From owner-freebsd-isp  Wed Oct 23 14:58:20 1996
Return-Path: owner-isp
Received: (from root@localhost)
          by freefall.freebsd.org (8.7.5/8.7.3) id OAA14186
          for isp-outgoing; Wed, 23 Oct 1996 14:58:20 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from vic.cioe.com (vic.cioe.com [204.120.165.37])
          by freefall.freebsd.org (8.7.5/8.7.3) with ESMTP id OAA14181
          for <freebsd-isp@freebsd.org>; Wed, 23 Oct 1996 14:58:17 -0700 (PDT)
Received: (from root@localhost) by vic.cioe.com (8.7.5/8.7.3) id QAA00885 for freebsd-isp@freebsd.org; Wed, 23 Oct 1996 16:58:46 -0500 (EST)
Date: Wed, 23 Oct 1996 16:58:46 -0500 (EST)
From: Steve Ames <steve@cioe.com>
Message-Id: <199610232158.QAA00885@vic.cioe.com>
To: freebsd-isp@freebsd.org
Subject: nntpcache
Sender: owner-isp@freebsd.org
X-Loop: FreeBSD.org
Precedence: bulk


Warning! Be careful about setting up nntpcache testing. I set up a
couple of servers to run nntpcache to see if it would recurve the news
traffic in a way that I could present to the all powerful accounting
department to get money... a little ways into my test I got an email
from the nntpcache people saying:

It has come to our attention that you are running an unlicensed nntpcache
server. If we get your check within 7 days we will not pursue this matter.

OUCH! So not only do I not complete my tests (actually nntpcache seems
to lock up frequently on my server, requiring a shutdown/restart to make
it function again), but now I'm going to be 'pursued' for running it?

Sheesh! Even M$ lets people test run a good portion of its products.

Just a note! Be Wary. Also, the licensing requirements should probably
be made more plain in the /usr/ports directory. *shrug* (and the 
licensing requirements are harsh)

					-Steve