LSTSRV-L Archives

LISTSERV Site Administrators' Forum

LSTSRV-L

Options: Use Monospaced Font
Show Text Part by Default
Show All Mail Headers

Topic: [<< First] [< Prev] [Next >] [Last >>]

Print Reply
Jose Maria Blasco <JMBLASCO@DEARN>
Thu, 2 Mar 89 15:37:16 MEZ
text/plain (38 lines)
I don't  want (and  I can't)  enter the political  implications of  the recent
FRMOP11 affaire. However,
 
1. When a site installs LISTSERV, it can only do so if it has previously read,
   understood and accepted the copyright notice and installation memo (this is
   true of any other  product, BTW). There it is clearly  stated which are the
   conditions to become (and to keep  being) a backbone node. That FRMOP11 has
   violated these rules, by  whichever reason it may be, is  a fact and should
   not be discussed. Please read carefully  the installation memo if you still
   have doubts.
 
2. FRMOP11  does not  only serve  EARN sites,  as any  network-wide DISTRIBUTE
   stream (and thus  also a huge number of distribution  lists) originating or
   having a peer in EARN with recipients in the other side of the atlantic had
   to  pass thru  FRMOP11. Although  I cannot  speak for  BITNET and  Netnorth
   people, I strongly  believe that they would never accept  to have to suffer
   the consequences of  a problem in an EARN node.  ALL non-EARN would suffer,
   as much  as EARN, and therefore  this can not  be a decision taken  only by
   EARN.
 
3. Eric  is right that he's  the person responsible for  updating global files
   and to  determine who is on  the backbone. In  the past, a number  of other
   sites have  also been removed from  the backbone, always for  good reasons,
   including the complaints of other nodes  served by the 'bad' backbone site.
   If EARN  were to negotiate with  Eric a change in  the responsibilities for
   determining  who's and  who's not  a  backbone, such  a negotiation  should
   include BITNET and  NetNorth representatives, as an  unilateral EARN change
   would be likely to hurt also BITNET and NetNorth.
 
4. My  personal opinion  as a  technical person  is that  there should  be ONE
   SINGLE person coordinating the backbone, and that this person should do the
   coordination for  the whole  network. Else,  technically speaking  again, I
   guess we should go back to plan 1.
 
Please don't flame Eric as this was the ONLY thing he could reasonably do.
 
  Jose Maria

ATOM RSS1 RSS2