The new LINKSWT FILE we received today (date/time 89/04/06 15:57)
changes the "hub" BITNET LISTSERV (at least in our neck of the woods)
from BITNIC to ORION.  And when I just checked  LISTSERV @ ORION wasn't
even logged on!
 
   The change which seems to do this is to set the weight for the
CUNYVM BITNIC link to 4.
 
   The last time BITNIC was down I changed my local LINKSWT to send
our files to [log in to unmask]  I had changed it to ORION initially
but Ken Ng was concerned about SPOOL load at the time as I recall.
Perhaps that host has been beefed up now to handle the extra load.
I certainly agree that BITNIC has enough to process without it!  ;-)
 
   It would seem to me that with the VMNET/BITNET II links taking what
appears to be a large amount of traffic it would be good to reexamine
the LINKSWT file.  For example, CUNYVM-PUCC is given the same weight
as CUNYVM-WISCMAC3!  (CUNYVM-PUCC has several routes, WISCMAC3 has one and
is only a JNET node so it can't handle as much traffic).  Similar
statements could be made for CUNYVM-PSUVM, etc.
 
   I also think if there is going to be a "hub" LISTSERV it would make more
sense to have it at a host such as PSUVM where it would be able to take
avantage of the various high-speed links in several different directions.
(Of course that assumes the tables used by LISTSERV reflect the real
topology in that area...).
 
   I haven't been following LSTSRV-L lately (I just resubscribed) so I
realize this might have been discussed.  But you might want to run some
DEBUG runs on some of your larger DIST2 lists to see if your "key LISTSERVs"
have changed with the new LINKSWT FILE.  If someone else hadn't pointed
out the change to me I might not have noticed for a while...  Of course,
we could be the only ones affected in which case - never mind.  ;-)
 
       Marty (who, me slow?) Hoag