Alternatives to a local Usenet server

Foteos Macrides macrides at
Mon Aug 22 20:07:32 EST 1994

In article <33b6kj$m9e at>,
una at (Una Smith) writes:
>Foteos Macrides <macrides at> wrote:
>>I suspect there are many sites which do not have a news server
>>installed, and are unlikely to carry news locally, but would
>>setup a news reader specifically to read bionet.*, or would
>>point their WWW clients to for that hierarchy.
>[Fote:  your lines are too long to fit in my newsreader without

	Set your column width to 80.  Our editor sends maximum 78
character lines (but I'll set it to 64 for this message 8-).

>About WWW, Fote, I assume you are thinking of a newsreader on
> being accessible from the WWW server there.  That
>should not be any major problem, and it might be significantly
>more useful than simply browsing through the archives for each
>group using the WWW or gopher client directly.  I think there
>are a lot of people who already depend on the archive servers,
>instead of using either a local Usenet server or subscriptions.

	It's not necessary to use a WWW server.  All that's
necessary is for the client's host to have access to an NNTP
server to which the environment variable NNTPSERVER can be set.
A server (http, gopher, or ftp) *could* provide a formatted cover
page with news links for the bionet.* groups, but a local HTML
file (accessed directly by the client) could be used instead, or
the user could simply pass a news URL on the command line, e.g.,
if using lynx:


We have no need of such a service (we have a news server which
carries the bionet hierarchy), but yes, there are hundreds of
thousands of Internet sites which don't have access to news.


 Foteos Macrides           Worcester Fndn. for Exptl. Biology
 MACRIDES at SCI.WFEB.EDU     222 Maple Av, Shrewsbury, MA 01545

More information about the Bioforum mailing list