🚀 go-pugleaf

In article <3smrr9$jnp@frigate.doc.ic.ac.uk>, vsn@ic.ac.uk (Vartan Narinian)
says:

>Other UK subscribers also have the same problem. It seems to have started
>late on the 16th of June.

Someone else has observed poor response with .AC.UK too (via the
lstown-l list)

>Another weird thing is that although listserv messages are delivered
>via SMTP directly to our mail server, the messages sent to the list
>go via UKACRL.BITNET and then to ib.rl.ac.uk. Obviously this is much
>slower. I recall that some time ago they were getting delivered via
>Internet SMTP to our server.

ib.rl.ac.uk is the same host as UKACRL, at least according to the
Bitearn Nodes dbase.  LISTSERV@UKACRL is responding to a THANKS
command.

In terms of slowness of going throug UKACRL, you could easily be
correct for single messages, but LISTSERV does not usually deal
with single messages, but mass mailings using a Distribute
algorithm designed to reduce WAN traffic at (perhaps) the expense
of CPU utilitization.  It used to be that transoceanic links were
the slowest link in the chain and that total traffic through that
link needed to be minimized.  (Probably still a good idea.)

--  co-owner INFOSYS, TQM-L, CPARK-L, ERAPPA-L, JANITORS, LDBASE-L, et -L
Pete-Weiss@psu.edu        "I get paid by the Byte"        +1 814 863 1843
31 Shields Bldg. --   Penn State    -- University Park, PA 16802-1202 USA