Verizon Policy Statement on Net Neutrality

Scott Helms khelms at zcorum.com
Mon Mar 2 20:50:35 UTC 2015


Odd how the graphing for the top 1000 Usenet servers showed exactly the
pattern I predicted.
On Mar 2, 2015 3:46 PM, "Barry Shein" <bzs at world.std.com> wrote:

>
>  > Anything based on NNTP would be extremely asymmetric without significant
>  > changes to the protocol or human behavior.
>  >
>  > We ran significant Usenet servers with binaries for nearly 20 years and
>  > without for another 5 and the servers' traffic was heavily asymmetric.
>  > On Mar 1, 2015 9:11 AM, "Miles Fidelman" <mfidelman at meetinghouse.net>
> wrote:
>
> With all due respect it's like people act purposely obtuse just to
> argue.
>
> If you're a Usenet server (and most likely client) then it'll be
> somewhat symmetric.
>
> Depending on how many nodes you serve the bias could easily be towards
> upload bandwidth as msgs come in once (ideally) but you flood them to
> all the other servers you serve once per server, the entire traffic
> goes out multiple times, plus or minus various optimizations like
> "already have that msg" oh for the love of all that is good and holy
> do I have to type the entire NNTP protocol spec in here just to make
> sure there isn't some microscopic crack of light someone can use to
> misinterpret and/or pick nits about???
>
> What was the original question because I think this has degenerated
> into just argumentativeness, we're on the verge of spelling and
> grammar error flames.
>
> I don't know how anyone who claims to have run Usenet servers couldn't
> know all this, is it just trolling?
>
> --
>         -Barry Shein
>
> The World              | bzs at TheWorld.com           |
> http://www.TheWorld.com
> Purveyors to the Trade | Voice: 800-THE-WRLD        | Dial-Up: US, PR,
> Canada
> Software Tool & Die    | Public Access Internet     | SINCE 1989     *oo*
>


More information about the NANOG mailing list