From: Charles Lindsey (chl@clerew.man.ac.uk)
Date: Mon Jan 26 2004 - 06:47:49 CST
In <87zncejmoh.fsf@windlord.stanford.edu> Russ Allbery <rra@stanford.edu> writes:
>Charles Lindsey <chl@clerew.man.ac.uk> writes:
>> Seth Breidbart <sethb@panix.com> writes:
>>> If history is 2 days, and you allow 2.5 day old articles, then the same
>>> article can show up twice.
>> In practice, though, history file entriess are typically kept for at
>> least 14 days so as to avoid that problem.
>What evidence do you have to support this statement? It does not jive
>with my operational experience and isn't even consistent with INN's
>defaults.
It's the default in CNews.
And in the days when transatlantic propagation delays were regularly 7
days, it was very necessary. Agreed it could be safely less now, but 2
days seems dangerously short, as Henry seems to agree.
Anyway, the purpose of this discussion is to decide what number to write
in for how stale an article could be allowed to be at the injector. John
Stanley said 24 hours was too short. I suggested 72 hours as a possible
answer. There has to be _some_ number there. I am waiting for further
suggestions or agreements.
-- Charles H. Lindsey ---------At Home, doing my own thing------------------------ Tel: +44 161 436 6131 Fax: +44 161 436 6133 Web: http://www.cs.man.ac.uk/~chl Email: chl@clerew.man.ac.uk Snail: 5 Clerewood Ave, CHEADLE, SK8 3JU, U.K. PGP: 2C15F1A9 Fingerprint: 73 6D C2 51 93 A0 01 E7 65 E8 64 7E 14 A4 AB A5