nanog mailing list archives
Re: Motion for a new POST NSF AUP
From: "William B. Norton" <wbn () merit edu>
Date: Mon, 16 Oct 1995 11:06:14 -0400 (EDT)
I personally think slightly smarter exploders might go a long way. For example: 1) a list server that recognizes the "subscribe me" messages and informs the subscriber without bothering the whole list, 2) an exploder that "suspends" messages with more than, say 6 lists and newsgroups, and notifies the sender. If the sender is not a real address, it automatically is purged. : you get the idea. Bill ------------------------------------------------------------------------- William B. Norton Merit Network Inc. e-mail: wbn () merit edu phone: (313) 936-2656 WWW: http://home.merit.edu/~wbn On Mon, 16 Oct 1995, Tim Bass wrote:
The motion on the table for a Post NSF AUP appears to be dying. The support for my motion is weak in the early stages. I like the idea of PGP authentication in list servers, except for the fact that adding PGP authentication to list servers will greatly slow down the processing time of large lists. The large public key rings required for large lists do not scale well. Second, the use of PGP authentication would restrict list participation to those with the ability to use PGP (this might be a *good* way to promote PGP use, on the other hand) Unless strong support for the AUP motion is observed today, I plan to table the motion for a Post NSF AUP for the Internet. The general concensus appears to be that an AUP would not be useful. I do not agree, but am more than happy to withdraw my motion, given weak support the AUP idea has received. The ideas for PGP authentication merit further discussion, especially the points above on reduced processing time with large public key rings. Thanks, Tim -- +--------------------------------------------------------------------------+ | Tim Bass | #include<campfire.h> | | Principal Network Systems Engineer | for(beer=100;beer>1;beer++){ | | The Silk Road Group, Ltd. | take_one_down(); | | | pass_it_around(); | | http://www.silkroad.com/ | } | | | back_to_work(); /*never reached */ | +--------------------------------------------------------------------------+
Current thread:
- Motion for a new POST NSF AUP Tim Bass (Oct 15)
- Re: Motion for a new POST NSF AUP Theodore Ts'o (Oct 15)
- <Possible follow-ups>
- Re: Motion for a new POST NSF AUP John Curran (Oct 15)
- Re: Motion for a new POST NSF AUP Tim Bass (Oct 15)
- Re: Motion for a new POST NSF AUP bcurnow (Oct 15)
- Re: Motion for a new POST NSF AUP Justin Newton (Oct 17)
- Re: Motion for a new POST NSF AUP George Herbert (Oct 15)
- Re: Motion for a new POST NSF AUP Philip J. Nesser (Oct 15)
- Re: Motion for a new POST NSF AUP Tim Bass (Oct 15)
- Re: Motion for a new POST NSF AUP Henry W. Miller (Oct 16)
- Re: Motion for a new POST NSF AUP Tim Bass (Oct 16)
- Re: Motion for a new POST NSF AUP William B. Norton (Oct 16)
- Re: Motion for a new POST NSF AUP Forrest W. Christian (Oct 16)
- Re: Motion for a new POST NSF AUP Tim Bass (Oct 16)
- Re: Motion for a new POST NSF AUP William Allen Simpson (Oct 16)
- Re: Motion for a new POST NSF AUP Forrest W. Christian (Oct 16)
- Re: Motion for a new POST NSF AUP Theodore Ts'o (Oct 16)
- Re: Motion for a new POST NSF AUP William Allen Simpson (Oct 16)
- Re: Motion for a new POST NSF AUP Havard . Eidnes (Oct 16)
- Re: Motion for a new POST NSF AUP Vadim Antonov (Oct 16)
- Re: Motion for a new POST NSF AUP William Allen Simpson (Oct 16)
- Re: Motion for a new POST NSF AUP Jeff . Ogden (Oct 16)
- Re: Motion for a new POST NSF AUP Barry Shein (Oct 16)