Re: Proposal: WIT over USENET or MailEhud Shapiro <email@example.com>
Date: Mon, 13 Jun 1994 11:32:04 +0200
From: Ehud Shapiro <firstname.lastname@example.org>
To: Multiple recipients of list <email@example.com>
Subject: Re: Proposal: WIT over USENET or Mail
X-Listprocessor-Version: 6.0c -- ListProcessor by Anastasios Kotsikonas
> From: Tim Berners-Lee <firstname.lastname@example.org>
> > From: Ehud Shapiro <email@example.com>
> > - A general news URL which allows access to any news server on the
> > Internet, in the form of "news://nntpserver_address/article".
> > Owners of the news group may decide whether to flood it
> > through Usenet (i.e. make it global), and whether to allow
> > remote browser access and posting, through standard NNTP/INN
> > mechanisms.
> This has been discussed on the URI list. (If it were WIT it would
> be easy to refer to.!) I am against the idea as it is a perversion
> of the NNTP protocol for uses which eth HTTP protocol was designed.
> You can do the same thing just by running a local HTTP gateway
> into a local newsgroup.
I haven't followed the URI discussion, and "perversion" is a loaded
term. What are the reasons against remote NNTP clients?
And how does an HHTP proxy overcome these reasons?