On Tue, 25 Feb 1992 18:02:17 CST Darren Evans-Young <[log in to unmask]> said:
 
>I thought that  being on the backbone REQUIRED that  you have up-to-date
>nodes files. These  servers should be removed  immediately! Unless there
>is some reason that I dont know about.
 
This reason is called  my time. This is a leaf  backbone server in Chile,
behind a slow link. If I remove  it from the backbone, I will create huge
queues and people from  both sides of the link will send  me tons of hate
mail that I'll have  to answer. Then I'll have to explain  why I did that
and what they have  to do to fix it. They will argue  that they should be
restored right away  to fix the queues  and promise to get  a new BITEARN
NODES as soon as  possible, but given the speed of  their link they can't
promise anything. This will go on for  a while, with a lot of time wasted
typing e-mail, and the end result  is that they will update their BITEARN
NODES *once*  to make  me happy  and then  forget about  it again  in the
future, so we can start over. I've wasted countless hours on this kind of
problems with brazilian servers, and gave up after achieving very little.
As long as they create no problem for the rest of the network, I am happy
to  let  leaf backbone  servers  provide  lousy  service to  their  local
"customers".
 
Now, here is a  list of servers I will have to remove  soon if they don't
stop losing jobs due to REXX interpreter failures (bless CMS6):
 
                  UHUPVM1 UMAINECS UMDSCVM UMVMA UCRVM2
 
  Eric