usenet
in [Design]
|
Prev: Hot! Hot! Hot!
Next: simple circuit simulator
From: Jan Panteltje on 25 May 2010 08:37 It is also possible to post using just telnet and a terminal: telnet nntp.aioe.org 119
From: Jan Panteltje on 25 May 2010 09:05 On a sunny day (Tue, 25 May 2010 12:37:56 GMT) it happened Jan Panteltje <pNaonStpealmtje(a)yahoo.com> wrote in <htggl6$1e9$1(a)speranza.aioe.org>: >It is also possible to post using just telnet and a terminal: >telnet nntp.aioe.org 119 So the way I posted that (via nntp.aioe.og) was like this: Start a telnet session and connect to a news server on the correct port: telnet nntp.aioe.org 119 Trying 94.75.214.90... Connected to nntp.aioe.org. Escape character is '^]'. 200 nntp.aioe.org InterNetNews NNRP server INN 2.5.1 ready (posting ok) You can type 'help for help, and read http://www.w3.org/Protocols/rfc977/rfc977.html first, but if you know all that, and want to post something, then you need to compose the correct header, I did it like this, the lines marked with arrows is what the server replied, I used cut and paste for the references: post 340 Ok, recommended message-ID <htggl6$1e9$1(a)speranza.aioe.org> <--- Message-ID: <htggl6$1e9$1(a)speranza.aioe.org> Newsgroups: sci.electronics.design From: Jan Panteltje <pNaonStpealmtje(a)yahoo.com> Subject: Re: usenet Date: Tue, 25 May 2010 12:37:56 GMT References: <laudv5l9n6n50cqeoo7tnk0772c5mhf072(a)4ax.com> <ht8c2m$13j$1(a)news.albasani.net> <85v7m3F3h7U1(a)mid.individual.net> <htdtea$v8u$1(a)news.albasani.net> <r6slv59sseks34dhcksfipi1gcqi150mpg(a)4ax.com> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-15 User-Agent: I am using telnet nntp.aioe.org 119 It is also possible to post using just telnet and a terminal: telnet nntp.aioe.org 119 .. 240 Article received <htggl6$1e9$1(a)speranza.aioe.org> <--- quit 205 Bye! <--- Connection closed by foreign host. ------------------------------------------------------------------- No typos allowed in the headers.. I accidently typed a space before the 'free format' header 'User-Agent:', but it got through anyways. Reading articles is even easier: group sci.electronics.design 211 5507 98938 104493 sci.electronics.design <--- head 104493 ...... <--server sends header lines body 104493 ..... < server send artilce text Usenet is text based, also for control, very strong:-)
From: JosephKK on 28 May 2010 01:08 On Fri, 21 May 2010 16:10:28 -0700, "Joel Koltner" <zapwireDASHgroups(a)yahoo.com> wrote: >"John Larkin" <jjlarkin(a)highNOTlandTHIStechnologyPART.com> wrote in message >news:laudv5l9n6n50cqeoo7tnk0772c5mhf072(a)4ax.com... >> http://www.theregister.co.uk/2010/05/20/usenet_duke_server/ > >Low usage? Check. > >Rising costs? Come on -- the cost of hard drives and bandwidth for Usenet has >been dropping ever since it started. > >I suspect i'ts more like, "disinterest on the part of the current IT guys, and >low enough usage that no one will squak too loudly if we pull the plug."
From: JosephKK on 28 May 2010 01:32 On Mon, 24 May 2010 08:55:41 +0100, Martin Brown <|||newspam|||@nezumi.demon.co.uk> wrote: >On 22/05/2010 00:10, Joel Koltner wrote: >> "John Larkin" <jjlarkin(a)highNOTlandTHIStechnologyPART.com> wrote in >> message news:laudv5l9n6n50cqeoo7tnk0772c5mhf072(a)4ax.com... >>> http://www.theregister.co.uk/2010/05/20/usenet_duke_server/ >> >> Low usage? Check. > >Basically true. Many of the sci.* groups are dying now due to aggressive >attacks by Chinese spammers, hipcryme and various unsavory trolls. Many >serious players have moved to private mailing lists with partial >moderation or access by invitation only to avoid the problems. > >Same for astronomy, computer chess and software engineering the Usenet >groups are a shadow of their former selves. Mickeysoft has announced it >is cancelling microsoft.public.excel.* on 1st June this year - I don't >think they actually understand how Usenet works :( > >> Rising costs? Come on -- the cost of hard drives and bandwidth for >> Usenet has been dropping ever since it started. > >It is the huge data bandwidth that a push system like Usenet uses >(especially the binary groups). Everything is moved to everywhere by >NNTP whether anyone has asked for it or not. Bzzzt. Wrong. The protocols are defined as a user pull system, and as a transport system. Each server pulls all the locally (user) requested NG and the articles within. Each server transports all the NG that the Admins choose to transport, concentrating on the local users pull NG. Email is more of a push system by far. >By comparison a web based >served on request mechanism with local caching is massively less >consuming of their bandwidth allocation. ie cheaper to run. Who are you trying to fool? Flash laden pages! Graphic saturated pages! Crazy adware gif everywhere you look! >> >> I suspect i'ts more like, "disinterest on the part of the current IT >> guys, and low enough usage that no one will squak too loudly if we pull >> the plug." You are way, way too generous. Try blazing ignorance, major arrogance, and blissful incompetence instead of bothering to make actual measurements. > >Most ISPs have come to the conclusion that there is no future for them >in providing a Usenet service. It costs them very dear in bandwidth >charges and they cannot make money from it. No. It is simply a minor market that they can afford to forgo. > >Regards, >Martin Brown >
From: Dave Platt on 28 May 2010 14:19
In article <n6kuv5p4cka9huuerh8v9abneon06nve0e(a)4ax.com>, JosephKK <quiettechblue(a)yahoo.com> wrote: >>It is the huge data bandwidth that a push system like Usenet uses >>(especially the binary groups). Everything is moved to everywhere by >>NNTP whether anyone has asked for it or not. > >Bzzzt. Wrong. The protocols are defined as a user pull system, and as a >transport system. Each server pulls all the locally (user) requested NG >and the articles within. Each server transports all the NG that the >Admins choose to transport, concentrating on the local users pull NG. The NNTP protocol supports both push-style and pull-style operation. Backbone-to-backbone connections often operate in "push" mode, with the sending site having a receiving site's subscription list (which may include wildcards to push all articles in entire newsgroup hierarchies). The sending site will send an IHAVE message for each qualifying article it has, and the receiving site will send back a specific request for each article it hasn't received via another path. The IHAVE messages identify the article by its messageID, but do not specify what newsgroups it's posted to... and thus the filtering of articles by newsgroup has to be done at the pushing side. Reader connections (client-to-server) generally operate in a "pull" mode, with the client asking for the article IDs of new messages in specific newsgroups, and then pulling the articles desired. Small "leaf node" servers often use the client (reader) protocols to connect to larger (backbone) servers. This allows the leaf site's subscription list to be managed locally (e.g. adjusting it automatically based on read requests from local clients). Historically, USENET news has also been handled via protocols other than NNTP. Originally, UUCP transport was used, and this was (I believe) always in "push" or "offer" mode. -- Dave Platt <dplatt(a)radagast.org> AE6EO Friends of Jade Warrior home page: http://www.radagast.org/jade-warrior I do _not_ wish to receive unsolicited commercial email, and I will boycott any company which has the gall to send me such ads! |