New Thread
I was thinking of an NNTP server that would be on the scale of Aaron's
example, and not Leif's.
I never really liked the archiving done by pipermail/mailman, its hard to
make threads cross archiving intervals.
I would like to see a mailbox exported to a nntp group. that way archives
can be offloaded or browsed in the user's local client.
'I would like to see' is starting to become 'I would like to program' as I
am starting to like and deploy dbmail, twice in the last week.
My first requirement is an nntp export only with dbmail-smtp insertion - that
is all I need/want. But other features are welcomed to be identified.
Anyone else think this is a good idea? bad idea?
ed
On Mon, 15 Mar 2004, Aaron Stone wrote:
> On more fundamental open source grounds, requests like these are generally
> just useless noise. Development happens when someone wants some software to do
> x,y,z task, cannot find anything to their liking, and so the person then goes
> and writes the software themselves. If they share it with others, that's when
> you get open source!
>
> I've always wanted to have a simple local news server that was also easily
> connected to a web forum. The lack of any sort of standardization among
> forums, or worse, the ones that try to use DAV and XML to "share" drives me
> nuts. So I've never had my small little news site. That's the itch that I
> might scratch by writing an NNTP server.
>
> Leif's advice is well taken, though. Usenet is a scary place to be; I've seen
> the news servers at my local ISP keep the access lights on a RAID array
> solidly lit all day and all night. And it's a small ISP.
>
> Aaron
>
>
> ""Leif Jackson"" <ljackson@jjcons.com> said:
>
> > Ed, For good reason,
> >
> > I used to work for one of the worlds largest NNTP providers. And believe
> > me from experience we do not want to get into NNTP stuff. The reason none
> > of the currently available NNTP server code uses an RDBM is that the file
> > IO is so heavy and requires so much IO that it takes all of a fiber
> > channel disk system and Sun 420R's with 4G of ram to keep up with a full
> > NNTP feed. Much less serve any end users. Roughly about 65Mbps (to
> > 90Mbps) for a full feed now, scary eh?
> >
> > my suggestion is to leave nntp alone :)
> >
> > -leif
> >
> > > Let me know when the NNTP service starts development.
> > > No other NNTP servers that I've found use a RDBMS backend.
> > >
> > > ed
> > >
> > > On Mon, 15 Mar 2004, Aaron Stone wrote:
> > >
> > >> This is really, really good... I wonder if it can be combined with a
> > >> macro or
> > >> built into a macro so that the "if (ci_write) return -1" could be
> > >> "ci_write"
> > >> and since there's only ever one stream to write, "ci->tx" could be
> > >> assumed.
> > >>
> > >> The LMTP code doesn't use the ClientInfo structure, but in the process
> > >> of
> > >> refactoring the server code these sorts of micro-differences should be
> > >> brought
> > >> together so that the ClientInfo structure is either generic enough or
> > >> beefy
> > >> enough (just toss all of the different elements into it) to handle IMAP,
> > >> POP,
> > >> LMTP, and whatever else comes next (NNTP anyone? ;-)
> > >>
> > >> Aaron
> > >>
> > >>
> > >> Paul J Stevens <paul@nfg.nl> said:
> > >>
> > >> >
> > >> > Hi all,
> > >> >
> > >> > Since there were no takers, I did a follow-up on my earlier conclusion
> > >> > that the networking code could do with some improvements.
> > >> >
> > >> > For those of you who haven't followed the list; dbmail2 won't work
> > >> with
> > >> > mozilla and derivatives.
> > >> >
> > >> > I've wrapped the code talking to clients in simple wrappers with error
> > >> > checking, and lo; mozilla suddenly works just fine with dbmail2 :-)
> > >> >
> > >> > As a proof-of-concept I'm attaching my patch against the HEAD branch
> > >> as
> > >> > of today.
> > >> >
> > >> > This is not for inclusion in CVS just yet. It's still kind of rough,
> > >> but
> > >> > I wanted to share my relief that this really does appear to fix the
> > >> bug.
> > >> > Also, pop3.c and lmtpd.c would probably also benefit from this
> > >> approach
> > >> > as well.
> > >> >
> > >> > IMO imap4.c and friends could do with some re-indenting. Looks like
> > >> > there are several different indent-styles intertwined in the code. Any
> > >> > consensus on that regard ?
> > >> >
> > >> >
> > >> > --
> > >> > ________________________________________________________________
> > >> > Paul Stevens mailto:paul@nfg.nl
> > >> > NET FACILITIES GROUP PGP: finger paul@nfg.nl
> > >> > The Netherlands________________________________http://www.nfg.nl
> > >> >
> > >> >
> > >>
> > >>
> > >>
> > >> --
> > >>
> > >>
> > >>
> > >> _______________________________________________
> > >> Dbmail-dev mailing list
> > >> Dbmail-dev@dbmail.org
> > >> http://twister.fastxs.net/mailman/listinfo/dbmail-dev
> > >>
> > >
> > > Security on the internet is impossible without strong, open,
> > > and unhindered encryption.
> > >
> > > _______________________________________________
> > > Dbmail-dev mailing list
> > > Dbmail-dev@dbmail.org
> > > http://twister.fastxs.net/mailman/listinfo/dbmail-dev
> > >
> >
> > _______________________________________________
> > Dbmail-dev mailing list
> > Dbmail-dev@dbmail.org
> > http://twister.fastxs.net/mailman/listinfo/dbmail-dev
> >
>
>
>
> --
>
>
>
> _______________________________________________
> Dbmail-dev mailing list
> Dbmail-dev@dbmail.org
> http://twister.fastxs.net/mailman/listinfo/dbmail-dev
>
I was thinking of an NNTP server that would be on the scale of Aaron's
example, and not Leif's.
I never really liked the archiving done by pipermail/mailman, its hard to
make threads cross archiving intervals.
I would like to see a mailbox exported to a nntp group. that way archives
can be offloaded or browsed in the user's local client.
'I would like to see' is starting to become 'I would like to program' as I
am starting to like and deploy dbmail, twice in the last week.
My first requirement is an nntp export only with dbmail-smtp insertion - that
is all I need/want. But other features are welcomed to be identified.
Anyone else think this is a good idea? bad idea?
ed
On Mon, 15 Mar 2004, Aaron Stone wrote:
> On more fundamental open source grounds, requests like these are generally
> just useless noise. Development happens when someone wants some software to do
> x,y,z task, cannot find anything to their liking, and so the person then goes
> and writes the software themselves. If they share it with others, that's when
> you get open source!
>
> I've always wanted to have a simple local news server that was also easily
> connected to a web forum. The lack of any sort of standardization among
> forums, or worse, the ones that try to use DAV and XML to "share" drives me
> nuts. So I've never had my small little news site. That's the itch that I
> might scratch by writing an NNTP server.
>
> Leif's advice is well taken, though. Usenet is a scary place to be; I've seen
> the news servers at my local ISP keep the access lights on a RAID array
> solidly lit all day and all night. And it's a small ISP.
>
> Aaron
>
>
> ""Leif Jackson"" <ljackson@jjcons.com> said:
>
> > Ed, For good reason,
> >
> > I used to work for one of the worlds largest NNTP providers. And believe
> > me from experience we do not want to get into NNTP stuff. The reason none
> > of the currently available NNTP server code uses an RDBM is that the file
> > IO is so heavy and requires so much IO that it takes all of a fiber
> > channel disk system and Sun 420R's with 4G of ram to keep up with a full
> > NNTP feed. Much less serve any end users. Roughly about 65Mbps (to
> > 90Mbps) for a full feed now, scary eh?
> >
> > my suggestion is to leave nntp alone :)
> >
> > -leif
> >
> > > Let me know when the NNTP service starts development.
> > > No other NNTP servers that I've found use a RDBMS backend.
> > >
> > > ed
> > >
> > > On Mon, 15 Mar 2004, Aaron Stone wrote:
> > >
> > >> This is really, really good... I wonder if it can be combined with a
> > >> macro or
> > >> built into a macro so that the "if (ci_write) return -1" could be
> > >> "ci_write"
> > >> and since there's only ever one stream to write, "ci->tx" could be
> > >> assumed.
> > >>
> > >> The LMTP code doesn't use the ClientInfo structure, but in the process
> > >> of
> > >> refactoring the server code these sorts of micro-differences should be
> > >> brought
> > >> together so that the ClientInfo structure is either generic enough or
> > >> beefy
> > >> enough (just toss all of the different elements into it) to handle IMAP,
> > >> POP,
> > >> LMTP, and whatever else comes next (NNTP anyone? ;-)
> > >>
> > >> Aaron
> > >>
> > >>
> > >> Paul J Stevens <paul@nfg.nl> said:
> > >>
> > >> >
> > >> > Hi all,
> > >> >
> > >> > Since there were no takers, I did a follow-up on my earlier conclusion
> > >> > that the networking code could do with some improvements.
> > >> >
> > >> > For those of you who haven't followed the list; dbmail2 won't work
> > >> with
> > >> > mozilla and derivatives.
> > >> >
> > >> > I've wrapped the code talking to clients in simple wrappers with error
> > >> > checking, and lo; mozilla suddenly works just fine with dbmail2 :-)
> > >> >
> > >> > As a proof-of-concept I'm attaching my patch against the HEAD branch
> > >> as
> > >> > of today.
> > >> >
> > >> > This is not for inclusion in CVS just yet. It's still kind of rough,
> > >> but
> > >> > I wanted to share my relief that this really does appear to fix the
> > >> bug.
> > >> > Also, pop3.c and lmtpd.c would probably also benefit from this
> > >> approach
> > >> > as well.
> > >> >
> > >> > IMO imap4.c and friends could do with some re-indenting. Looks like
> > >> > there are several different indent-styles intertwined in the code. Any
> > >> > consensus on that regard ?
> > >> >
> > >> >
> > >> > --
> > >> > ________________________________________________________________
> > >> > Paul Stevens mailto:paul@nfg.nl
> > >> > NET FACILITIES GROUP PGP: finger paul@nfg.nl
> > >> > The Netherlands________________________________http://www.nfg.nl
> > >> >
> > >> >
> > >>
> > >>
> > >>
> > >> --
> > >>
> > >>
> > >>
> > >> _______________________________________________
> > >> Dbmail-dev mailing list
> > >> Dbmail-dev@dbmail.org
> > >> http://twister.fastxs.net/mailman/listinfo/dbmail-dev
> > >>
> > >
> > > Security on the internet is impossible without strong, open,
> > > and unhindered encryption.
> > >
> > > _______________________________________________
> > > Dbmail-dev mailing list
> > > Dbmail-dev@dbmail.org
> > > http://twister.fastxs.net/mailman/listinfo/dbmail-dev
> > >
> >
> > _______________________________________________
> > Dbmail-dev mailing list
> > Dbmail-dev@dbmail.org
> > http://twister.fastxs.net/mailman/listinfo/dbmail-dev
> >
>
>
>
> --
>
>
>
> _______________________________________________
> Dbmail-dev mailing list
> Dbmail-dev@dbmail.org
> http://twister.fastxs.net/mailman/listinfo/dbmail-dev
>