🚀 go-pugleaf

In article <1991May22.141737.26521@sceard.Sceard.COM> mrm@Sceard.COM (M.R.Murphy) writes:
>In article <1991May22.040039.21721@iguana.uucp> merce@iguana.uucp (Jim Mercer) writes:

>>Goal: reduce MBAS impact on USENET
>>Administrative: get MBAS's to straighten up their act.

>Close. Real close. How to straighten up the act is another question.
>How about having the MBAS not abuse its downstream sites unless they are
>masochistic enough to accept the abuse willingly. That is, have the MBAS
>check if the entire path for a transfer is cooperative. If it doesn't
>know that an element of the path is cooperative, then that element should
>be deemed non-cooperative, and the whole path is ng. Politely notifiy the
>requestor to that effect. By "check the path", I mean "check the path."
>As in "an address isn't good enough, you gotta check the path, and
>every element in the path must be explicitly cooperative." Not hard to
>do in software.

What about a new line in everyone's map entry stating whether they will forward
MBAS mail?  Or perhaps a line which states the maximum number of Megs that
a particular site is willing to accept? (0 would mean don't send MBAS stuff
through me at all).  Then MBAS's could go through the path to a user and if
all the sites along the path explicitly allowed MBAS files, then it would
be ok to send, otherwise - NIX.

This would mean that MBAS's would have to start getting the map files (which 
they probably don't have, being on the internet).   

Anyone that REALLY wants to get MBAS mail can update their map entry and
convince sites upstream to do so also.  Anyone who doesn't want MBAS traffic
can simply do nothing.

scott
 
-- 
Scott J.M. Campbell                                   scott@skypod.guild.org
Skypod Communications Inc.            ..!gatech!dscatl!daysinns!skypod!scott
1001 Bay Street, Suite 1210           ..!uunet!utai!lsuc!becker!skypod!scott
Toronto, Ont. (416) 924-4059          ..!epas.utoronto.ca!nyama!skypod!scott