From owner-freebsd-chat  Wed Oct 25 11:55:12 1995
Return-Path: owner-chat
Received: (from root@localhost)
          by freefall.freebsd.org (8.6.12/8.6.6) id LAA05338
          for chat-outgoing; Wed, 25 Oct 1995 11:55:12 -0700
Received: from alpha.xerox.com (alpha.Xerox.COM [13.1.64.93])
          by freefall.freebsd.org (8.6.12/8.6.6) with SMTP id LAA05333
          for <chat@freebsd.org>; Wed, 25 Oct 1995 11:55:09 -0700
Received: from crevenia.parc.xerox.com ([13.2.116.11]) by alpha.xerox.com with SMTP id <15328(1)>; Wed, 25 Oct 1995 11:51:13 PDT
Received: from localhost by crevenia.parc.xerox.com with SMTP id <177478>; Wed, 25 Oct 1995 11:50:50 -0700
X-Mailer: exmh version 1.6.1 5/23/95
To: Ollivier Robert <roberto@keltia.freenix.fr>
cc: chat@freebsd.org
Subject: Re: moving some mail. 
In-reply-to: Your message of "Wed, 25 Oct 95 01:36:01 PDT."
             <199510250836.JAA22840@keltia.freenix.fr> 
Mime-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii
Date: Wed, 25 Oct 1995 11:50:48 PDT
From: Bill Fenner <fenner@parc.xerox.com>
Message-Id: <95Oct25.115050pdt.177478@crevenia.parc.xerox.com>
Sender: owner-chat@freebsd.org
Precedence: bulk

In message <199510250836.JAA22840@keltia.freenix.fr> you write:
>Usenet  can make it more   then twenty... 

Using INN and nntplink, I have seen propogation times of 100ms per article, 
making 20 hops 2 seconds.  That's dealable =)

The USENET paradigm can also make things much better for the overloaded EU<>US 
link; one (or two or three) copy flows and gets redistributed on the other 
side, instead of the email copy-per-subscriber...

This whole one-fanout-point thing is the problem (and it's clear that jmb 
recognizes that).  I'm simply suggesting that adding on another single fanout 
point may not be the best solution.

  Bill