Sat, 9 Dec 1995 18:28:37 +0200
|
On Sat, 9 Dec 1995 10:52:17 -0500 Mark Hunnibell
<[log in to unmask]> said:
>I am not sure if I understand you here. It sounds like you are agreeing
>that setting subscriptions to FULLHDR just to be able to get the MIME
>header lines is a solution that creates a disk space problem for most
>system administrators
No, I am saying that I disagree completely.
>Well... forcing everyone on the planet to change their system
>configuration to allow more than 17 hops in a header seems like a rather
>excessive position
No, it's a perfectly natural position, since a hop count of 17 makes no
sense in 1995, LISTSERV or no LISTSERV. There has been the exact same
problem with TCP/IP TTL values. Sites with ancient TTL limits were cut
off as the Internet expanded. Many of them whined that the solution was
to expand the Internet in a different way so that they would not have to
fix their software. They also predicted that if people didn't stop
expanding the Internet this way, the new sites would just be cut off
because people simply wouldn't increase their hop counts, and other
providers would come along which *would* be happy to address the very
important issue of the hop count. The Internet kept expanding the way it
needed to, and people increased their hop counts.
>Lets face it too that, as good as LISTSERV is, if you ignore the
>real-world requirements in favor of adhering to an abstract philosophy,
Every new option increases the complexity of the software and the
confusion level of the users. Every day hundreds of people will ask their
helpdesk what is the difference between MIMEHDR and FULLHDR. There is
also a resource cost for every new type of header. Most sites make no use
of SHORTHDR, and having both FULLHDR and MIMEHDR would double the number
of files in their mail spool.
In real world terms, you are asking for a new option to bypass an ancient
default in ONE product, sendmail. Furthermore that limit is only ever an
issue in the rare case of peered lists where the recipient is several
peers removed from the posting site, and the default has been increased
in recent versions. I am telling you that this is a problem in sendmail
that has been fixed in recent versions, and that the solution is for the
sites with the ancient default to update either their config file or
their sendmail. If they aren't willing to do either, there will be other
providers that *will* be willing to invest an entire 5 minutes updating
one line in their config file so that their users can have access to
remote LISTSERV lists.
Eric
|
|
|