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
Chris Lewis <[log in to unmask]>
Wed, 4 Aug 1993 19:21:26 -0400
text/plain (51 lines)
On Aug 4, 12:07, Eric Thomas wrote:
} Subject: Re: SCIFAQ errors
} On     Tue,    3     Aug    1993     19:10:39    -0400     Chris    Lewis
} <[log in to unmask]> said:
 
} >But  what's the  sense  of  sending the  200  copies  to the  originator
} >instead? They're unlikely to have been the originator's fault either.
 
} Ok, so what should LISTSERV do? Send  200 copies to the entire list? Send
} 200 copies  to the list owner,  who isn't responsible about  the incident
} either? Quietly throw the message away,  with the result that you'd never
} have known your FAQ wasn't being posted? There is not perfect solution, I
} just thought  it would be  better to send 200  copies to a  single person
} than to the whole list.
 
How about throwing the article away and writing an error log message
that the list-owner can look at?  Is this a tremendously difficult thing?
I don't think so.
 
} >Frankly, I think  the duplicate acknowledge is rather  silly anyways. If
} >the message  got through the first  time, there's no particular  need to
} >tell the originator about the  subsequent duplicates. Just drop the durn
} >thing.
 
} And you'd never have known your FAQ wasn't posted.
 
But my FAQ *was* posted.  Successfully.  Someone else beyond my control
and without my knowledge has chosen to route it to a LISTSERV which has
different rules.  I did not send it to the LISTSERV.  If the LISTSERV has
a problem with it, it's not my concern.  If the LISTSERV has a transmission
problem with it, it's the list owner who should find out.
 
} Anyway, as long as you insist  on applying  usenet  logic  to mailing  lists
} we aren't  getting anywhere.
 
No, I'm applying usenet logic to usenet.  Articles posted to usenet should
never bounce.  I don't care what a gateway is gating to, transmission
problems outside of usenet are the gatewayer's problem.
 
} Duplicates are normal in usenet - normal, and often desired for
} redundancy. On a mailing list, duplicates are an anomaly and often one of
} the visible symptoms  of a serious configuration problem.
 
But we're not talking about mailing lists here, we're talking about a broken
usenet gateway.
 
--
Chris Lewis; [log in to unmask]; Phone: Canada 613 832-0541
Psroff 3.0 info: [log in to unmask]
Ferret list: [log in to unmask]

ATOM RSS1 RSS2