Groups | Search | Server Info | Keyboard shortcuts | Login | Register [http] [https] [nntp] [nntps]
Groups > news.admin.peering > #3349
| Path | csiph.com!pasdenom.info!newsfeed.bofh.team!paganini.bofh.team!tor-network!not-for-mail |
|---|---|
| From | SyberShock! <spamtrap_usenet_001@sybershock.com> |
| Newsgroups | news.admin.peering |
| Subject | Successor to the NNTP Protocol? |
| Date | Tue, 16 Jun 2026 03:57:48 -0000 |
| Organization | To protect and to server |
| Message-ID | <20260616035748.7968ba65@dev> (permalink) |
| Mime-Version | 1.0 |
| Content-Type | text/plain; charset=US-ASCII |
| Content-Transfer-Encoding | 7bit |
| Injection-Info | paganini.bofh.team; logging-data="2954352"; posting-host="VwziB37d9iISmT8NZYm3iw.user.paganini.bofh.team"; mail-complaints-to="usenet@bofh.team"; posting-account="9dIQLXBM7WM9KzA+yjdR4A"; |
| X-Notice | Filtered by postfilter v. 0.9.3 |
| X-TOR-Router | sha256:MTkyLjQyLjExNi45NA== -- |
| Xref | csiph.com news.admin.peering:3349 |
Show key headers only | View raw
If we were to design a successor to the NNTP Protocol updated
for the current era, which changes and features should the
protocol and server provide?
What would be the rationale for such features?
Which would be the best methods for implementing new features?
Which problems should be addressed or solved?
Back to news.admin.peering | Previous | Next — Next in thread | Find similar | Unroll thread
Successor to the NNTP Protocol? SyberShock! <spamtrap_usenet_001@sybershock.com> - 2026-06-16 03:57 +0000 Re: Successor to the NNTP Protocol? D <J@M> - 2026-06-16 18:58 +0200
csiph-web