[Mailman-Users] NNTP server for "local" newsgroups ?

I'd start with this search:

http://www.google.com/search?q=nntpd

John Fitzsimons writes:
Just use any old NNTP server and block access from the outside at the
firewall.
Most such software has a configuration option to specify the port,
since that's a common way to test modified software.

Yes. I intend to explore using Twisted in Mailman 3 to provide NNTP
and IMAP access to Mailman archives.

-Barry

Hi Barry,
Would you mind explaining that a bit more please ? Would the end
user need to install Twisted first to get NNTP access to Mailman
archives ?

When you say "archives" do you mean "old posts" ? Or would this
provide the "live" NNTP < > email list mirroring that I am looking
for ?

As you appear to have already provided email to NNTP mirroring ability
eg. Gmane would your version 3 provide the install of an NNTP server
with the Mailman install ?

Sorry to ask so many dumb questions but I would really like to get a
better understanding of what you propose and whether it is likely to
give me the mirroring facilities I am after.

Bye the way, I don't know if the following helps, or not, but someone
who managed to get email < > web < > NNTP newsgroups working
said..


"you can also make some changes to the way your web server is set up
so that your users can access your newsgroups through the same URL as
your web site. There is no need to include unsightly port numbers in
the URL. This can also overcome problems of people not being able
to read your newsgroups because of their firewall settings.

< snip >

we use the Apache web server with the mod_proxy module. Similar
approaches are available with most other web servers. For IIS, you
will either need Microsoft Proxy Server, Microsoft Internet
Acceleration Server, or a third-party ISAPI module (such as
http://www.isapirewrite.com/) to have the same effect.

< snip >

For details on how to set this up on your own web server, see the
Apache mod_proxy documentation or the documentation for whatever web
server or proxy server you are using, and look for details on how to
set up a "reverse proxy".

Don't know whether that helps, or is relevant to the discussion.


Regards, John.

Hmm, I'm not sure how it is relevant to NNTP access to the mailing lists.

-Barry

Hi Barry,

Thank you for explaining things more.

< snip >
One can run "a local NNTP server" now. That connects to Mailman. I
assume that you are meaning that if Twisted were installed then
Twisted, or will it be Mailman, would provide the server ?

Or are we not talking about an NNTP server at all ? Just a conversion
of protocols in some way ?
< snip >

Okay, but I am assuming that Gmane has port 119 open. Many sites that
provide Mailman wouldn't have it open. How could that be overcome ?

Regards, John.

Well, you'd have to open the appropriate port. Gmane is a fine service, but it's run by a party you don't control. The idea here is to run a server that you do control for sites that want to do that.

-Barry

Okay, IF an NNTP setup were part of Mailman then that would IMO
encourage a huge number of hosters, that currently install Mailman,
to consider opening that port. Particularly as you could put in the
installation documents that the Mailman NNTP facility requires it.

You would be doing a gigantic service to newsgroup fans around the
world. I sure hope you can manage this venture.
Yep, as a "proof of concept" situation it works particularly well. Web
forum <> newsgroup post <> email mirroring. Few other people have
managed that.
Yes, and if one doesn't use it there is nobody else anywhere who can
provide a similar service. Even for a cost. :-(
Well, if you pull this off, then IMO Mailman will blow competing
products out of the water. Both freeware and payware. :-)

Regards, John.

I'm sure that hosts would consider running an NNTP server for a few
moments before considering the ramifications (to Mailman) of not doing
so before ultimately considering a different mailing list manager.

I think Mailman (as a mailing list manager) should remain separate from
a NNTP daemon. Having Mailman take advantage of an NNTP server that
exists is wonderful. Making the leap to requiring the use of a Mailman
rolled NNTP server is (IMHO) extremely arrogant. Offering an optional
program that has been "tested to work with" (tm) is something completely
different and acceptable.

Further, you have some sites that are running Mailman on a server that
is already running a different NNTP server. Are you going to tell these
sites that they have to switch from their current NNTP server to the one
that ships with Mailman? What if they refuse to switch? Does that mean
that they have chosen to abandon Mailman and go with another product?

Requiring a Mailman included NNTP server is a *VERY* big and (IMHO) bad
thing to do.

At most, I think there should be an optional component that is tested
and supported. Any thing beyond that should be what we currently have,
best effort support to work with an alternative part NNTP server.
Is adding multiple additional news servers (that only carry groups for
the mailing lists hosted on the server) really such a good service? Or
would it be better to (do what we currently do) gateway from Mailman and
an existing NNTP server.
There are already packages that provide web form / mailing list /
newsgroup / news server integration all in one. Synchronet comes to mind.



Grant. . . .

No idea why someone wanting a mailing list manager would NOT like to
have additional functionality. If it were an option.

I was, of course, assuming that during Mailman's installation a
question would be asked such as "Do you wish to enable an NNTP
server for use with Mailman ? Y/N ?"
If people had an option during installation then they could decide
that question for themselves.
I wasn't recommending that. I was suggesting that if people chose,
during installation, to add an NNTP capability then they would be
reminded that they need to open the relevant port to get everything
working properly.
No, as these people wouldn't choose the added NNTP functionality while
installing Mailman.
Well, as Gmane has 11,972 mailing list ported to NNTP I guess quite a
lot of people would say "yes". IMO the only reason more people don't
use Gmane is because they haven't heard of it and/or don't understand
how it works.

That certainly applies to me. Had I known about Gmane, and how it
works, in 2002 then I would have considered using their service then.
IF Mailman had a similar thing as an "option" then IMO many would jump
at the opportunity to have this added functionality.
No it wouldn't. A very high percentage of "hosted" sites install
Mailman. IF an NNTP "optional" component existed then more sites would
offer their clients that option.

At the moment the number of "hosted" sites that offer an NNTP option
is pretty close to 0%. Almost all the very very few sites that offer
NNTP do so as a newsgroup provider only. It isn't part of the "hosting
package" that many companies offer.
Almost all of which need root access and/or Linux skills. Not much use
to people who don't have root access, or Linux skills.

With Synchronet for example ..

"Step-by-step Instructions
=========================

Note: These instructions assume you are already logged in as 'root'.

Q. Where do I get Synchronet for Unix?

A. There are no binary distributions at this time, so you must get the
source code from...."


Not everyone is a "Unix geek". Some of us simply want to be able to
send/receive email and newsgroup posts. Preferably as a synchronised
setup.

This sort of thing is absurdly simple in windows. It is amazingly
difficult in Linux.


Regards, John.

Function-creep/bloatware, things getting too big for their own boots?

I like small things. If I want extra packages/software, I install
them. I don't want them to be bundled in. Especially not
automatically.

No, Mailman will not /require/ the use of its NNTP server, just like today it
does not require the use of Pipermail. It'll be available for anybody who
wants an easy, turnkey solution, which actually is probably the majority of
users. But if you don't want it, or want to roll you're own, you will of
course be welcome to.

-Barry