On Fri, 24 Oct 1997 09:23:42 -0400, in message:
<[log in to unmask]>, Pete Weiss
<[log in to unmask]> wrote:
> | May you tell me what implicit assumptions I have made?
> |Especialy the ones that I made that ``do not relate to the issues at
> |hand''? I do hope that I made all of my assuptions explicit, but if I
> |haven't I am most sorry...
>
> (My reading of your assumptions had to do with (lack of) ease of access to
> the mail under certain conditions.)
I think I made it clear that my assumption was that in some
cases NEWS is not accesable, generaly speaking if news IS accesable,
so is e-mail. Now some people prefer a newsgroup to a mailing list,
and some people preffer a mailing list to a newsgroup, and that is yet
another benifit of having a mailing list and a newsgroup. I do not
believe that there is ever a lack of accessability to mail, exsept
under circumstances where a person is getting only ``www'' access...
> | Again, *I* don't think that this applies to the issue at hand.
> |Even if it DOES relate to the issue at hand (original issue), I would
> |be GREATLY intrested in what it would take to set up a gateway from a
> |local newsgroup to a mailing list
>
> I don't think the mechanics of setting up a local bidirectional news
> gateway are much different than setting up the GLOBAL gateway. You just
> don't "leak" the newsgroup to the rest of Usenet. The fun begins when you
> start trying to make decisions about moderated lists and/or moderated
> newsgroup; or PRIVATE vs. PUBLIC authorization to post.
I don't think that ``leaking'' the newsgroup is a function of
the gateway but more a function of the news daemon(s), and presumably
if it is set up correctly then there is no need to even bring up this
issue, as it has little to do with gatewaying, but a lot to do with
news admin. In this case I think you are dealing with three diffrent
admin possitions (though it is possible these can be handled by the
same person depending on the volume on each of the three components),
that is your news admin (admins the WHOLE news service), your gateway
admin (admins the gateway, only looking at what is going through the
gateway is a liason between the listserv, and news admin), and you
have the listserv admin, administrates the listserv software and deals
with problems on that end of things.
As for the technical details, I think they are greatly
diffrent, if you are gatwaying through American or another existing
gateway, you do not have to deal with any of the technical details
related to the gateway or news admin, and gateway admin, just listserv
admin and ensuring proper conversation between American and your
listserv admin.
As for policy decisions, I think that maybe a few of them may
be cleared up by talking to American ESPECIALY if you are gatewaying
through them, but there is no diffrence in those policy decisions
regardless of what you are gatewaying...
> Those were the essential elements of recent previous discussion (as well as
> the global gateway issues at AMERICAN).
Yes, and some of them deffinately do apply here, but MOST of
the discusion I have seen about gatewaying and American have basicaly
been ``don't do it unless you have a really good reason to''. And I
think that is LARGELY because of the issues of American being
unreliable, and of issues of ``spam'' bleeding from the newsgroup to
the mailing list...
Jason Rasku
--
Intrested in hand made textiles and more?
Visit <http://kootweb.com/trillium/trrasku/trrasku.html>
|
