From: Matthias Andree (ma@dt.e-technik.uni-dortmund.de)
Date: Wed Apr 02 2003 - 16:41:19 CST
"Charles Lindsey" <chl@clw.cs.man.ac.uk> writes:
> In <m33cl3zjqd.fsf@merlin.emma.line.org> Matthias Andree <ma@dt.e-technik.uni-dortmund.de> writes:
>
>>Part of this "best current practice" could be a clause that states to
>>write "!binary" as last or next-to-last part of the Path (you'll usually
>>find !not-for-mail there today) -- and then the path exclude would
>>work. No "filters" needed, just a mail or call to the feeder (upstream)
>>telling him "please add binfor to my path excludes".
>
> Actually, that could be quite a good solution to the problem (but as the
> next-to-last, not the last item in the Path).
OK, then the next-to-last. Fine with me.
> Certainly good for keeping binaries out of a server. Maybe not so good
> for user agents (for sure it won't be in the overview).
Jürgen has not laid out what the actual problem is, so we can only
guess. I read his posts as though he was trying to take load off the
servers to "de-annoy" them -- and as I wrote, servers don't usually talk
XOVER between one another, but use IHAVE or UUCP and rnews.
If he wants to hide binaries from the user agent, then he should take
care that the administration of the relevant subhierarchy makes a clear
distinction between the binary groups and the textual groups. If he
needs user agents to filter, he'd better talk to his ISP and have him
include Content-Type in the overview. This is likely outside Usefor
though.
-- Matthias Andree