Groups | Search | Server Info | Keyboard shortcuts | Login | Register [http] [https] [nntp] [nntps]

Groups > news.admin.peering > #3421 > unrolled thread

another peeve with newsmaster who dont do common sense

Back to article view | Back to news.admin.peering

Contents

  another peeve with newsmaster who dont do common sense noel <deletethis@invalid.lan> - 2026-08-01 09:56 +1000
    Re: another peeve with newsmaster who dont do common sense Nomen Nescio <nobody@dizum.com> - 2026-08-01 03:13 +0000
      Re: another peeve with newsmaster who dont do common sense Marco Moock <mm@dorfdsl.de> - 2026-08-01 06:18 +0200
        Re: another peeve with newsmaster who dont do common sense Ray Banana <rayban@raybanana.net> - 2026-08-01 08:52 +0200
          Re: another peeve with newsmaster who dont do common sense Kevin Bowling <kevin.bowling@kev009.com> - 2026-08-01 01:10 -0700
            Re: another peeve with newsmaster who dont do common sense noel <deletethis@invalid.lan> - 2026-08-01 20:55 +1000
              Re: another peeve with newsmaster who dont do common sense Kevin Bowling <kevin.bowling@kev009.com> - 2026-08-01 04:50 -0700
                Re: another peeve with newsmaster who dont do common sense noel <deletethis@invalid.lan> - 2026-08-01 23:54 +1000
                  Re: another peeve with newsmaster who dont do common sense Jesse Rehmer <jesse.rehmer@blueworldhosting.com> - 2026-08-01 16:25 +0000
                  Re: another peeve with newsmaster who dont do common sense Ivo Gandolfo <usenet@bofh.team> - 2026-08-01 21:02 +0200
                    Re: another peeve with newsmaster who dont do common sense noel <deletethis@invalid.lan> - 2026-08-02 09:04 +1000
                      Re: another peeve with newsmaster who dont do common sense Ivo Gandolfo <usenet@bofh.team> - 2026-08-02 12:54 +0200
                        Re: another peeve with newsmaster who dont do common sense noel <deletethis@invalid.lan> - 2026-08-04 08:23 +1000
                          Re: another peeve with newsmaster who dont do common sense Jesse Rehmer <jesse.rehmer@blueworldhosting.com> - 2026-08-04 02:34 +0000
                          Re: another peeve with newsmaster who dont do common sense Kevin Bowling <kevin.bowling@kev009.com> - 2026-08-06 00:12 -0700
                      Re: another peeve with newsmaster who dont do common sense Nomen Nescio <nobody@dizum.com> - 2026-08-02 11:45 +0000
                  Re: another peeve with newsmaster who dont do common sense Kevin Bowling <kevin.bowling@kev009.com> - 2026-08-01 16:25 -0700
                    Re: another peeve with newsmaster who dont do common sense Eddie Martin <ejm@nospammy.myplace.de> - 2026-08-02 10:50 +1000
                      Re: another peeve with newsmaster who dont do common sense Kevin Bowling <kevin.bowling@kev009.com> - 2026-08-01 18:19 -0700
                        Re: another peeve with newsmaster who dont do common sense Eddie Martin <ejm@nospammy.myplace.de> - 2026-08-02 13:29 +1000
                          Re: another peeve with newsmaster who dont do common sense Kevin Bowling <kevin.bowling@kev009.com> - 2026-08-01 21:02 -0700
                        Re: another peeve with newsmaster who dont do common sense Marco Moock <mm@dorfdsl.de> - 2026-08-02 06:41 +0200
                          Re: another peeve with newsmaster who dont do common sense Kevin Bowling <kevin.bowling@kev009.com> - 2026-08-01 22:11 -0700
                          Re: another peeve with newsmaster who dont do common sense Ivo Gandolfo <usenet@bofh.team> - 2026-08-02 13:02 +0200
                        Re: another peeve with newsmaster who dont do common sense D <J@M> - 2026-08-02 06:47 +0200
          Re: another peeve with newsmaster who dont do common sense noel <deletethis@invalid.lan> - 2026-08-01 20:08 +1000
            Re: another peeve with newsmaster who dont do common sense Ray Banana <rayban@raybanana.net> - 2026-08-01 16:35 +0200
      Re: another peeve with newsmaster who dont do common sense noel <deletethis@invalid.lan> - 2026-08-01 20:07 +1000
    Re: another peeve with newsmaster who dont do common sense Nigel Reed <sysop@endofthelinebbs.com> - 2026-08-15 01:47 -0500
      Re: another peeve with newsmaster who dont do common sense Jesse Rehmer <jesse.rehmer@blueworldhosting.com> - 2026-08-15 13:17 +0000
        Re: another peeve with newsmaster who dont do common sense Nigel Reed <sysop@endofthelinebbs.com> - 2026-08-29 22:32 -0500

Page 2 of 2 — ← Prev page 1 [2]

#3440

On 8/1/26 20:29, Eddie Martin wrote:
> On 2/08/2026 11:19 am, Kevin Bowling wrote:
>> On 8/1/26 17:50, Eddie Martin wrote:
>>> On 2/08/2026 9:25 am, Kevin Bowling wrote:
>>>> On 8/1/26 06:54, noel wrote:
>>>>> On Sat, 01 Aug 2026 04:50:28 -0700, Kevin Bowling wrote:
>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>>> Many larger providers use multiple A records for good reasons, it's
>>>>>
>>>>> yeah, they're too cheap to use what the big boys use hardware load
>>>>> balancers
>>>>>
>>>>>> valid to design around articles flooding into networks and you really
>>>>>> shouldn't put a load balancer in front of feeders.. just use the
>>>>>
>>>>> /me shakes head
>>>>>
>>>>>> protocols effectively.  Inferring that there must be a 
>>>>>> relationship to
>>>>>> IPs or that an operator is forever bound to one set of systems/PoPs
>>>>>> doesn't reflect how these systems are run.  You need to have 
>>>>>> proper rDNS
>>>>>
>>>>> thats contrary to my experience in the real world of running ISP's and
>>>>> carriers for over 30 years, crap thats over 35 years now actiually
>>>>>
>>>>>> set up and the 3 major news server software handle this per design.
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>> whoooooooooooppppieeeeeeeeeeeeeeee who cares, are you trying to 
>>>>> tell me i
>>>>> should adjust the way i do things, the same way national carriers have
>>>>> been doing this for over 30 years just because you say so, just to
>>>>> resolve one persons M.O.O? you're a bigger fucking idiot than I was
>>>>> starting to think if so.
>>>>
>>>> I was guiding you nicely to the fact that you have no idea what you 
>>>> are talking about.  I've helped build two of the largest CDNs in the 
>>>> world, and you do it by using the Internet Protocols as designed 
>>>> never hardware load balancers which cannot scale and are additional 
>>>> failure domain.
>>>>
>>>
>>>
>>> Good grief, I can't remain silent in this who's got the bigger dick 
>>> contest any longer, how you do things today is nothing like how it 
>>> was done before, having worked at high levels in ATT for decades 
>>> (thankfully I am recently retired so I no longer need to deal with 
>>> rubbish like this), hardware load balancers have long and are still 
>>> very common today, or were 7 months ago anyway. So what if you have 
>>> helped build (I've never heard your name before a couple months ago 
>>> when you started contributing to INN2)a CDN, a CDN is a CDN, it 
>>> solves a  mostly different problem, or perhaps your CDN was at 
>>> Alphabet or Facebook, it would explain your arrogances.
>>
>> The Internet Protocols are the same, only the L7 differs.  Inbound 
>> NNTP is basically the worst possible place to use a load balancer, you 
>> just have the feeders peer with each other and outward and everything 
>> flood fills without any additional complexity.  Reader servers might 
>> benefit from a sticky session LB, and a _proxy_ (not LB) would be less 
>> ridiculous for inbound if it was providing routing or message oracle 
>> for some distributed backend.
>>
>>>
>>>>>>> All in all its just common courtesy to give your peers a heads 
>>>>>>> up, its
>>>>>>> fine if Jesse no longer wants peering, jesus, it took me 3 weeks to
>>>>>>> discover he was MIA courtesy of the pending articles list file 
>>>>>>> hitting
>>>>>>> 10Mb which triggered the email alert, anyways he can either 
>>>>>>> accept the
>>>>>>> advice or ignore it, the sun will still rise in the morning.
>>>>>
>>>>>> Maybe look at the bigger picture of what he is doing and that most of
>>>>>> use are cramming administration into active life.  Your server your
>>>>>> rules, so to each their own.
>>>>>
>>>>> ohh wow really, and i thought running my organisation 15 hours a day 6
>>>>> days a week was because i was bored and wanted to avoid the family..
>>>>> thats where i went wrong.. jesus fucking christ. Jesse miught lack 
>>>>> common
>>>>> courtesy, but you lack common sense, and thats worse.
>>>>> dont waste your time trolling me again.
>>>>
>>>> The mercurial reaction to your own Dunning-Kruger limits is at least 
>>>> comical.  If you don't want peers, drop them.  You're the one making 
>>>> the spectacle and an ass out of yourself.
>>>
>>> On the contrary you all are making an ass out of yourselves. Both you 
>>> and Noel need time out, Jesse does need to learn if he wants to 
>>> provide a service, he needs to consider everyone he provides services 
>>> to, or request they use hostnames or thank but decline to peer, yes, 
>>> stuff happens, but it takes 30 seconds to post a note in here even 
>>> after the fact saying "hey guys" he instead probably spent more 
>>> energy attacking Noel then he did in putting in thought to how his 
>>> consequences affect other peers (and now prospective other peers who 
>>> see how they get treated), and yes Noel should have fired an Email to 
>>> Jesse instead of venting here, it had merit, but should have been 
>>> raised in private. Although as he alludes, maybe in jest, that he 
>>> wont be using Jesse's or anyone's peering shortly either way, a shame 
>>> to see an apparently long time service pulled because of usenet admin 
>>> squabbles, and I find it strange that Kevin thinks he can speak to 
>>> this where from what I can tell, he does not and has never run an 
>>> NNTP server, let alone service, so not sure where he thinks he can 
>>> speak on this matter, only one who has run them for a substantial 
>>> amount of time actually understands, perhaps his misguided beliefs 
>>> that CDN and usenet are the same.
>>
>> Another hyperbolic joker.  I've run a peer for 15 years, not hard to 
>> observe.
>>
> 
> 
> You are right Kevin, I apologize, I should have taken a moment to check 
> you out, I never really cared before.
> 
> Kevin, we have a problem, there appears no evidence you had any part in 
> a CDN development (anyone can set up reverse proxies, ATS, caches, etc), 
> you do however run a small MSP computer and software design business in 
> Chino Valley, despite no real world peering presence with no AS in the 
> routing databases, a cursory look shows you do lease a /29 prefix, but 
> Kevin, you need a minimum of a /24 prefix for BGP, and anyone running 
> CDN's have decent IPAS, anything smaller and networks discard the route 
> opting for the next up, unlike with csiph usenet I see you run Kevin, 
> where you could do that on dialup with single IP, so perhaps I am 
> starting to see Kevin, why you dislike networks using IP's and want them 
> to use host names, so much.

csiph is not a CDN nor claimed to be, it's a single PoP done on my own 
time and dime for 15 years.  And also trivially observable currently 
serving around 10-30 million articles a day, making it one of the 
busiest free text readers.  Meanwhile you are using someone else's system.

> 
> Another thing puzzles me Kevin, since you are the CDN expert, why is 
> there no talks at NANOG, why not share that all encompassing knowledge 
> to those mere mortals beneath you, I see you only graduated college in 
> 2011, so I understand why you are confused and can not comprehend how 
> large networks are actually designed and run, since you were not even 
> born when some people here were running them, however Kevin, I can 
> respect the high bar you've set for yourself, I really do, and perhaps 
> one day, you'll get there, but I suspect because you detest humble pie, 
> it's a bit off yet, but that's not a real problem Kevin, as you're still 
> a young fellow.

Multiple public talks, again trivial to find.  NANOG is concentrated 
with people that configure and operate network devices, not software 
developers.

You're going off again on things you have no idea about, convinced you 
are right with your Dunning-Krueger twin.

The root point remains, if you have some notion of how a peer should 
look to peer with you, deal with it privately or simply disconnect them. 
  Making a public spectacle with poor technical judgement to attempt to 
shame people is sheer idiocy.

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]

#3441

Am 02.08.26 um 03:19 schrieb Kevin Bowling:
> 
> The Internet Protocols are the same, only the L7 differs.  Inbound NNTP 
> is basically the worst possible place to use a load balancer, you just 
> have the feeders peer with each other and outward and everything flood 
> fills without any additional complexity.  Reader servers might benefit 
> from a sticky session LB, and a _proxy_ (not LB) would be less 
> ridiculous for inbound if it was providing routing or message oracle for 
> some distributed backend.

Is a reader server for text-only groups in need of a load balancer or 
can current hardware handle all the sessions?

-- 
Gruß
Marco

Junk-Mail bitte an trashcan@stinkedores.dorfdsl.de

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]

#3443

On 8/1/26 21:41, Marco Moock wrote:
> Am 02.08.26 um 03:19 schrieb Kevin Bowling:
>>
>> The Internet Protocols are the same, only the L7 differs.  Inbound 
>> NNTP is basically the worst possible place to use a load balancer, you 
>> just have the feeders peer with each other and outward and everything 
>> flood fills without any additional complexity.  Reader servers might 
>> benefit from a sticky session LB, and a _proxy_ (not LB) would be less 
>> ridiculous for inbound if it was providing routing or message oracle 
>> for some distributed backend.
> 
> Is a reader server for text-only groups in need of a load balancer or 
> can current hardware handle all the sessions?
> 

For the most part a single system can handle it if designed for.  It 
might be a little tight for a place like Eternal September that might 
see 10k idle connections.

The current issue with inn specifically is that it forks a new nnrpd 
process for every reader connection.  That means each connection costs 
many megabytes of RAM, when the actual weight of a connection could be 
kilobytes.  The way to solve this is to make the connections cheap, with 
an event loop, and have nnrpd service many connections as they notify 
(via the kernel) of read/write readiness.  But there is a lot of work to 
get there, and you still want some fan out to processes (or threads) to 
continue taking advantage of multiple CPU cores.

In the mean time something like 
https://github.com/mjc/nntp-proxy/tree/main would be helpful to an inn 
reader deployment where idle connections sit on a cheap event loop, and 
are multiplexed back to the expensive nnrpd processes.  Note that I 
haven't looked deeply at that code so I don't know how complete or 
effective it is.  To highlight the complexity, csiph grew a fairly 
sophisticated connection pooler for similar reasons (the complexity is 
to deal with things like a WWW request aborting.. I want the NNTP conn 
to stay alive and be in a known good state so it finishes the NNTP 
transaction anyway which is cheaper than tearing down and setting up a 
new conn).

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]

#3445

Il 02/08/2026 06:41, Marco Moock ha scritto:
> Is a reader server for text-only groups in need of a load balancer or 
> can current hardware handle all the sessions?
> 

I recompiled INN to have more FD available, but as Kevin told you it's 
more of a CPU/RAM/SSD issue these days.

My experience over the years has led me to believe that if you have a 
fairly large user base, exposing the reader directly is 
counterproductive unless you have very high-performance hardware.
In fact, in anticipation of expanding my service, I almost rewrote an 
nntp-proxy service from scratch.
The INN servers will remain only as a backend and history server, while 
the nntp frontend will take care of everything else leaving me plenty of 
options for caching and storing everything in the database for very fast 
searches.

I've currently seen several read timeouts on my servers, mostly due to 
the extensive searches performed. If everything is indexed a priori, the 
result is almost instantaneous.


Sincerely

-- 
Ivo Gandolfo

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]

#3442

On Sat, 1 Aug 2026 18:19:15 -0700, Kevin Bowling wrote:
> On 8/1/26 17:50, Eddie Martin wrote:
>> On 2/08/2026 9:25 am, Kevin Bowling wrote:
>>> On 8/1/26 06:54, noel wrote:
>>>> On Sat, 01 Aug 2026 04:50:28 -0700, Kevin Bowling wrote:
>>>>> Many larger providers use multiple A records for good reasons, it's

snips
> 
> The Internet Protocols are the same, only the L7 differs.  Inbound NNTP 
> is basically the worst possible place to use a load balancer, you just 
> have the feeders peer with each other and outward and everything flood 
> fills without any additional complexity.  Reader servers might benefit 
> from a sticky session LB, and a _proxy_ (not LB) would be less 
> ridiculous for inbound if it was providing routing or message oracle for 
> some distributed backend.
> 
>>>>>> All in all its just common courtesy to give your peers a heads up, its
>>>>>> fine if Jesse no longer wants peering, jesus, it took me 3 weeks to
>>>>>> discover he was MIA courtesy of the pending articles list file hitting
>>>>>> 10Mb which triggered the email alert, anyways he can either accept the
>>>>>> advice or ignore it, the sun will still rise in the morning.
>>>>
>>>>> Maybe look at the bigger picture of what he is doing and that most of
>>>>> use are cramming administration into active life.  Your server your
>>>>> rules, so to each their own.
>>>>
>>>> ohh wow really, and i thought running my organisation 15 hours a day 6
>>>> days a week was because i was bored and wanted to avoid the family..
>>>> thats where i went wrong.. jesus fucking christ. Jesse miught lack 
>>>> common
>>>> courtesy, but you lack common sense, and thats worse.
>>>> dont waste your time trolling me again.
>>>
>>> The mercurial reaction to your own Dunning-Kruger limits is at least 
>>> comical.  If you don't want peers, drop them.  You're the one making 
>>> the spectacle and an ass out of yourself.
>> 
>> On the contrary you all are making an ass out of yourselves. Both you 
>> and Noel need time out, Jesse does need to learn if he wants to provide 
>> a service, he needs to consider everyone he provides services to, or 
>> request they use hostnames or thank but decline to peer, yes, stuff 
>> happens, but it takes 30 seconds to post a note in here even after the 
>> fact saying "hey guys" he instead probably spent more energy attacking 
>> Noel then he did in putting in thought to how his consequences affect 
>> other peers (and now prospective other peers who see how they get 
>> treated), and yes Noel should have fired an Email to Jesse instead of 
>> venting here, it had merit, but should have been raised in private. 
>> Although as he alludes, maybe in jest, that he wont be using Jesse's or 
>> anyone's peering shortly either way, a shame to see an apparently long 
>> time service pulled because of usenet admin squabbles, and I find it 
>> strange that Kevin thinks he can speak to this where from what I can 
>> tell, he does not and has never run an NNTP server, let alone service, 
>> so not sure where he thinks he can speak on this matter, only one who 
>> has run them for a substantial amount of time actually understands, 
>> perhaps his misguided beliefs that CDN and usenet are the same.
> 
> Another hyperbolic joker.  I've run a peer for 15 years, not hard to 
> observe.

myself an amateur but devoted user of usenet newsgroups, this search:

https://csiph.com/search?q=from%3A%22Eddie+Martin%22&group=&after=&before=&sort=relevance&lang=

would suggest that only two posts within the past decade (10.8 years),
and using this "stage name"-style alias . . . if it looks like a duck,
or quacks like ai-enhanced trolling-chatbots, but maybe these popular
usenet newsservers, in this case, blueworld and csiph, both with very
long and complete article retention (especially bw, mostly from 1981),
are helpful and useful to the public, which is anathema to (redacted)

such trolling seems strangely out of place even in unmoderated groups,
as if the common practice to ignore trolls has become the global norm,
so they're taunting system administrators, to help the chatbots learn,
and they've been at it since circa 1993, their agenda is causing gigo

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]

#3428

On Sat, 01 Aug 2026 08:52:09 +0200, Ray Banana wrote:

> Thus spake Marco Moock <mm@dorfdsl.de>
>  
>> Am 01.08.26 um 05:13 schrieb Nomen Nescio:
>>> Do you not use DNS to refresh your name -> IP mapping regularly?
>> IIRC INN resolved the names one time and then never does it again until
>> restarted. Although that is from hearsay.
> 
> That would indicate that a daily cron job is missing:
> 
> 0       0   *   *   *   test -x /usr/local/news/bin/ctlinnd &&
>  /usr/local/news/bin/ctlinnd -t 300 -s reload incoming.conf "flush
>  cache"
> 
> Has been working for me for decades.

That wont do shit for me, since we dont use INN :)

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]

#3432

Thus spake noel <deletethis@invalid.lan>
 
> On Sat, 01 Aug 2026 08:52:09 +0200, Ray Banana wrote:
>> Thus spake Marco Moock <mm@dorfdsl.de>
>
>>> Am 01.08.26 um 05:13 schrieb Nomen Nescio:
>>>> Do you not use DNS to refresh your name -> IP mapping regularly?
>>> IIRC INN resolved the names one time and then never does it again until
>>> restarted. Although that is from hearsay.
>>>
>> That would indicate that a daily cron job is missing:
>>
>> 0       0   *   *   *   test -x /usr/local/news/bin/ctlinnd &&
>>  /usr/local/news/bin/ctlinnd -t 300 -s reload incoming.conf "flush
>>  cache"
>>
>> Has been working for me for decades.
>
> That wont do shit for me, since we dont use INN :)

I know you are using D-News. Marco, however, referred explicitly to INN
;-) 

-- 
Пу́тін — хуйло́
https://www.eternal-september.org

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]

#3427

On Sat, 01 Aug 2026 03:13:58 +0000, Nomen Nescio wrote:

> Do you not use DNS to refresh your name -> IP mapping regularly?

No, real news servers (as in ISP's) have since the 90s granted ihave 
access to IP's, it was generally frowned upon to use hostnames for 
obvious reasons, IP's have been used in my own, and prior to that 
Tesltra's servers (ad I know optusnet, iprimus, also did, I also know 
many of the US ISP's used IP as well, Jesse is very aware I use IP as I 
told him at outset, and the last time he changed his IP.

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]

#3450

On 1 Aug 2026 09:56:44 +1000
noel <deletethis@invalid.lan> wrote:

> Just discovered (after a 21 day grace period) an overnight alert from
> our monitoring we weren't getting anything (since July 10) from
> blueworld hosting, it seems after some checks his IP changed, and
> i'll be fucked if I can find any reference or warning that was to
> happen let alone an after the fact, all completed blah blah blah, and
> of consequence to that fail2ban blackholed them for repeatedly trying
> to send whilst getting denied :)
> 
> Now BWH is not the first peer who's done that, and sadly wont be the 
> last, but all it takes is a minute of time to send post to this group
> if you dont bother keeping an internal email list of peers to
> notify...
> 
> 
> I'll rmeove the ban and correct IP's in access file, if feed returns
> it returns, if not, it doesnt.

I use ipsets for blocking IPs but all my usenet peers are in their own
set which bypasses the blocks. It seems like BWH couldn't be bothered
to me know they changed their IP either. 

toot@newsfeed:/news/spool/innfeed# host usenet.blueworldhosting.com
usenet.blueworldhosting.com has address 76.235.89.209
toot@newsfeed:/news/spool/innfeed# ipset list |grep 76.235.89.209

Lucky for them I don't have 76.235.89.0/24 blocked so we're still
exchanging articles, but still, as a matter of courtesy, you need to
let your peers know if you change your config in some way that effects
them. 



-- 
End Of The Line BBS - Plano, TX
telnet endofthelinebbs.com 23

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]

#3451

On Aug 15, 2026 at 1:47:25 AM CDT, "Nigel Reed" <sysop@endofthelinebbs.com>
wrote:

> I use ipsets for blocking IPs but all my usenet peers are in their own
> set which bypasses the blocks. It seems like BWH couldn't be bothered
> to me know they changed their IP either.
> 
> toot@newsfeed:/news/spool/innfeed# host usenet.blueworldhosting.com
> usenet.blueworldhosting.com has address 76.235.89.209
> toot@newsfeed:/news/spool/innfeed# ipset list |grep 76.235.89.209
> 
> Lucky for them I don't have 76.235.89.0/24 blocked so we're still
> exchanging articles, but still, as a matter of courtesy, you need to
> let your peers know if you change your config in some way that effects
> them.

I've blocked your IPs, you can remove the peering configuration.

For someone complaining about notification and visibility, your website with
peering details hasn't been accessible for some time, and in the past when
you've changed IPs multiple times you didn't always include the new IP
information.

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]

#3463

On Sat, 15 Aug 2026 13:17:41 -0000 (UTC)
Jesse Rehmer <jesse.rehmer@blueworldhosting.com> wrote:

> On Aug 15, 2026 at 1:47:25 AM CDT, "Nigel Reed"
> <sysop@endofthelinebbs.com> wrote:
> 
> > I use ipsets for blocking IPs but all my usenet peers are in their
> > own set which bypasses the blocks. It seems like BWH couldn't be
> > bothered to me know they changed their IP either.
> > 
> > toot@newsfeed:/news/spool/innfeed# host usenet.blueworldhosting.com
> > usenet.blueworldhosting.com has address 76.235.89.209
> > toot@newsfeed:/news/spool/innfeed# ipset list |grep 76.235.89.209
> > 
> > Lucky for them I don't have 76.235.89.0/24 blocked so we're still
> > exchanging articles, but still, as a matter of courtesy, you need to
> > let your peers know if you change your config in some way that
> > effects them.  
> 
> I've blocked your IPs, you can remove the peering configuration.
> 
> For someone complaining about notification and visibility, your
> website with peering details hasn't been accessible for some time,
> and in the past when you've changed IPs multiple times you didn't
> always include the new IP information.

I have always let you know when I change IPs. In fact I've only changed
IPs once since getting my permanent server setup and that was because
my ISP forced the change on me and I sent out a couple of emails with
the new IP addresses. 

usenet@blueworldhosting.com was sent an email on Monday June 1st 2026
at 12:10am CT along with 11 other peers with the subject "IP CHange
[sic]" along with the new IPv4 and IPv6 addresses. I'm sorry if you
didn't get it, however I sent it out.

https://www.pasteboard.co/VlGnF1h3JNTx.png

I have just checked the webpage at
https://www.endofthelinebbs.com/peering.html and it responded
immediately.

I feel your criticism is overly harsh considering I have done my best
to treat other peers how I would wish to be treated myself. I have
received no complaints so far.

However, we all get to choose who we peer with and I'm sorry you feel
you have to block me. I will, of course, remove your config from my
system. If you ever feel like peering again, please reach out. No hard
feelings.

-- 
End Of The Line BBS - Plano, TX
telnet endofthelinebbs.com 23

[toc] | [prev] | [standalone]

Page 2 of 2 — ← Prev page 1 [2]

Back to top | Article view | news.admin.peering

csiph-web