 
|
| Sender: |
The Revised LISTSERV Distribution List <LSTSRV-L@EB0UB011> |
| Subject: |
|
| From: |
Harold C Pritchett <HAROLD@UGA> |
| Date: |
Fri, 12 Jun 87 18:44:54 EDT |
| In-Reply-To: |
Message of Fri, 12 Jun 87 13:36:34 PDT from <GA.JRG@STANFORD> |
| Reply-To: |
The Revised LISTSERV Distribution List <LSTSRV-L@EB0UB011> |
>REPLY TO 06/12/87 12:39 FROM [log in to unmask]: Re: possible solution
>for usenet-listserv peering
>
>>Seems to me that getting all of the other-net list mailers to implement
>>a complete solution would be difficult.
>>
>right on!
>
>>Perhaps a satisfactory alternative that is implemented totally within
>>LISTSERV would be to allow lists to be declared "subserviant" in addition
>>to peered. A subserviant list would have a "master" on another
>>network. Mail traffic apparently from the master (identified by either
>>which network it came from, or which user from a list of possibilities,
>>or...) would be distributed as per normal. Mail traffic not from the
>>master (probably meaning from a Bitnet host) would be forwarded to
>>the master AND NOT DISTRIBUTED. (I assume we'll catch a copy returned
>>by the master and distribute that.)
>>
>>-JSFisher
>>
>I love it!
Sounds a lot like the Editor= option which is already implemented in LISTSERV.
Harold...
|
|
|
