21 ms·
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Network_News_Transfer_Protocol https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Network_News_Transfer_Protocol Originally over UUCP (Unix Unix Copy
by shagie 3y ago
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Network_News_Transfer_Protocol https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Network_News_Transfer_Protocol
Originally over UUCP (Unix Unix Copy Protocol) and done via dial ups at night (when the rest of the batch transfers were done - email too with the old bang path). The two servers would exchange all the batched email and news posts that were routed to the other side.
RFC 977 ( https://www.w3.org/Protocols/rfc977/rfc977 https://www.w3.org/Protocols/rfc977/rfc977 ) has an example of how files are copied between the two systems (section 4.6) including fetching and receiving mail.
Note that not all posts outbound are necessarily of interest to the other server. An IHAVE message could come back with either a "I want it" type response or a "not interested"
> The IHAVE command informs the server that the client has an article whose id is <messageid>. If the server desires a copy of that article, it will return a response instructing the client to send the entire article. If the server does not want the article (if, for example, the server already has a copy of it), a response indicating that the article is not wanted will be returned.
That's how some of the moderation worked - your server would say "I don't want anything that came by way of X host" or "not interested in that newsgroup."
One of the amusing things to me (looking back at this), if you're familiar with HTTP response codes, you'll likely get most of the way through the NNTP ones.
200 server ready - posting allowed
400 service discontinued
411 no such news group
500 command not recognized
I'd also suggest a read of RFC 850 ( https://www.w3.org/Protocols/rfc850/rfc850.html https://www.w3.org/Protocols/rfc850/rfc850.html ) for some other background and section 5: The News Propagation Algorithm
- dylan604 3y agoBut how did all of this line up within the federated or not conversation? If each ISP could host their own version, that doesn't sound federated. But who was in control of the "main" source of truth type of version?
- shagie 3y agoThere was no "main" source of truth for each version and each ISP could have its own set of posts. The bofh.* hierarchy for example had a very limited distribution and if it was found that one of the sites that provided it was leaking it to the general public they'd collectively cut off sites from being able to post or receive posts until they rectify their configuration. http://usenet.trigofacile.com/hierarchies/index.py?status=private http://usenet.trigofacile.com/hierarchies/index.py?status=pr... and https://web.archive.org/web/20220815151921/http://bofh.taronga.com/bofh.html https://web.archive.org/web/20220815151921/http://bofh.taron... Sure, an ISP could host its own news.answers site and not accept posts from others for that group nor pass messages from it out to others... but that would be a rather lonely place. Likewise, one ISP may have a different set of posts that it shows for a news group because of moderation actions (we don't accept any posts greater than 1MB in size because of disk space issues and we don't host any newsgroup named *.binaries). Federation comes from exchanging those posts using a common protocol - NNTP.
- sitkack 3y agoBecause there is no central controller of NTTP feeds or data streams.