Date: Thu, 23 Nov 1995 16:04:57 -0500 (EST) From: "Jonathan M. Bresler" <jmb@kryten.Atinc.COM> To: freebsd-hubs@freebsd.org Subject: NNTP as transport for mail (fwd) Message-ID: <Pine.3.89.9511231640.Q20122-0100000@kryten.atinc.com>
next in thread | raw e-mail | index | archive | help
Date: Thu, 23 Nov 1995 12:28:39 -0800 From: Jordan K. Hubbard <jkh@time.cdrom.com> To: Joe Greco <jgreco@brasil.moneng.mei.com> Cc: me@gw.muc.ditec.de, terry@lambert.org, hackers@freebsd.org Subject: Re: 2.1.0-RELEASE now available! > I would suggest using NNTP strictly as a transport protocol. Bury the > articles in an encoded format in a moderated newsgroup, so that people don't > try to use the transport newsgroup to read or post messages. At each hub, > you can install channel feeds for the transport newsgroup that pipe the > articles into an extraction/verification filter. The filter then turns > around and submits the decoded and verified message into Sendmail (and/or > INN under a different group name). I would say that if our postmaster agrees with this, and wants to do it this way, then it's purely his business and you guys should just set it up. Not to sound perfunctory about it, I'm simply trying to make the point that if it makes his life easier and delivers better service (which is a big goal of his little department) then he should use whatever tools are available and nobody has any *place* shooting it down. Likewise, since he's doing the work, if he decides he can't or doesn't want to deal with the complexity then we really can't force him to say yes. His area of responsibility, hence his decision. To me, it actually sounds pretty cool! :-) Jordan
Want to link to this message? Use this URL: <https://mail-archive.FreeBSD.org/cgi/mid.cgi?Pine.3.89.9511231640.Q20122-0100000>