Proposal: Distributed Debian Mailing Lists (fwd)
This message was not delivered the first two times due to problems with
the mailing lists.
I wonder though if it would not be better to run a network of small NNTP
Servers instead of the mailing lists? The NNTP protocol would avoid
sending duplicate messages across the net.
--- +++ --- +++ --- +++ --- +++ --- +++ --- +++ --- +++ ---
PGP Public Key = FB 9B 31 21 04 1E 3A 33 C7 62 2F C0 CD 81 CA B5
---------- Forwarded message ----------
Date: Wed, 11 Dec 1996 08:41:38 -0800 (PST)
From: Christoph Lameter <clameter@waterf.org>
To: debian-devel@lists.debian.org
Subject: Proposal: Distributed Debian Mailing Lists
Given the constant problems with our mailing lists I think the following
might be a solution:
1. The mailing lists are distributed and services by people volunteering
resources and the hosts carrying those lists are are named
lists1.debian.org
lists2.debian.org
etc.
2. All public accessible lists are available from every lists host.
There is a special hosts (lists.debian.org) that carries the restricted
mailing lists (like debian-private).
3. All hosts run SmartList and list as the first subscribers to each list
debian-xxx@lists1.debian.org
debian-xxx@lists2.debian.org
...
so that all messages are sent out to all other exploders first.
4. A user can subscribe/unsubscribe to any listserver at will and will
only be served by that listserver. It is easy to simply subscribe to
another listserver in case that the one subscribed to causes trouble.
The disadvantages:
- No central control anymore for public mailing lists.
- There will be redundant traffic between those lists servers sending
e-mail that are already on the lists (but SmartList keep the ids of
mails and identifies and drops those e-mails).
--- +++ --- +++ --- +++ --- +++ --- +++ --- +++ --- +++ ---
PGP Public Key = FB 9B 31 21 04 1E 3A 33 C7 62 2F C0 CD 81 CA B5
--
TO UNSUBSCRIBE FROM THIS MAILING LIST: e-mail the word "unsubscribe" to
debian-devel-REQUEST@lists.debian.org . Trouble? e-mail to Bruce@Pixar.com
Reply to: