Skip site navigation (1)Skip section navigation (2)
Date:      Thu, 3 Oct 1996 16:03:18 -0400 (EDT)
From:      "Graydon Hoare ()" <admin@multinet.net>
To:        freebsd-isp@freebsd.org
Subject:   Re: RAID Controller Product
Message-ID:  <Pine.BSF.3.91.961003153815.20647D-100000@house.multinet.net>
In-Reply-To: <199610031815.IAA13726@pegasus.com>

next in thread | previous in thread | raw e-mail | index | archive | help
On Thu, 3 Oct 1996, Richard Foulk wrote:

> Hadn't thought of that.  In that light, more reliable servers (with
> RAID, etc.) may be more appropriate than multiple/redundant servers
> (since that's where this thread started.)

these newsserver threads are weird.

We don't run netnews here because the hardware overhead is too high. But
netnews is designed to be a peer-to-peer thing, right? Where you select where
you get your feeds from, and who else you are willing to feed, ja? So, if
(big IF here) IP6 is designed to make autoconfiguration a reality and people
start having more than just IP numbers in their homes, but actually running
some services as well, isn't it likely that a consumer firmware netnews
server will show up to relieve the centralized points of failure, and ease
the pressure on every site having to carry all of its users' possible
intrests all the time? i.e. one newsserver, one user, that sorts thing? I 
know there are already condominiums going up with ethernets & ISDN 
wirings. Why should NETCOM's ability to keep their servers running 
dictate who, in a whole city, gets to use netnews?

Just thinkin...
-graydon <admin@multinet.net> 



Want to link to this message? Use this URL: <https://mail-archive.FreeBSD.org/cgi/mid.cgi?Pine.BSF.3.91.961003153815.20647D-100000>