Where do you want to go tomorrow?

[Pavel A.]

Dear users of msnews.microsoft.com,

There are rumors that Microsoft plans to shut down this nntp server.

See this for example:
http://news.cnet.com/8301-13860_3-20004109-56.html

Any thoughts on where we can migrate from here - besides of the web-based
MSDN forums?.
To Google groups, maybe?

Regards,
-- pa

[Maxim S. Shatskih]

Post by Pavel A.
Any thoughts on where we can migrate from here - besides of the web-based
MSDN forums?.

Windows kernel people - to OSR's forums, surely.

[Hector Santos]

Post by Pavel A.
Dear users of msnews.microsoft.com,
There are rumors that Microsoft plans to shut down this nntp server.
http://news.cnet.com/8301-13860_3-20004109-56.html
Any thoughts on where we can migrate from here - besides of the
web-based MSDN forums?.
To Google groups, maybe?
Regards,
-- pa

Technically what Microsoft is stopping is the Microsoft.* newsgroups
in lieu of new forums style messages which can also be exposed as
"locally published" newsgroups.

As "Forums Newsgroups," you can download the MS NNTP Bridge

http://connect.microsoft.com/MicrosoftForums

that will allow you to continue to use your favorite desktop news
reader to access the Microsoft Forums Newsgroups.

It actually works pretty well. Not all the old newsgroup "names" are
available in the MS forums. There is the kernel one:

Microsoft.en-US.kernel

I'm sure in time that other providers will use the MS NNTP Bridge with
NNTP gating software to mirror the MS Forums on their own NNTP servers
as newsgroups.

Its leaves us to wonder what will happen to the old mirrors, i.e.
Google Groups. That probably depends if Microsoft will allow or not
their name sake and branding to continue to be used as newsgroup names
run by 3rd party servers. Maybe they don't care, maybe they don't
realize they will care once its highly abused more than it is now
where there was filtering going on, but no longer. :)

[Lem]

Post by Pavel A.
Dear users of msnews.microsoft.com,
There are rumors that Microsoft plans to shut down this nntp server.
http://news.cnet.com/8301-13860_3-20004109-56.html
Any thoughts on where we can migrate from here - besides of the
web-based MSDN forums?.
To Google groups, maybe?
Regards,
-- pa

Technically what Microsoft is stopping is the Microsoft.* newsgroups in
lieu of new forums style messages which can also be exposed as "locally
published" newsgroups.
As "Forums Newsgroups," you can download the MS NNTP Bridge
http://connect.microsoft.com/MicrosoftForums
that will allow you to continue to use your favorite desktop news reader
to access the Microsoft Forums Newsgroups.
It actually works pretty well. Not all the old newsgroup "names" are
Microsoft.en-US.kernel
I'm sure in time that other providers will use the MS NNTP Bridge with
NNTP gating software to mirror the MS Forums on their own NNTP servers
as newsgroups.
Its leaves us to wonder what will happen to the old mirrors, i.e. Google
Groups. That probably depends if Microsoft will allow or not their name
sake and branding to continue to be used as newsgroup names run by 3rd
party servers. Maybe they don't care, maybe they don't realize they
will care once its highly abused more than it is now where there was
filtering going on, but no longer. :)

I wouldn't go so far as to say that the nntp bridge "works pretty well."
At least on T'Bird 2.x, the headers and bodies occasionally become
unsynced and the unread message indicator is unreliable.

[Hector Santos]

Ok, "Works as an beta" :)

Yes, I noticed that myself with TBIRD.
--
HLS

Post by Lem

Post by Hector Santos

Post by Pavel A.
Dear users of msnews.microsoft.com,
There are rumors that Microsoft plans to shut down this nntp server.
http://news.cnet.com/8301-13860_3-20004109-56.html
Any thoughts on where we can migrate from here - besides of the
web-based MSDN forums?.
To Google groups, maybe?
Regards,
-- pa

Technically what Microsoft is stopping is the Microsoft.* newsgroups
in lieu of new forums style messages which can also be exposed as
"locally published" newsgroups.
As "Forums Newsgroups," you can download the MS NNTP Bridge
http://connect.microsoft.com/MicrosoftForums
that will allow you to continue to use your favorite desktop news
reader to access the Microsoft Forums Newsgroups.
It actually works pretty well. Not all the old newsgroup "names" are
Microsoft.en-US.kernel
I'm sure in time that other providers will use the MS NNTP Bridge with
NNTP gating software to mirror the MS Forums on their own NNTP servers
as newsgroups.
Its leaves us to wonder what will happen to the old mirrors, i.e.
Google Groups. That probably depends if Microsoft will allow or not
their name sake and branding to continue to be used as newsgroup names
run by 3rd party servers. Maybe they don't care, maybe they don't
realize they will care once its highly abused more than it is now
where there was filtering going on, but no longer. :)

I wouldn't go so far as to say that the nntp bridge "works pretty well."
At least on T'Bird 2.x, the headers and bodies occasionally become
unsynced and the unread message indicator is unreliable.

[Stefan Kuhr]

Hello everyone,

<snip>
As "Forums Newsgroups," you can download the MS NNTP Bridge
http://connect.microsoft.com/MicrosoftForums
that will allow you to continue to use your favorite desktop news reader
to access the Microsoft Forums Newsgroups.
It actually works pretty well. Not all the old newsgroup "names" are

Down anyone have more insight as to how the nntp bridge works with
regards to authenticating the user? I wonder how it deals with my live
ID user name and password and whether it is safe to use it with the same
live ID credentials that I use to access my technet plus subscription or
msdn subscriber downloads, or if this might reveal my credentials to
wiretappers. All information it exposes in its UI is that it obviously
accesses
http://social.microsoft.com/ForumsServicePreview/ForumsService.svc. Note
that this is an http URL, not https.

[Jochen Kalmbach [MVP]]

Hi Stefan!

Post by Stefan Kuhr
Down anyone have more insight as to how the nntp bridge works with
regards to authenticating the user?

It uses the offical documented live ID SKD:
http://msdn.microsoft.com/en-us/library/bb404787.aspx
http://dev.live.com/liveid/

Here is a code sample:
http://msdn.microsoft.com/en-us/library/bb676891.aspx

IMHO it is very secure... and not

[Hector Santos]

Yes, I did noticed that, and AFAICT, the REST requests are all HTTP.

Note: the correct url is:
http://services.social.microsoft.com/forumsServicePreview/ForumsService.svc

This is a primitive 3rd party program. The author seems to be new at
communications requirements. It uses the Live ID Framework Client
SDK for this.

http://msdn.microsoft.com/en-us/library/bb404791.aspx

And it comes with a C# example illustrating the authentication.

For me, since my live id account is a junk account anyway, I don't
worry about it - although they are beginning to force me to use it
more now.
--
HLS

Post by Stefan Kuhr
Hello everyone,

<snip>
As "Forums Newsgroups," you can download the MS NNTP Bridge
http://connect.microsoft.com/MicrosoftForums
that will allow you to continue to use your favorite desktop news reader
to access the Microsoft Forums Newsgroups.
It actually works pretty well. Not all the old newsgroup "names" are

Down anyone have more insight as to how the nntp bridge works with
regards to authenticating the user? I wonder how it deals with my live
ID user name and password and whether it is safe to use it with the same
live ID credentials that I use to access my technet plus subscription or
msdn subscriber downloads, or if this might reveal my credentials to
wiretappers. All information it exposes in its UI is that it obviously
accesses
http://social.microsoft.com/ForumsServicePreview/ForumsService.svc. Note
that this is an http URL, not https.

[Hector Santos]

Just wish to note the actually Live ID authentication process is
internally done over SSL.

Post by Hector Santos
Yes, I did noticed that, and AFAICT, the REST requests are all HTTP.
http://services.social.microsoft.com/forumsServicePreview/ForumsService.svc
This is a primitive 3rd party program. The author seems to be new at
communications requirements. It uses the Live ID Framework Client SDK
for this.
http://msdn.microsoft.com/en-us/library/bb404791.aspx
And it comes with a C# example illustrating the authentication.
For me, since my live id account is a junk account anyway, I don't worry
about it - although they are beginning to force me to use it more now.

[Jochen Kalmbach [MVP]]

Hi Pavel!

Post by Pavel A.
Any thoughts on where we can migrate from here - besides of the
web-based MSDN forums?.

Why not just stay here?
You only need to use a different news-server than news.microsoft.com.
But the group will still exist in the future. And the groups will still
be peered to other news-servers.
NNTP is a peer-to-peer system, so the down of news.microsoft.com will
not matter.

So just change your news-provider and everything will work as today.

[Hector Santos]

Post by Jochen Kalmbach [MVP]
Hi Pavel!

Post by Pavel A.
Any thoughts on where we can migrate from here - besides of the
web-based MSDN forums?.

Why not just stay here?
You only need to use a different news-server than news.microsoft.com.
But the group will still exist in the future. And the groups will still
be peered to other news-servers.

But there is a main HOP source. There still needs to a common source.

Post by Jochen Kalmbach [MVP]
NNTP is a peer-to-peer system, so the down of news.microsoft.com will
not matter.
So just change your news-provider and everything will work as today.

And given the fact that the new systems were not merged anyway, the
only real lost is the Microsoft NNTP server. That is a big lost as
not everyone wants to go OUTSIDE the Microsoft server and other
services will be lost too.

So it will be a big change from that standpoint.

A good solid bridge is all that is needed to use the new storage
forums. This 3rd party bridge "works" but still has issues and is
missing many basic features.

[Jochen Kalmbach [MVP]]

Hi Hector!

Post by Hector Santos

Post by Jochen Kalmbach [MVP]
Why not just stay here?

But there is a main HOP source. There still needs to a common source.

No. NNTP is a peer-to-peer system... there is no "main"...

Post by Hector Santos

Post by Jochen Kalmbach [MVP]
So just change your news-provider and everything will work as today.

And given the fact that the new systems were not merged anyway, the only
real lost is the Microsoft NNTP server.

Exactly!

[hector]

Post by Jochen Kalmbach [MVP]
Hi Hector!

Post by Hector Santos

Post by Jochen Kalmbach [MVP]
Why not just stay here?

But there is a main HOP source. There still needs to a common source.

No. NNTP is a peer-to-peer system... there is no "main"...

Jochen, we are vendors of NNTP software. In addition, we are providers of
newsgroups for our technical support where we have other customers gating
the technical support news mail into their servers and so on.

Of course there is a MAIN source. It has to start from somewhere. Most
PEERS are going to start with the MAIN source, others will use a mirror.
The topology is more like a star network where you main have many hubs. But
there is a main HUB source which is not going to be gating to other servers.

In other words, if you post on the MAIN (Microsoft), they are not exporting
it to others - others servers are importing it. And so on.

That means once this main hub is lost, so are its end users. They will have
to go to another hub, but these hubs will now lose the MAIN source of input.

Post by Jochen Kalmbach [MVP]

Post by Hector Santos

Post by Jochen Kalmbach [MVP]
So just change your news-provider and everything will work as today.

And given the fact that the new systems were not merged anyway, the only
real lost is the Microsoft NNTP server.

Exactly!

Plus the lost of the nodes (users) off the star hub.

Do not take it for granted the that world of users take complete openness to
user external or 3rd party servers as a given.

Maybe I'm old school but there are MANY people who prefer to stick with the
resources and solutions that Microsoft offers. There is a reason why they
even bothered to post the announcement here, even though the storage was
already separate from the new MS Forums storage and they already have began
to create and migrate customers there.

Quite frankly if I was more aware of the fact that the two storages were not
one, I probably would of left this venue long ago. Buts that me, I'm old
school - I don't use 3rd party solutions. Its either Microsoft or we write
it.

That said, the MS related information has grown rich outside of Microsoft
so it does help many and for that reason, maybe, it won't change much.

You would hope not, but you don't know for sure until the plug is actually
pulled from the wall and people actually began to feel that something is no
longer the same.

That is why the NNTP Bridge is important for Microsoft. My only concern
there is that it's a 3rd party tool and they might be underestimating how
important it will be for to minimize the impact on people's long time usage
of the Microsoft NNTP based newsgroups.

[Hector Santos]

Example:

You are ASSUMING that if you use server XYZ, that it will propagate to
all the HUBS when one one is pulled from the star network.


N5 U1 U2
| | /
N4-N3-N2 -- N0 -- U3
| | \
N6 N1 Ui
|
N8 - N8 - N9 - N11 - N12
|
N10


If you consider Microsoft is N0 with its thousands of Ui users, once
N0is gone, N1 and N2 will lost its source.

Now, yes, N2 and N1 will will have to get different hubs. But there
is now a HUGE lost of N0 information. And lets not assume
google.groups is pulling mail from another source other than N0. If
google is N1, N2 and its star chain is LOST.

Post by hector

Post by Jochen Kalmbach [MVP]
Hi Hector!

Post by Hector Santos

Post by Jochen Kalmbach [MVP]
Why not just stay here?

But there is a main HOP source. There still needs to a common source.

No. NNTP is a peer-to-peer system... there is no "main"...

Jochen, we are vendors of NNTP software. In addition, we are providers
of newsgroups for our technical support where we have other customers
gating the technical support news mail into their servers and so on.
Of course there is a MAIN source. It has to start from somewhere. Most
PEERS are going to start with the MAIN source, others will use a mirror.
The topology is more like a star network where you main have many hubs.
But there is a main HUB source which is not going to be gating to other
servers.
In other words, if you post on the MAIN (Microsoft), they are not
exporting it to others - others servers are importing it. And so on.
That means once this main hub is lost, so are its end users. They will
have to go to another hub, but these hubs will now lose the MAIN source
of input.

Post by Jochen Kalmbach [MVP]

Post by Hector Santos

Post by Jochen Kalmbach [MVP]
So just change your news-provider and everything will work as today.

And given the fact that the new systems were not merged anyway, the
only real lost is the Microsoft NNTP server.

Exactly!

Plus the lost of the nodes (users) off the star hub.
Do not take it for granted the that world of users take complete
openness to user external or 3rd party servers as a given.
Maybe I'm old school but there are MANY people who prefer to stick with
the resources and solutions that Microsoft offers. There is a reason
why they even bothered to post the announcement here, even though the
storage was already separate from the new MS Forums storage and they
already have began to create and migrate customers there.
Quite frankly if I was more aware of the fact that the two storages were
not one, I probably would of left this venue long ago. Buts that me,
I'm old school - I don't use 3rd party solutions. Its either Microsoft
or we write it.
That said, the MS related information has grown rich outside of
Microsoft so it does help many and for that reason, maybe, it won't
change much.
You would hope not, but you don't know for sure until the plug is
actually pulled from the wall and people actually began to feel that
something is no longer the same.
That is why the NNTP Bridge is important for Microsoft. My only
concern there is that it's a 3rd party tool and they might be
underestimating how important it will be for to minimize the impact on
people's long time usage of the Microsoft NNTP based newsgroups.

[John John - MVP]

Post by hector

Post by Jochen Kalmbach [MVP]
Hi Hector!

Post by Hector Santos

Post by Jochen Kalmbach [MVP]
Why not just stay here?

But there is a main HOP source. There still needs to a common source.

No. NNTP is a peer-to-peer system... there is no "main"...

Jochen, we are vendors of NNTP software.

And that software is?

John

[Hector Santos]

Post by John John - MVP

Post by hector

Post by Jochen Kalmbach [MVP]
Hi Hector!

Post by Hector Santos

Post by Jochen Kalmbach [MVP]
Why not just stay here?

But there is a main HOP source. There still needs to a common source.

No. NNTP is a peer-to-peer system... there is no "main"...

Jochen, we are vendors of NNTP software.

And that software is?

Wildcat! Interactive Net Server (WINSERVER)

http://www.santronics.com (sales)
http://www.winserver.com (tech support)

NNTP is just one small part of a totally integrated mail system.

[John John - MVP]

Post by hector
Of course there is a MAIN source. It has to start from somewhere. Most
PEERS are going to start with the MAIN source, others will use a mirror.
The topology is more like a star network where you main have many hubs.
But there is a main HUB source which is not going to be gating to other
servers.

That is certainly not my (and many others, I'm sure) understanding of
the Usenet network. It may have been a star network in the very early
days but it is now, and has for quite a while been described as a mesh
network.

John

[Hector Santos]

Post by John John - MVP

Post by hector
Of course there is a MAIN source. It has to start from somewhere.
Most PEERS are going to start with the MAIN source, others will use a
mirror. The topology is more like a star network where you main have
many hubs. But there is a main HUB source which is not going to be
gating to other servers.

That is certainly not my (and many others, I'm sure) understanding of
the Usenet network. It may have been a star network in the very early
days but it is now, and has for quite a while been described as a mesh
network.

Ok, first, the microsoft.public.* newsgroups are not usenet.

Second, call it what it want, it is still the same thing. A mesh is
just a form of a star network.

No matter what you can wish to call it, it requires coordination and
each node knowing who are their Uplinks and Downlinks which is what
experts in the mail distribution market, who still run the show, know
it as. Otherwise you will have redundancy (and hence duplicity).

An uplink is who you send data too, and downlink is who you get data from.

Now, in a mesh, redundancy may be part of the expectation with
duplicity considered a lower overhead operation then it was in other
days where hardware did did not allow for such low efficiency however
it still needed to be checked.

In a well coordinated network, to minimize duplicity, the nodes are
usually going to go to a more centralize hub (lets call it MAIN). If
the Nodes are going to also serve as HUBS for others, then they better
have dupe checking because they don't KNOW if their own nodes are also
using the MAIN hub.

In general, old and current, every node has a list of remote host they
will connect too to IMPORT and EXPORT information.

If you wish to see the PATH a messge takes from any server, see the
Path: header in a newsgroup article.

Viewing your message from the Microsoft NNTP server, I see:

Path: TK2MSFTNGP01.phx.gbl!TK2MSFTNGP06.phx.gbl

That means that it was posted at

TK2MSFTNGP06.phx.gbl

but it was also imported to:

TK2MSFTNGP01.phx.gbl

You can tell it was posted at TK2MSFTNGP06.phx.gbl because of the
message-ID: header:

Message-ID: <***@TK2MSFTNGP06.phx.gbl>

Now if I go to google groups and see your message from there, I see
(all one line)

Path: g2news1.google.com!
news1.google.com!
news.glorb.com!
feeder.erje.net!
weretis.net!
feeder1.news.weretis.net!
TK2MSFTNGP01.phx.gbl!
TK2MSFTNGP06.phx.gbl

Starting from the bottom, the feeder1.news.weretis.net! server it
pulled from Microsoft TK2MSFTNGP01.phx.gbl! and it was gated thru a
number of 5 additional servers.

Well, #1 once the MS servers goes down, Google will not be able to
pull from TK2MSFTNGP01.phx.gbl! It will have find some thing else.

#2, you won't have MS server to post, and if you found another, you
don't know if Google will be pulling from it or that your Serer will
be posting to GOOGLE.

So no matter want you wish to call it, there is is a "backbone"
concept where there is a main hub who is normally known as the OWNER
of the newsgroup.

In regards to USENET, this is different issue. This is in industry
sponsored backbone. Not one company ones it. Its like a DNS.
Everyone has it access to add and remove from it. As long as you have
have primary uplink you can act as a primary server as well.

Anyway, with usenet, long ago, we requested an alt.* group for usenet,
It still exist:

alt.bbs.wildcat

We abandoned it long ago around 1997 when it became a high volume of
spam for us and the anonymous dirt was not something we wanted to
bother with our customers with when it was gated into our support
avenues.

The only reason we had no problem abandoning it was because it wasn't
our NEWSGROUP. We were not the main hub for it.

Thats not the case here with Microsoft.* newsgroup. These are not
usenet groups. The main hub was Microsoft where others pulled from.

Now, if someone were to migrate all the microsoft.public.* groups into
usenet groups, then you and Jochen would be correct, it wouldn't
matter if the Microsoft NNTP servers goes down because they would be
just a node off the backbone, not the main hub for it.

Hey, who knows, Maybe Google's answer to this Microsoft dropping of
their NNTP server would be to announce their own services to be
available. But they don't want people off the web for the same reason
Microsoft wants people to use the web. :)

[John John - MVP]

Post by Hector Santos

Post by John John - MVP

Post by hector
Of course there is a MAIN source. It has to start from somewhere.
Most PEERS are going to start with the MAIN source, others will use a
mirror. The topology is more like a star network where you main have
many hubs. But there is a main HUB source which is not going to be
gating to other servers.

That is certainly not my (and many others, I'm sure) understanding of
the Usenet network. It may have been a star network in the very early
days but it is now, and has for quite a while been described as a mesh
network.

Ok, first, the microsoft.public.* newsgroups are not usenet.

Gee, I wonder why Microsoft themselves refer to them as Usenet groups...

http://www.microsoft.com/communities/guide/newsgroupfaq.mspx

Post by Hector Santos
{snip]
Well, #1 once the MS servers goes down, Google will not be able to pull
from TK2MSFTNGP01.phx.gbl! It will have find some thing else.
#2, you won't have MS server to post, and if you found another, you
don't know if Google will be pulling from it or that your Serer will be
posting to GOOGLE.

People post to the groups from all kinds of different servers, when the
Microsoft servers are down these other servers still synchronize between
themselves without any problem and these folks who post on other servers
can still post and read without the intermediary of Microsoft servers.
We have often seen this in the past when outages of a few hours or more
at the Microsoft servers have happened and some of us use other servers
to keep on posting, when the Microsoft servers come back only line they
then "catch-up" and then all the posts show up many hours latter on
these servers. This is obvious enough when you use non Microsoft
servers to read the posts in Microsoft groups, all kinds of posts which
have not made it to the MS servers, or posts which have been removed
from the MS servers are on the other servers for all to see and read.

John

[Maxim S. Shatskih]

Post by John John - MVP
Gee, I wonder why Microsoft themselves refer to them as Usenet groups...

This is, as Hector correctly told us, "Microsoft's Usenet" :-)

Usenet technically, but is not set up to be the part of the public Usenet.

Well, there are comp.xxx public Usenet newsgroups, which duplicate most microsoft.xxx ones.

Probably those of us who hate the web interfaces should move there.

Anyway for my area of interest - Windows kernel - we have excellent OSROnline forums, where the traffic is around 4 times more then on microsoft.xxx

[Jonathan de Boyne Pollard]

<!DOCTYPE HTML PUBLIC "-//W3C//DTD HTML 4.01 Transitional//EN">
<html>
<head>
<meta content="text/html; charset=ISO-8859-1"
http-equiv="Content-Type">
<title></title>
</head>
<body bgcolor="#ffffff" text="#000000">
<blockquote cite="mid:***@TK2MSFTNGP05.phx.gbl" type="cite">
<blockquote type="cite">
<p>Gee, I wonder why Microsoft themselves refer to them as Usenet
groups...</p>
</blockquote>
<p>This is, as Hector correctly told us, "Microsoft's Usenet" :-)</p>
</blockquote>
<p>No.&nbsp; It's just Usenet.&nbsp; It's a <code>microsoft.*</code> hierarchy
of newsgroups, but that doesn't make it owned, or run, by Microsoft.&nbsp;
Much of what M. Santos is writing in this thread about star networks,
hubs, "backbone listings", and so forth is just complete unadulterated
twaddle.&nbsp; The statements about "owners of newsgroups" are more of the
same, alas.<br>
</p>
<p>Of course, the fact that this is Usenet is almost certainly part of
the problem for Microsoft.&nbsp; It has no control.&nbsp; It was a problem for JP
Software with the <code>comp.os.msdos.4dos</code> newsgroup years ago,
when it pulled out of Usenet and tried to get everyone to instead come
to WWW-based forums that it had full control over.&nbsp; This is Usenet.&nbsp;
There isn't a central authority.</p>
<blockquote cite="mid:***@TK2MSFTNGP05.phx.gbl" type="cite">
<p>Usenet technically, but is not set up to be the part of the public
Usenet.</p>
</blockquote>
<p>Actually, that's exactly what it <em>is</em> set up to be.&nbsp;
Otherwise I wouldn't have seen your message and you wouldn't be seeing
this message of mine.&nbsp; Don't conflate the Big 8 with Usenet.</p>
</body>
</html>

[Hector Santos]

Post by Maxim S. Shatskih

Post by John John - MVP
Gee, I wonder why Microsoft themselves refer to them as Usenet groups...

This is, as Hector correctly told us, "Microsoft's Usenet" :-)

No. It's just Usenet. It's a |microsoft.*| hierarchy of newsgroups,
but that doesn't make it owned, or run, by Microsoft. Much of what M.
Santos is writing in this thread about star networks, hubs, "backbone
listings", and so forth is just complete unadulterated twaddle. The
statements about "owners of newsgroups" are more of the same, alas.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Usenet

Looks like a star topology

Microsoft "owns" the microsoft.* groups. Whether they wish keep it
listed on the backbone listing, its up to them and yes, there is a
"administrator" that issues controls.

Of course, the fact that this is Usenet is almost certainly part of the
problem for Microsoft. It has no control.

Not true, they can ask to get it remove. If they don't others have
the power (IETF, ISC.ORG) to remove it from the listing.

That doesn't mean other usenet feed sites has to honor a change
request or new listing. Thats up to them. But if they want to be in
sync with the rest of the feeds, they will work with the new listing.

As Russ Allbery clearly stated here in response to Julien's plan to
have the microsoft.* newsgroups remove from the usenet BACKBONE listing:

http://groups.google.com/group/microsoft.public.news.server/msg/6cf4bbc6284d92a3

The whole point of that hierarchy was that it was
synchronized with Microsoft; without that point, there are lots of
other hierarchies that can absorb the traffic, and without
spreading it across way more groups than the residual traffic is
likely to require.

Look at the word *synchronized with Microsoft" - study what it means.

As soon as MS pulls the plug, Julien plans to remove the groups from
the listings.

I just wanted to let you know that I will issue rmgroup
control articles, reflecting the changes that are bound to
happen on msnews.microsoft.com, when they occur.

[John John - MVP]

Post by Hector Santos

Post by Maxim S. Shatskih

Post by John John - MVP
Gee, I wonder why Microsoft themselves refer to them as Usenet groups...

This is, as Hector correctly told us, "Microsoft's Usenet" :-)

No. It's just Usenet. It's a |microsoft.*| hierarchy of newsgroups,
but that doesn't make it owned, or run, by Microsoft. Much of what M.
Santos is writing in this thread about star networks, hubs, "backbone
listings", and so forth is just complete unadulterated twaddle. The
statements about "owners of newsgroups" are more of the same, alas.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Usenet
Looks like a star topology

How can you look at a portion of the network, a partial sketch of 3
servers amongst thousands, and declare this to be a star network? Maybe
you should have read instead of just looking at pictures:

"One notable difference between a BBS or web forum and Usenet is the
absence of a central server and dedicated administrator. Usenet is
distributed among a large, constantly changing conglomeration of servers
that store and forward messages to one another. These servers are
loosely connected in a variable mesh. This is similar to the complex
transportation plan of a city. There are multiple ways to get to any
point in the city. If one of those ways is blocked for some reason,
there is always another avenue available to get there. In this manner,
the User Network or Usenet allows newsgroup postings to reach their many
destinations robustly."

This is what a star network looks like:
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Star_network

It is completely unsuitable for Usenet robustness, as mentioned in the
article:

"The primary disadvantage of a star topology is the high dependence of
the system on the functioning of the central hub. While the failure of
an individual link only results in the isolation of a single node, the
failure of the central hub renders the network inoperable, immediately
isolating all nodes. The performance and scalability of the network also
depend on the capabilities of the hub."

Post by Hector Santos
Microsoft "owns" the microsoft.* groups. Whether they wish keep it
listed on the backbone listing, its up to them and yes, there is a
"administrator" that issues controls.

Of course, the fact that this is Usenet is almost certainly part of
the problem for Microsoft. It has no control.

Not true, they can ask to get it remove. If they don't others have the
power (IETF, ISC.ORG) to remove it from the listing.

IETF? ISC.ORG? Do you even know what are the missions and mandates of
these organizations? Here is a hint, it has to do with protocols and
technical aspects of Usenet/Internet traffic, they don't have any powers
whatsoever to force anyone to do anything and they certainly wouldn't
get involved in any squabbles between individuals or entities about
newsgroups!

John

[Hector Santos]

Post by John John - MVP

Post by Hector Santos
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Usenet
Looks like a star topology

How can you look at a portion of the network, a partial sketch of 3
servers amongst thousands, and declare this to be a star network? Maybe

As I stated in the beginning of your onslaught:

A mesh is just a form of a star network.

And I further added:

Now, in a mesh, redundancy may be part of the expectation with
duplicity considered a lower overhead operation then it was in
older days where hardware did not allow for such low efficiency
however it still needed to be checked.

But you probably don't know what that means.

Post by John John - MVP

Post by Hector Santos

Post by Jonathan de Boyne Pollard
Of course, the fact that this is Usenet is almost certainly part of
the problem for Microsoft. It has no control.

Not true, they can ask to get it remove. If they don't others have
the power (IETF, ISC.ORG) to remove it from the listing.

IETF? ISC.ORG? Do you even know what are the missions and mandates of
these organizations? Here is a hint, it has to do with protocols and
technical aspects of Usenet/Internet traffic, they don't have any powers
whatsoever to force anyone to do anything

HA! well, you don't seem to be have been involved much around the
IETF then!

Post by John John - MVP
and they certainly wouldn't get involved in any squabbles between
individuals or entities about newsgroups!

You are right, they will do want they want. They don't need to explain
anything to you.

Go get your current usenet listing at:

ftp://ftp.isc.org/pub/usenet/CONFIG/newsgroups

And see if you can POLITELY ask to manage it yourself.

http://groups.google.com/group/microsoft.public.news.server/msg/6cf4bbc6284d92a3

But you are certainly welcome to maintain your own list and share it
among your network of friends who know about you.

If there is one thing about the old guards, including the old Fidonet,
they LOVE to maintain LIST. Oh its FREE - now go try to take control
of it.

[John John - MVP]

Post by Hector Santos

Post by John John - MVP

Post by Hector Santos
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Usenet
Looks like a star topology

How can you look at a portion of the network, a partial sketch of 3
servers amongst thousands, and declare this to be a star network?

A mesh is just a form of a star network.

Sheesh, now you are trying to backpeddle! Read here:
http://www.myreader.co.uk/msg/12534.aspx

"Although the UK Network may once have been a star network, this is no
longer the case. There are many news servers each of which has multiple
connections to others forming a mesh-like network. There are no central
sites in a position to control what comes in and out of the network as a
whole."

It's the same thing worldwide, trying to imply that the Usenet is a star
network in an effort to bolster your claim that the MS servers are a
mandatory and necessary "hub" in the distribution of the microsoft.*
hierarchy is lame to say the least!

I'm done with this thread, good bye!

John

[Hector Santos]

Post by John John - MVP

Post by Hector Santos

Post by John John - MVP

Post by Hector Santos
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Usenet
Looks like a star topology

How can you look at a portion of the network, a partial sketch of 3
servers amongst thousands, and declare this to be a star network?

A mesh is just a form of a star network.

http://www.myreader.co.uk/msg/12534.aspx
"Although the UK Network may once have been a star network, this is no
longer the case. There are many news servers each of which has multiple
connections to others forming a mesh-like network. There are no central
sites in a position to control what comes in and out of the network as a
whole."
It's the same thing worldwide, trying to imply that the Usenet is a star
network in an effort to bolster your claim that the MS servers are a
mandatory and necessary "hub" in the distribution of the microsoft.*
hierarchy is lame to say the least!
I'm done with this thread, good bye!

You're right, you should because you twisted words to suit whatever
purpose you had here.

To indicate that me referencing a picture of "three" nodes in a usenet
network is not representative of the "thousands" of nodes in the
network is ludicrous and a lame attempt of trolling for an nonsense
argument.

The above does not change the fact that a node relative to itself
operates like a star and as I stated in my last post, you have no
control of what your nodes and points off your server will do. In
other words, you don't need to go to a main hub to get your feeds.
That still doesn't eliminate the idea each node itself operates as a star.

What? You think you can just post in UK node and it will magically
appear in some far distance USA node without some form of organized
uplink/downlink transport system? Are you broadcasting by posting the
article at different servers crossing your fingers that at least ONE
will make and the others will by rejected as DUPES?

And again, unless you UNDERSTAND the intricacies of developing hosting
software especially for all hosting operationally needs when it comes
to distribution, then yes, you should say good bye and shut up.

[Marianne]

Post by Hector Santos

Post by John John - MVP

Post by Hector Santos

Post by John John - MVP

Post by Hector Santos
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Usenet
Looks like a star topology

How can you look at a portion of the network, a partial sketch of 3
servers amongst thousands, and declare this to be a star network?

A mesh is just a form of a star network.

http://www.myreader.co.uk/msg/12534.aspx
"Although the UK Network may once have been a star network, this is no
longer the case. There are many news servers each of which has multiple
connections to others forming a mesh-like network. There are no central
sites in a position to control what comes in and out of the network as a
whole."
It's the same thing worldwide, trying to imply that the Usenet is a star
network in an effort to bolster your claim that the MS servers are a
mandatory and necessary "hub" in the distribution of the microsoft.*
hierarchy is lame to say the least!
I'm done with this thread, good bye!

You're right, you should because you twisted words to suit whatever
purpose you had here.
To indicate that me referencing a picture of "three" nodes in a usenet
network is not representative of the "thousands" of nodes in the network
is ludicrous and a lame attempt of trolling for an nonsense argument.
The above does not change the fact that a node relative to itself operates
like a star and as I stated in my last post, you have no control of what
your nodes and points off your server will do. In other words, you don't
need to go to a main hub to get your feeds.
That still doesn't eliminate the idea each node itself operates as a star.
What? You think you can just post in UK node and it will magically appear
in some far distance USA node without some form of organized
uplink/downlink transport system? Are you broadcasting by posting the
article at different servers crossing your fingers that at least ONE will
make and the others will by rejected as DUPES?
And again, unless you UNDERSTAND the intricacies of developing hosting
software especially for all hosting operationally needs when it comes to
distribution, then yes, you should say good bye and shut up.

And you sell nntp software? For the sake of your customers I hope that your
tech support knows more about newsgroups than you do because you don't know
wtf you are talking about! Anyone reading this thread will see that you
haven't got a clue and they will surely pass on your software offering!
You've indentified yourself as working for a certain company any you have
posted links to your company in this thread, by doing so you have attached
your company to the discussion. After reading this thread and seeing how
you completely misunderstand Usenet I can say without any hesitation that I
would never purchase your software! Nice job you clueless moron!

M

[Hector Santos]

Post by John John - MVP

Post by Hector Santos
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Usenet
Looks like a star topology

How can you look at a portion of the network, a partial sketch of 3
servers amongst thousands, and declare this to be a star network? Maybe
"One notable difference between a BBS or web forum and Usenet is the
absence of a central server and dedicated administrator. Usenet is
distributed among a large, constantly changing conglomeration of servers
that store and forward messages to one another. These servers are
loosely connected in a variable mesh. This is similar to the complex
transportation plan of a city. There are multiple ways to get to any
point in the city. If one of those ways is blocked for some reason,
there is always another avenue available to get there. In this manner,
the User Network or Usenet allows newsgroup postings to reach their many
destinations robustly."
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Star_network
It is completely unsuitable for Usenet robustness, as mentioned in the
"The primary disadvantage of a star topology is the high dependence of
the system on the functioning of the central hub. While the failure of
an individual link only results in the isolation of a single node, the
failure of the central hub renders the network inoperable, immediately
isolating all nodes. The performance and scalability of the network also
depend on the capabilities of the hub."

Whats funny about this is that you really don't know what it means
because you probably never operated or hosted a server.

I'll try to explain it to you:

Its relative - think of yourself as a HOST operator.

When you first install whatever hosting software you have, it begins
EMPTY!

Now YOU, as a HUMAN have to decide where you will get your feeds for
whatever information you wish to provide for your users and/or LOCALLY
HOSTED host operator.

Old school operators will understand terms like users as POINTS

HOST-JOHN <---> USER-A

The key point is that the USER is not hosting anyone else. But maybe
you are going to like to host other sites, free or fee or whatever:

HOST-JOHN <---> USER-A
|
HOST-BIZ-CUSTOMER

Relative to USER-A and the BIZ customer, YOUR are their HUB and its an
the form of a STAR.

In the old days, it was more of a locality, distance issue simply
because of the networking. But the internet allows you to go to other
HUBs now who offer the same feeds that you wanted.

There are MANY reasons, seriously, why users and nodes go to different
sources or multiple different sources.

Assuming you have access to anyone you are working with, its possible
to download form one host and upload to another. Its akin to reading
on this server and for some reason, you decide to post a reply via
google or some other site.

But keep in mind that USER and a HOST are different when it comes to
redundancy and duplicity.

If a HOST is going to go different multiple HOST for the same feeds,
the NNTP protocol has logic to check for dupes.

The point is today, you don't even think about it anymore. The
hardware, the bandwidth and software are that good to completely
automated it. It is still overhead, but its not something that was a
BIG BIG concern in the past where FEEDS are large and expensive. The
dupes where still there but if there was a real big issue, someone
traced it down to the problem node.

Lets put it this way, if you became an ISP - you will think STAR
network relative to yourself; you will sell services to NODES off your
hub - users and other hosting sites. You normally will not have any
control what this nodes will do themselves, but if one of your nodes
where getting duplicate feeds from someone else, and you UPLOADED it
to the hub, do you think they will accept it?

[Hector Santos]

Post by John John - MVP

Post by Hector Santos
Ok, first, the microsoft.public.* newsgroups are not usenet.

Gee, I wonder why Microsoft themselves refer to them as Usenet groups...
http://www.microsoft.com/communities/guide/newsgroupfaq.mspx

Unfortunately, another case of Microsoft creating user confusion in
this regard.

Microsoft.public.* are *not* part of the usenet backbone newsgroup
listing nor backbone stream.

Check it out yourself. If you have access to a major ISP where you
have a high trunk line backwidth such as a T1 or T3, you will see that
the usenet feed newsgroup listing does not include microsoft.public.*

If a smaller ISP is showing microsoft.public.*, then they are directly
or indirectly going to Microsoft servers and are MERGING it with the
usenet listing. But they are two different sources of feeds.

Post by John John - MVP

Post by Hector Santos
#2, you won't have MS server to post, and if you found another, you
don't know if Google will be pulling from it or that your Serer will
be posting to GOOGLE.

People post to the groups from all kinds of different servers, when the
Microsoft servers are down these other servers still synchronize between
themselves without any problem and these folks who post on other servers
can still post and read without the intermediary of Microsoft servers.
We have often seen this in the past when outages of a few hours or more
at the Microsoft servers have happened and some of us use other servers
to keep on posting, when the Microsoft servers come back only line they
then "catch-up" and then all the posts show up many hours latter on
these servers. This is obvious enough when you use non Microsoft
servers to read the posts in Microsoft groups, all kinds of posts which
have not made it to the MS servers, or posts which have been removed
from the MS servers are on the other servers for all to see and read.

All that will change one MS pulls the plug from the wall.

While you might find another site that keeps the newsgroups and they
still remain relatively active, that is only because the site itself
have become the MAIN source for others to feed into - a large part of
the chain. But those chains that feed off Microsoft only are lost
unless they feed into someone else.

[Lem]

Hector Santos wrote:
<snip>

Check it out yourself. If you have access to a major ISP where you have
a high trunk line backwidth such as a T1 or T3, you will see that the
usenet feed newsgroup listing does not include microsoft.public.*
If a smaller ISP is showing microsoft.public.*, then they are directly
or indirectly going to Microsoft servers and are MERGING it with the
usenet listing. But they are two different sources of feeds.

<snip>

I have no expertise at all in newsgroup management, but just to inject a
fact into all of this speculation, Earthlink (which I would characterize
as a "major ISP") includes the microsoft.public.* groups on its news
servers. Whether it will continue to do so after Microsoft discontinues
its support for the newsgroups is, of course, is another story.

[Hector Santos]

<snip>

Post by Hector Santos
Check it out yourself. If you have access to a major ISP where you
have a high trunk line backwidth such as a T1 or T3, you will see that
the usenet feed newsgroup listing does not include microsoft.public.*
If a smaller ISP is showing microsoft.public.*, then they are directly
or indirectly going to Microsoft servers and are MERGING it with the
usenet listing. But they are two different sources of feeds.

<snip>
I have no expertise at all in newsgroup management, but just to inject a
fact into all of this speculation, Earthlink (which I would characterize
as a "major ISP") includes the microsoft.public.* groups on its news
servers. Whether it will continue to do so after Microsoft discontinues
its support for the newsgroups is, of course, is another story.

If you see microsoft.* feeds in your Earthlink ISP NNTP news service,
then you they are directly or indirectly getting it from somewhere
that provides microsoft.public.* but theses groups are not part of the
usenet backbone.

There are merged from your view point, as a user of earthlink.

For example:

If you go to a news server XYZ.COM, and telnet it it on port 119.

Telnet xyz.com 119

You might see this:

200 Server Site Name version, posting allowed

Type HELP

and among the listing, you see the LIST command

100 Legal commands are :
article [MessageID|Number]
authinfo [user|pass|generic|transact] <data>
body [MessageID|Number]
check <message-id>
date
group newsgroup
head [MessageID|Number]
help
ihave <message-id>
last
list
[active|newsgroups[wildmat]|srchfields|searchable|prettynames[wildmat]]
listgroup [newsgroup]
mode stream|reader
newgroups yymmdd hhmmss ["GMT"] [<distributions>]
newnews wildmat yymmdd hhmmss ["GMT"] [<distributions>]
next
post
quit
search
stat [MessageID|number]
xhdr header [range|MessageID]
xover [range]
xpat header range|MessageID pat [morepat ...]
xreplic newsgroup/message-number[,newsgroup/message-number...]
takethis <message-id>
.

If you type LIST NEWSGROUPS

you will get the listing of the news groups that is available on that
server.

Among the list, you will see a MERGE of usenet plus private newsgroups

alt.* << - USENET, thousands of these
comp.* << - USENET, thousands of these
Earthlink.* << - a few of these for EarthLink techncal support
microsoft.* << - plus the private Microsoft groups.

The listing might stay after MS pulls the plug, but you won't see any
new mail unless EarthLink goes to another source (assuming they go
directly to microsoft for the news). But that new source might be
dependent on getting mail from msnews.microsoft.com. So its like an
old telephone listing - call it and no one is there.

So the listing might remain, but it will remain quite.

EARTHLINK connects to where they get the usenet BACKBONE feeds. They
are a big "major" ISP, but there are bigger ones - they pay backbone
companies, the Telcos. They are not AT&T, Verizon (formerly, MCI/
UUNET), the guys who own the "wires" - the infrastructure.

[John John - MVP]

Post by John John - MVP

Post by Hector Santos
Ok, first, the microsoft.public.* newsgroups are not usenet.

Gee, I wonder why Microsoft themselves refer to them as Usenet groups...
http://www.microsoft.com/communities/guide/newsgroupfaq.mspx

Unfortunately, another case of Microsoft creating user confusion in this
regard.
Microsoft.public.* are *not* part of the usenet backbone newsgroup
listing nor backbone stream.
Check it out yourself. If you have access to a major ISP where you have
a high trunk line backwidth such as a T1 or T3, you will see that the
usenet feed newsgroup listing does not include microsoft.public.*
If a smaller ISP is showing microsoft.public.*, then they are directly
or indirectly going to Microsoft servers and are MERGING it with the
usenet listing. But they are two different sources of feeds.

Post by John John - MVP

Post by Hector Santos
#2, you won't have MS server to post, and if you found another, you
don't know if Google will be pulling from it or that your Serer will
be posting to GOOGLE.

People post to the groups from all kinds of different servers, when
the Microsoft servers are down these other servers still synchronize
between themselves without any problem and these folks who post on
other servers can still post and read without the intermediary of
Microsoft servers. We have often seen this in the past when outages of
a few hours or more at the Microsoft servers have happened and some of
us use other servers to keep on posting, when the Microsoft servers
come back only line they then "catch-up" and then all the posts show
up many hours latter on these servers. This is obvious enough when
you use non Microsoft servers to read the posts in Microsoft groups,
all kinds of posts which have not made it to the MS servers, or posts
which have been removed from the MS servers are on the other servers
for all to see and read.

All that will change one MS pulls the plug from the wall.
While you might find another site that keeps the newsgroups and they
still remain relatively active, that is only because the site itself
have become the MAIN source for others to feed into - a large part of
the chain. But those chains that feed off Microsoft only are lost
unless they feed into someone else.

The groups are on *many* usenet servers, majors like Giganews as well as
small guys like aioe carry them. If these guys refuse to honor the
remove group notices the groups will continue to exist on these servers
and peerage will continue between any and all who decide to keep on
carrying the groups. There is no denying that a majority of the posts
originates from the Microsoft servers and that without these servers the
groups may or will probably wither and die but the death will not be
because Microsoft servers are not there to act as a peerage "hub".

John

[Hector Santos]

Post by John John - MVP

Post by Hector Santos
All that will change one MS pulls the plug from the wall.
While you might find another site that keeps the newsgroups and they
still remain relatively active, that is only because the site itself
have become the MAIN source for others to feed into - a large part of
the chain. But those chains that feed off Microsoft only are lost
unless they feed into someone else.

The groups are on *many* usenet servers, majors like Giganews as well as
small guys like aioe carry them. If these guys refuse to honor the
remove group notices the groups will continue to exist on these servers
and peerage will continue between any and all who decide to keep on
carrying the groups. There is no denying that a majority of the posts
originates from the Microsoft servers and that without these servers the
groups may or will probably wither and die but the death will not be
because Microsoft servers are not there to act as a peerage "hub".

Right, the death will be relative to the users of where they decide to
reconnect.

The fact is that many sites and end users use msnews.microsoft.com as
their site feed and now they will need to go to other sites. The
issue is that those other sites might also had been using Microsoft.

So sure, they will need to change to new site so that a link won't be
broken. As long as there remain a common list of newsgroups
available, and it includes microsoft.*, its all good as far as getting
it going.

[Pavel A.]

Post by Jochen Kalmbach [MVP]
Hi Pavel!

Post by Pavel A.
Any thoughts on where we can migrate from here - besides of the web-based
MSDN forums?.

Why not just stay here?
You only need to use a different news-server than news.microsoft.com.
But the group will still exist in the future. And the groups will still be
peered to other news-servers.
NNTP is a peer-to-peer system, so the down of news.microsoft.com will not
matter.
So just change your news-provider and everything will work as today.
--
Greetings
Jochen
My blog about Win32 and .NET
http://blog.kalmbachnet.de/

Thank you Jochen and Mr. Burn,

I share concerns expressed by Hector Santos, that MS won't like Google
or others carrying their newsgroups. The distributed and free Usenet has its
merits,
but these techical NGs are focused on Microsoft ecosystem, so naturally
they better should stay with Microsoft.
If we can continue to use newsreaders rather than web interface (with all
due respect to AJAX....)
and still conect to the central MS server, then this bridge indeed looks
like a good solution for me.

Thanks,
-- pa

[Jonathan de Boyne Pollard]

<!DOCTYPE HTML PUBLIC "-//W3C//DTD HTML 4.01 Transitional//EN">
<html>
<head>
<meta content="text/html; charset=ISO-8859-1"
http-equiv="Content-Type">
<title></title>
</head>
<body bgcolor="#ffffff" text="#000000">
<blockquote cite="mid:%***@TK2MSFTNGP05.phx.gbl"
type="cite">
<p>I share concerns expressed by Hector Santos, [...]</p>
</blockquote>
<p>You shouldn't.&nbsp; Hector Santos is talking rubbish.&nbsp; Again.<br>
</p>
<blockquote cite="mid:%***@TK2MSFTNGP05.phx.gbl"
type="cite">
<p>The distributed and free Usenet has its merits,
[...]</p>
</blockquote>
<p>... and is how many people have been accessing these newsgroups for
many years, including anyone posting from Google Groups.&nbsp; This is
Usenet, and these are Usenet newsgroups.<br>
</p>
<blockquote cite="mid:%***@TK2MSFTNGP05.phx.gbl"
type="cite">
<p>If we can continue to use newsreaders rather than web interface
(with all due respect to AJAX....) and still conect to the central MS
server, then this bridge indeed looks like a good solution for me.
</p>
</blockquote>
<p id="line1">You're still making the fundamental mistake of thinking
that there's a "central server".&nbsp; Ignore the Sanotosisms.&nbsp; Xyr
description of what happens is wrong on about six or seven different
counts.&nbsp; Listen to Jochen Kalmbach.&nbsp; Xe has far more clue, here.&nbsp;
Here's some irony for you:&nbsp; If you did what M. Santos said to do and
went to your ISP and looked, you'll probably find that (presuming that
it actually runs a Usenet node at all, of course) your ISP does,
indeed, carry the entire <code>microsoft.*</code> newsgroup hierarchy,
and you could have obtained it from your ISP's Usenet node all along.&nbsp; <br>
</p>
<p id="line1">Most commercial Usenet nodes run by ISPs have,
historically, carried many of these big non-Big8 newsgroup hierarchies.&nbsp;
Usenet isn't just, and never has been, the Big 8.&nbsp; The question is
whether ISPs will continue to carry the <code>microsoft.*</code>
hierarchy in the future.&nbsp; It's more likely, nowadays, given the trend
of recent years, that they'll just discontinue Usenet service outright
than fiddle with adjusting a few lines in active files for one
hierarchy, to be blunt.<br>
</p>
</body>
</html>

[Hector Santos]

Post by Pavel A.
If we can continue to use newsreaders rather than web interface (with
all due respect to AJAX....) and still conect to the central MS
server, then this bridge indeed looks like a good solution for me.

You're still making the fundamental mistake of thinking that there's a
"central server". Ignore the Sanotosisms. Xyr description of what
happens is wrong on about six or seven different counts. Listen to
Jochen Kalmbach. Xe has far more clue, here. Here's some irony for
you: If you did what M. Santos said to do and went to your ISP and
looked, you'll probably find that (presuming that it actually runs a
Usenet node at all, of course) your ISP does, indeed, carry the entire
|microsoft.*| newsgroup hierarchy, and you could have obtained it from
your ISP's Usenet node all along.

Ahh, hence the erroneous presumption that every node carries the
entire usenet feed. WRONG!

Again the TROLL is missing the point.

Once the MS NNTP Server goes down, its chain of nodes including
end-users will no longer get its exchange of microsoft.* only mail.
They have to go else where and thats a MAJOR lost of information and
users and active user support people.

PS: There is one good thing about the MS Forums! No more trolls such
as the Jonathans - which I am sure you won't mind as you won't be able
to handle anything you can't cross post all over the place.

[LD5SZRA]

Most probably you won't be able to move to anywhere else; not even
on forums because Microsoft hasn't got any plans to open forums
for Windows XP and earlier technology. Somebody suggested that
you can go to other P2P newsgroups like Google or aioe.org. This
again won't be possible because microsoft may force them to close
their newsgroups bearing Micro$hit name.

The only alternative I can think of is for somebody to organize a
group of about 10 individuals to come together and start their own
newsgroups to be financed by advertising and volunteers. I am
willing to put my name forward for this project provided there are
individuals who have some basic knowledge of hosting NNTPs which
can be expanded further as time goes by. I am good at programming
and developing websites using Java, Javascript and ASP and perhaps
some networking skills and SQL servers. that is all I know at
present.

hth

Post by Pavel A.
Dear users of msnews.microsoft.com,
There are rumors that Microsoft plans to shut down this nntp server.
http://news.cnet.com/8301-13860_3-20004109-56.html
Any thoughts on where we can migrate from here - besides of the web-based
MSDN forums?.
To Google groups, maybe?
Regards,
-- pa

--
THE INFORMATION IS PROVIDED "AS IS" WITHOUT WARRANTY OF ANY
KIND. LD5SZRA DISCLAIMS ALL WARRANTIES, EITHER EXPRESSED OR
IMPLIED, INCLUDING THE WARRANTIES OF MERCHANTABILITY AND
FITNESS FOR A PARTICULAR PURPOSE. IN NO EVENT SHALL LD5SZRA
OR ITS ASSOCIATES BE LIABLE FOR ANY DAMAGES WHATSOEVER
INCLUDING DIRECT, INDIRECT, INCIDENTAL, CONSEQUENTIAL, LOSS OF
BUSINESS PROFITS OR SPECIAL DAMAGES, EVEN IF LD5SZRA OR ITS
ASSOCIATES HAVE BEEN ADVISED OF THE POSSIBILITY OF SUCH
DAMAGES. SOME STATES DO NOT ALLOW THE EXCLUSION OR
LIMITATION OF LIABILITY FOR CONSEQUENTIAL OR INCIDENTAL
DAMAGES SO THE FOREGOING LIMITATION MAY NOT APPLY.

Copyright LD5SZRA 2010.

[Hector Santos]

Post by LD5SZRA
Most probably you won't be able to move to anywhere else; not even
on forums because Microsoft hasn't got any plans to open forums
for Windows XP and earlier technology. Somebody suggested that
you can go to other P2P newsgroups like Google or aioe.org. This
again won't be possible because microsoft may force them to close
their newsgroups bearing Micro$hit name.
The only alternative I can think of is for somebody to organize a
group of about 10 individuals to come together and start their own
newsgroups to be financed by advertising and volunteers. I am
willing to put my name forward for this project provided there are
individuals who have some basic knowledge of hosting NNTPs which
can be expanded further as time goes by. I am good at programming
and developing websites using Java, Javascript and ASP and perhaps
some networking skills and SQL servers. that is all I know at
present.

Yes, I agree.

This would be a good idea but it starts with a new "main source" or
feed coordination. There will be a lot of nodes lost once the MS NNTP
servers are shut off and they need to be told who they can link up to.

How successful that all be, might be another thing.

You need a "ground zero" whether its one site or a group of sites as a
whole - they all need to know they can feed off each other. Once that
is established, then the rest of the world can feed of them.

That or someone at Microsoft "donates" the name sake
"microsoft.public.*" to the backbone usenet feed to it becomes part of
it the usenet listing.

The point?

When a NNTP client issues the command at any of the "New Feeds":

NEWSGROUP

the NNTP SERVER will show:

microsoft.public.*

as part of the result.

[Jonathan de Boyne Pollard]

<!DOCTYPE HTML PUBLIC "-//W3C//DTD HTML 4.01 Transitional//EN">
<html>
<head>
<meta content="text/html; charset=ISO-8859-1"
http-equiv="Content-Type">
</head>
<body bgcolor="#ffffff" text="#000000">
<blockquote
cite="mid:E124E48D-6066-4D35-9AC0-***@microsoft.com"
type="cite">
<p>There are rumors that Microsoft plans to shut down this nntp
server.
</p>
</blockquote>
<p>Ahem!&nbsp; "This NNTP server" is a phrase that means different things to
different people.&nbsp; This is Usenet, remember.&nbsp; There <em>isn't</em>
just one node.&nbsp; There are thousands of them.&nbsp; Microsoft has no plans to
shut down <em>my</em> Usenet node, which carries this and several
other newsgroups in the <code>microsoft.*</code> hierarchy.&nbsp; It
couldn't do so even if it wanted to.&nbsp; It's my node, not Microsoft's.</p>
</body>
</html>

[Hector Santos]

Post by Pavel A.
There are rumors that Microsoft plans to shut down this nntp server.

Ahem! "This NNTP server" is a phrase that means different things to
different people. This is Usenet, remember. There /isn't/ just one
node. There are thousands of them. Microsoft has no plans to shut down
/my/ Usenet node, which carries this and several other newsgroups in the
|microsoft.*| hierarchy. It couldn't do so even if it wanted to. It's
my node, not Microsoft's.

But no one is going to connect to a Troll's node.

[Paul Attryde]

Post by Pavel A.
Dear users of msnews.microsoft.com,
There are rumors that Microsoft plans to shut down this nntp server.
http://news.cnet.com/8301-13860_3-20004109-56.html
Any thoughts on where we can migrate from here - besides of the
web-based MSDN forums?.
To Google groups, maybe?

Personally I signed up for an account at OSROnline. They
have an NNTP version of their mailing lists at lists.osr.com

hth somebody,
Paul

[Maxim S. Shatskih]

Post by Paul Attryde
Personally I signed up for an account at OSROnline. They
have an NNTP version of their mailing lists at lists.osr.com

This is what I'm using for 8 years or so.

[Jeremy Linton]

<joke>

MS's announcement translated...

Starting in early summer 2010, Microsoft will begin progressively

closing down the Microsoft public newsgroups to enrich conversations in
the rapidly-growing forum platform. This decision is in response to
worldwide market trends and evolving customer needs.


Beginning this summer, we are shutting down perfectly working
standardized technology. This is to encourage the older more
knowledgeable crowd using those technologies to move into the web forums
where they may help users who are either to lazy or ignorant to install
news readers. Plus, in an effort to control all the content and postings
in our newsgroups we will create a proprietary interface that makes it
hard to replicate the information on 3rd party servers.

Microsoft continues to invest in forums to reduce customer effort,

consolidate community venues and make it easier for active contributors
to retain their influence. Forums provide a healthy community
environment with less spam and make answers easier to find by customers
and search engines. Additionally, forums offer a better user and
off-topic management platform that will improve customer satisfaction by
facilitating discussions in a clean space.


We assigned some programmers to consolidate all of our venues, and
create nntp/web forums bridging. Instead they wrote a new forum
interface. Since we paid them all this money, we have to use this new
technology or we won't look good to our bosses. To make it easier on us,
and offload some of the pain to the community we will be disabling some
of your connections and requiring you to go to some effort to setup some
new accounts.

</joke>