reliable news servers ?

[Alex Gibson]

Anyone got any tips for reliable public news servers ?

ihug's one only keeps messages for a few days

Thanks
Alex

 

[Phil Allison]

"Alex Gibson" <


Anyone got any tips for reliable public news servers ?

ihug's one only keeps messages for a few days



** That long - really ??


Sheep shaggers do have such short memories......




......... Phil

 

[Dan Marz]

Forget TPG they are just as bad if not worse.

All is fine for a while till they reset their newsgroup server every
couple of months to tidy up their HD's. What's worse is that messages
stop for days, they are not late, they just don't send them at all.

It is a know and common problem with TPG and Netscape users. The scum bags!

But what does this have to do with aus.electronics?

Alex Gibson wrote:

Anyone got any tips for reliable public news servers ?

ihug's one only keeps messages for a few days

Thanks
Alex

 

[Russ]

"Alex Gibson" <alxx/*nospam*/@@/*nospam*/ihug./*nospam*/com./remove/au>
wrote in message news:bqhvqg$6no$2@lust.ihug.co.nz...

Anyone got any tips for reliable public news servers ?

ihug's one only keeps messages for a few days

Thanks
Alex

Try http://www.individual.net/

Russ.

 

[KoRRupT]

"Dan Marz" <medcircDELETETHIS@tpg.com.au> wrote in message
news:3fcc9477$1@dnews.tpgi.com.au...

| But what does this have to do with aus.electronics?
|



maybe the OP is a bit cheesed that they can't contribute to this group more
efficiently?


anyway... i've only glanced at google's newsgroups and most of the messages
i see on the server i'm with are reflected on google... but i haven't really
used it that much to vouch for its reliability... doing a search for my
email address on google's newsgroup returned messages i posted about 6
months ago!

 

[Gregory Toomey]

It was a dark and stormy night, and Russ managed to scribble:

"Alex Gibson" <alxx/*nospam*/@@/*nospam*/ihug./*nospam*/com./remove/au
wrote in message news:bqhvqg$6no$2@lust.ihug.co.nz...
Anyone got any tips for reliable public news servers ?

ihug's one only keeps messages for a few days

Thanks
Alex

Try http://www.individual.net/

Russ.

I use it and it works well.

This site, sponsored by the Free University of Berlin, puts to shame all Australian ISPs.

gtoomey

 

[Alex Gibson]

"Dan Marz" <medcircDELETETHIS@tpg.com.au> wrote in message news:3fcc9477$1@dnews.tpgi.com.au...

Forget TPG they are just as bad if not worse.

All is fine for a while till they reset their newsgroup server every
couple of months to tidy up their HD's. What's worse is that messages
stop for days, they are not late, they just don't send them at all.

It is a know and common problem with TPG and Netscape users. The scum bags!

But what does this have to do with aus.electronics?

ihug drops the messages sometimes before I can get to read them.

groups.google is fine but not for offline newsgroup reading.

Also some of the public news servers don't carry aus.electronics.

And asking here I get a better answer than asking in
other newsgroups.

Thanks
Alex

 

[Alex Gibson]

"Gregory Toomey" <nospam@bigpond.com> wrote in message news:2278449.5gDFbxks1M@gregs-web-hosting-and-pickle-farming...

It was a dark and stormy night, and Russ managed to scribble:


"Alex Gibson" <alxx/*nospam*/@@/*nospam*/ihug./*nospam*/com./remove/au
wrote in message news:bqhvqg$6no$2@lust.ihug.co.nz...
Anyone got any tips for reliable public news servers ?

ihug's one only keeps messages for a few days

Thanks
Alex

Try http://www.individual.net/

Russ.

I use it and it works well.

This site, sponsored by the Free University of Berlin, puts to shame all Australian ISPs.

gtoomey

Thanks , I'll give these guys a try.

Alex

 

[Mike Harding]

On Wed, 03 Dec 2003 11:35:10 +1000, Gregory Toomey
<nospam@bigpond.com> wrote:

Try http://www.individual.net/

I use it and it works well.

This site, sponsored by the Free University of Berlin, puts to shame all Australian ISPs.

The only downer to it I can see is that you have to use a
valid e-mail address which prevents putting a spamblock
(as I do) into your posts?

Mike Harding

 

[Rod Speed]

Mike Harding <mike_harding1@nixspamhotmail.com> wrote in
message news:i9gqsvk6lamku80la5j881hjv12lblh3qn@4ax.com...

Gregory Toomey <nospam@bigpond.com> wrote

Try http://www.individual.net/

I use it and it works well.

This site, sponsored by the Free University
of Berlin, puts to shame all Australian ISPs.

The only downer to it I can see is that you have
to use a valid e-mail address which prevents
putting a spamblock (as I do) into your posts?

You're welcome to include a valid email address
and have another spamblocked address too.

And just ignore the valid email address completely.

 

[Alex Gibson]

"Mike Harding" <mike_harding1@nixspamhotmail.com> wrote in message news:i9gqsvk6lamku80la5j881hjv12lblh3qn@4ax.com...

On Wed, 03 Dec 2003 11:35:10 +1000, Gregory Toomey
nospam@bigpond.com> wrote:

Try http://www.individual.net/

I use it and it works well.

This site, sponsored by the Free University of Berlin, puts to shame all Australian ISPs.

The only downer to it I can see is that you have to use a
valid e-mail address which prevents putting a spamblock
(as I do) into your posts?

Mike Harding

Could always read on that server
and post via isp's dodgy server using a spamblock.

Alex

 

[budgie]

On Wed, 03 Dec 2003 12:51:06 +1100, Mike Harding
<mike_harding1@nixspamhotmail.com> wrote:

On Wed, 03 Dec 2003 11:35:10 +1000, Gregory Toomey
nospam@bigpond.com> wrote:

Try http://www.individual.net/

I use it and it works well.

This site, sponsored by the Free University of Berlin, puts to shame all Australian ISPs.

The only downer to it I can see is that you have to use a
valid e-mail address which prevents putting a spamblock
(as I do) into your posts?

You obviously didn't read the info on their website very well. They
advise that (my words) "the owner of privacy.net has given his
approval for the username me@privacy.net to be used for this purpose"

AFAICT it works fine - except that you then need some way to provide
your real addie when required.

 

[Mike Harding]

On Wed, 03 Dec 2003 06:35:17 GMT, me@privacy.net (budgie) wrote:

On Wed, 03 Dec 2003 12:51:06 +1100, Mike Harding
mike_harding1@nixspamhotmail.com> wrote:

On Wed, 03 Dec 2003 11:35:10 +1000, Gregory Toomey
nospam@bigpond.com> wrote:

Try http://www.individual.net/

I use it and it works well.

This site, sponsored by the Free University of Berlin, puts to shame all Australian ISPs.

The only downer to it I can see is that you have to use a
valid e-mail address which prevents putting a spamblock
(as I do) into your posts?

You obviously didn't read the info on their website very well.

Actually I did, but perhaps I misunderstood it?

They
advise that (my words) "the owner of privacy.net has given his
approval for the username me@privacy.net to be used for this purpose"

AFAICT it works fine - except that you then need some way to provide
your real addie when required.

I'm afraid I don't understand the above at all.

However the FAQ says the following:

2.4 My postings are rejected because of an "invalid address". What am
I doing wrong?
News.Individual.NET runs a highly modified version of the newsreader
daemon "nnrpd".

This version checks the "From:", "Reply-To:" and "Sender:" e-mail
addresses for syntactical correctness. It also uses DNS (Domain Name
System) to verify the existence of the domain part by checking if
there is an A- or MX-record for it.

Postings that fail the checks are rejected by the server.

So if you get one of the following error messages, please change the
configuration of your news client following our policy.

"Invalid address in From: Header."
"From:" header address is syntactically incorrect or invalid
(according to DNS)

"Invalid address in Reply-To: Header."
"Reply-To:" header address is syntactically incorrect or invalid
(according to DNS)

"Invalid address in Sender: Header."
"Sender:" header address is syntactically incorrect or invalid
(according to DNS)



Upon rereading the above perhaps I could use a spam block
of the form <mike_harding1XXX@hotmail.com>?

Mike Harding

 

[Russ]

"Mike Harding" <mike_harding1@nixspamhotmail.com> wrote in message
news:i9gqsvk6lamku80la5j881hjv12lblh3qn@4ax.com...

On Wed, 03 Dec 2003 11:35:10 +1000, Gregory Toomey
nospam@bigpond.com> wrote:

Try http://www.individual.net/

I use it and it works well.

This site, sponsored by the Free University of Berlin, puts to shame all
Australian ISPs.

The only downer to it I can see is that you have to use a
valid e-mail address which prevents putting a spamblock
(as I do) into your posts?

This is what I thought when I signed up and foolishly put my real email
address in. I got hit very hard by the Swen virus as a result. Looking
closer at the rules, the server only really requires that the email address
be well-formed (have an @ in the middle) and that the domain portion
resolves to a mail server.

Thus all you have to do is mangle the front of your email address in a
human-understandable way and leave the domain intact.

Russ.

 

[budgie]

On Wed, 03 Dec 2003 18:07:52 +1100, Mike Harding
<mike_harding1@nixspamhotmail.com> wrote:

On Wed, 03 Dec 2003 06:35:17 GMT, me@privacy.net (budgie) wrote:

On Wed, 03 Dec 2003 12:51:06 +1100, Mike Harding
mike_harding1@nixspamhotmail.com> wrote:

On Wed, 03 Dec 2003 11:35:10 +1000, Gregory Toomey
nospam@bigpond.com> wrote:

Try http://www.individual.net/

I use it and it works well.

This site, sponsored by the Free University of Berlin, puts to shame all Australian ISPs.

The only downer to it I can see is that you have to use a
valid e-mail address which prevents putting a spamblock
(as I do) into your posts?

You obviously didn't read the info on their website very well.

Actually I did, but perhaps I misunderstood it?

They
advise that (my words) "the owner of privacy.net has given his
approval for the username me@privacy.net to be used for this purpose"

AFAICT it works fine - except that you then need some way to provide
your real addie when required.

I'm afraid I don't understand the above at all.

Check my posting address, and you'll see what they said/meant in
action.

However the FAQ says the following:

2.4 My postings are rejected because of an "invalid address". What am
I doing wrong?
News.Individual.NET runs a highly modified version of the newsreader
daemon "nnrpd".

This version checks the "From:", "Reply-To:" and "Sender:" e-mail
addresses for syntactical correctness. It also uses DNS (Domain Name
System) to verify the existence of the domain part by checking if
there is an A- or MX-record for it.

Postings that fail the checks are rejected by the server.

So if you get one of the following error messages, please change the
configuration of your news client following our policy.

"Invalid address in From: Header."
"From:" header address is syntactically incorrect or invalid
(according to DNS)

"Invalid address in Reply-To: Header."
"Reply-To:" header address is syntactically incorrect or invalid
(according to DNS)

"Invalid address in Sender: Header."
"Sender:" header address is syntactically incorrect or invalid
(according to DNS)



Upon rereading the above perhaps I could use a spam block
of the form <mike_harding1XXX@hotmail.com>?

If it only checks the domain part, then that should do it. My
previous "spammed" addie had an extra level in the domain part, and
wasn't usable on their service, so I went for the above "privacy.net"
solution. It's temporary anyway, as I'm due to change ISP within the
week and will probably go with a corrupted user-name approach.

 

[Rod Speed]

"Mike Harding" <mike_harding1@nixspamhotmail.com> wrote in message news:im2rsvsghm5enckccnfkl9285jsojaduvj@4ax.com...

On Wed, 03 Dec 2003 06:35:17 GMT, me@privacy.net (budgie) wrote:

On Wed, 03 Dec 2003 12:51:06 +1100, Mike Harding
mike_harding1@nixspamhotmail.com> wrote:

On Wed, 03 Dec 2003 11:35:10 +1000, Gregory Toomey
nospam@bigpond.com> wrote:

Try http://www.individual.net/

I use it and it works well.

This site, sponsored by the Free University of Berlin, puts to shame all Australian ISPs.

The only downer to it I can see is that you have to use a
valid e-mail address which prevents putting a spamblock
(as I do) into your posts?

You obviously didn't read the info on their website very well.

Actually I did, but perhaps I misunderstood it?

They
advise that (my words) "the owner of privacy.net has given his
approval for the username me@privacy.net to be used for this purpose"

AFAICT it works fine - except that you then need some way to provide
your real addie when required.

I'm afraid I don't understand the above at all.

However the FAQ says the following:

2.4 My postings are rejected because of an "invalid address". What am
I doing wrong?
News.Individual.NET runs a highly modified version of the newsreader
daemon "nnrpd".

This version checks the "From:", "Reply-To:" and "Sender:" e-mail
addresses for syntactical correctness. It also uses DNS (Domain Name
System) to verify the existence of the domain part by checking if
there is an A- or MX-record for it.

Postings that fail the checks are rejected by the server.

So if you get one of the following error messages, please change the
configuration of your news client following our policy.

"Invalid address in From: Header."
"From:" header address is syntactically incorrect or invalid
(according to DNS)

"Invalid address in Reply-To: Header."
"Reply-To:" header address is syntactically incorrect or invalid
(according to DNS)

"Invalid address in Sender: Header."
"Sender:" header address is syntactically incorrect or invalid
(according to DNS)



Upon rereading the above perhaps I could use a spam block
of the form <mike_harding1XXX@hotmail.com>?

Probably. But you might as well just use a valid
email address like me@privacy.net and include
the spamblocked email address in the sig.