when server
operators try to seed equally as being fed. It's a function of how a
few servers are the source original content and how long individual
servers choose (and have the disk) to keep specific content.
It was never designed to have as many server nodes as you're
describing and I'd imagine there's some nasty side effects if we tried
get that many active servers going as we have customers.
On Mar 1, 2015 10:25 AM, "Miles Fidelman" <mfidel...@meetinghouse.net
<mailto:mfidel...@meetinghouse.net>> wrote:
Scott,
Asymmetric measured where? Between client and server or between
servers? I'm thinking the case where we each have a server
running locally - how do you get a high level of asymmetry in a
P2P environment?
Miles Fidelman
Scott Helms wrote:
Anything based on NNTP would be extremely asymmetric without
significant changes to the protocol or human behavior.
We ran significant Usenet servers with binaries for nearly 20
years and without for another 5 and the servers' traffic was
heavily asymmetric.
On Mar 1, 2015 9:11 AM, "Miles Fidelman"
<mfidel...@meetinghouse.net
<mailto:mfidel...@meetinghouse.net>
<mailto:mfidel...@meetinghouse.net
<mailto:mfidel...@meetinghouse.net>>> wrote:
Aled Morris wrote:
Sadly we don't have many "killer applications" for
symmetric
residential
bandwidth, but that's likely because we don't have the
infrastructure to
incubate these applications.
Come to think of it, if USENET software wasn't so
cumbersome, I
kind of wonder if today's "social network" would consist
of home
servers running NNTP - and I expect the traffic would be very
symmetric. (For that matter, with a few tweaks, the USENET
model
would be great for "groupware" - anybody remember the Netscape
communications server that added private newsgroups and
authentication to the mix?)
Miles Fidelman
-- In theory, there is no difference between theory
and practice.
In practice, there is. .... Yogi Berra
--
In theory, there is no difference between theory and practice.
In practice, there is. .... Yogi Berra
--
In theory, there is no difference between theory and practice.
In practice, there is. .... Yogi Berra
