Re: Our pal, Netcom

["Mario M. Butter" <mbutter@tower.clark.net>]

I can take over the list right now. I have the software setup (I run 4 other
lists), and I don't get charged for mail. I even maintain a message archive
for the other lists, which can be done for Atlantia-L.

And I'm *in* Atlantia, also.

Mario

Mario M. Butter            |GAT d++$ H>++ s:+ !g !p au+ a?  w+++ v++(-) C++
mbutter@tower.clark.net    |UL++++$ P+>++++ L++>++++ 3 N+++ E--- K-- W---
gaummb@fnma.com            |M-- V-- -po+ Y+ t++ 5++ jx R++ G' tv+++ b+++ !D
#include <std_disclaimer.h>|B-- e* u*@ h---- f* r+++ !n y** GeekCode v2.1

On Thu, 11 Jan 1996 francis@tigana.microserve.com wrote:

> At 4:33 AM 9.01.96, John Strauss wrote:
> >Tanner,
> >
> >        I think that atlantia-l is a fine and wonderful thing.
> >But it really does seem as if Netcom is choking it.
> [...]
> >        I request that you look for a different home for the list.
> 
> The ISP where I have this PPP service will host a list for $15/mo plus a
> $15 setup.  That's for 5000 outgoing messages/month; each additional 1000
> msgs is an extra $2.  Anybody know how many people are on the list? ('cause
> the # of msgs each of us sees will be multiplied by the # of recipients)
> 
> As for how to pay for it--take up a collection? (Me, I'd gladly give a
> month or two's worth.) If we collected enough to pay for it for the first
> year or two, it'd be stable enough to count on.  (Semi-silly idea: manifest
> the Merry Rose Tavern at an event, as a fundraiser.  It'd certainly be a
> stark contrast to sca-east, where the concept of naming the list at all was
> roundly shouted down.  :-)
> 
> Or there may well be cheaper/better options.  (Maybe we'd prefer to
> patronize an ISP somewhere in Atlantia.  :-) But, if we're willing to pay,
> we ought to be able to find something better than Netcom (which isn't
> charging at all, right?).
> 
> >Messages from netcom accounts are distributed with no real delay;
> 
> For what it's worth, this is probably a side effect, not deliberate
> sabotage on Netcom's part.  Quick burst of geekery (non-geeks can stop
> reading; there's nothing interesting left in this message): if sendmail
> can't deliver a message immediately, it gets queued.  This means that, if
> the system handling mail is overloaded--say, it can handle only N messages
> per hour, and it's getting 2*N--then the queue will keep growing until the
> load drops (in this case, it'll grow by N messages per hour).  But mail
> from Netcom users probably gets processed on the machine they're sending
> from, rather than going through the same machine that handles all the
> inbound mail.  <rummage in DNS and SMTP...yup, I think that's right> Since
> the user machines are less loaded (they'd have to be, or Netcom would lose
> their customers), mail from them goes straight out.
> 
> To make things more confusing, the queue is serviced in reverse order.
> Strange, but there is a good reason: if your mail is bogging down, you want
> complaints to the postmaster to take priority over the normal traffic that
> preceded them.
> 
> /===========================================================================\
> |John (Francis) Stracke        | http://www.io.com/~francis | PGP key on Web|
> |francis@tigana.microserve.com |============================================|
> |Power Mac w/PPP               | Do not suspect that I am not human.        |
> |My Mac, my opinions.          |                                            |
> \===========================================================================/
>   Francois Thibault          AFP of PA!       Shire of the Blak Rose (East)
>   Argent, a cock gules, and, on a chief sable, three standing stones argent
> 
>