From Newsgroup: alt.free.newsservers

Anne Frank wrote:

without any credential usage, like paganini and tcpreset?

Testing... testing... 123...
--- Synchronet 3.22a-Linux NewsLink 1.2

From Newsgroup: alt.free.newsservers

Testing... testing... 123...

Looking at the PATH... is this a correct analysis of the various hops?

1. news.tcpreset.net is the injection point accepting the nntp post
2. .POSTED!not-for-mail confirms it's a direct NNTP POST
3. news-fra.pugleaf.net is likely one of tcpreset's primary peers.
4. srl.newsdeef.eu is a peering from a wider European mesh perhaps?
5. newsfeed.bofh.team Interesting. Do they share a peering relationship?
6. feeder.erje.net is a free-server feed node I think
7. 2.eu.feeder.erje.net another node, similar to what eternal-sept uses
8. news2.arglkargh.de now in the mid-tier general European mesh?
9. The final receiving peer (which varies per user)

Is this analysis of the path correct?
If not, what's the correct analysis?
--- Synchronet 3.22a-Linux NewsLink 1.2

From Newsgroup: alt.free.newsservers

Some nym <foo@bar.invalid> wrote:

Testing... testing... 123...

Looking at the PATH... is this a correct analysis of the various hops?

1. news.tcpreset.net is the injection point accepting the nntp post
2. .POSTED!not-for-mail confirms it's a direct NNTP POST
3. news-fra.pugleaf.net is likely one of tcpreset's primary peers.
4. srl.newsdeef.eu is a peering from a wider European mesh perhaps?
5. newsfeed.bofh.team Interesting. Do they share a peering relationship?
6. feeder.erje.net is a free-server feed node I think
7. 2.eu.feeder.erje.net another node, similar to what eternal-sept uses
8. news2.arglkargh.de now in the mid-tier general European mesh?
9. The final receiving peer (which varies per user)

Is this analysis of the path correct?
If not, what's the correct analysis?

Generally, there's no priority among peers. Two News sites could peer
directly, yet Path shows several intermediate peers. Peers flood each
other with articles not knowing what the other is missing.

!not-for-mail is a convention. You'll see that in a moderated newsgroup
in which the user's proto article isn't injected into Usenet till
approved by the moderator, and not directly by the user.
--- Synchronet 3.22a-Linux NewsLink 1.2

From Newsgroup: alt.free.newsservers

Am 20.06.26 um 16:33 schrieb Adam H. Kerman:

!not-for-mail is a convention. You'll see that in a moderated newsgroup
in which the user's proto article isn't injected into Usenet till
approved by the moderator, and not directly by the user.

You will see that in other articles too.
Dunno why that is included, as https://datatracker.ietf.org/doc/html/rfc1036#section-2.1.6 explicitly
says it should not be used for mail replies.
--
Gru|f
Marco

Junk-Mail bitte an trashcan@stinkedores.dorfdsl.de
--- Synchronet 3.22a-Linux NewsLink 1.2

From Newsgroup: alt.free.newsservers

Marco Moock <mm@dorfdsl.de> wrote:

Am 20.06.26 um 16:33 schrieb Adam H. Kerman:

You removed necessary context. This addresses an instance in which
not-for-mail appears on path even though the user did not submit his
proto article for injection himself.

I'm guessing Path is formed the same way even if part of the Path is
UUCP.

!not-for-mail is a convention. You'll see that in a moderated newsgroup
in which the user's proto article isn't injected into Usenet till
approved by the moderator, and not directly by the user.

You will see that in other articles too.
Dunno why that is included, as >https://datatracker.ietf.org/doc/html/rfc1036#section-2.1.6 explicitly
says it should not be used for mail replies.

I haven't read RFC 1036 in a while. I had not remembered that the path
could be formed with a choice of punctuation, not limited to a bang
path.

I think it's saying that older systems expected the path to begin with a
user's mailbox. Therefore, to force these systems to use Usenet in
followup and not Mail in reply, the path began with "not-for-mail".

I never used such a system so someone else will have to confirm.
--- Synchronet 3.22a-Linux NewsLink 1.2

From Newsgroup: alt.free.newsservers

This addresses an instance in which
not-for-mail appears on path even though the user did not submit his
proto article for injection himself.

AFAICT, the Path header only shows that the proto-article was injected by
the server news.tcpreset.net. The presence of the pseudo-sites POSTED and not-for-mail indicates that the article was posted directly by a user via
NNTP and that no email-based injection was involved.


LASTRELAY!news2.arglkargh.de!2.eu.feeder.erje.net!feeder.erje.net!newsfeed.bofh.team!srl.newsdeef.eu!news-fra.pugleaf.net!news.tcpreset.net!.POSTED!not-for-mail
LASTRELAY!news2.arglkargh.de!2.eu.feeder.erje.net!feeder.erje.net!news.mb-net.net!open-news-network.org!srl.newsdeef.eu!news-fra.pugleaf.net!news.tcpreset.net!.POSTED!not-for-mail


news.tcpreset.net - injecting server that accepted the post from the user POSTED - the article originated from a user session, not from a peer. not-for-mail - it was not injected via email or a mail-to-news gateway.

It seems to me, an outside observer, that the Path header does not reveal
the user's connection method. I don't see how it can prove or disprove
whether the posting was done via clearnet NNTP, Tor, I2P, VPN, or any other transport.

Mostly what I was asking about, given that news-fra.pugleaf.net and srl.newsdeef.eu appear identically in both paths, is whether it is
reasonable to infer that news.tcpreset.net uses a consistent upstream feed route through these peers when propagating articles toward those
destinations?
--- Synchronet 3.22a-Linux NewsLink 1.2

From Newsgroup: alt.free.newsservers

Some nym <foo@bar.invalid> wrote:

This addresses an instance in which
not-for-mail appears on path even though the user did not submit his
proto article for injection himself.

AFAICT, the Path header only shows that the proto-article was injected by >the server news.tcpreset.net. The presence of the pseudo-sites POSTED and >not-for-mail indicates that the article was posted directly by a user via >NNTP and that no email-based injection was involved.

That's not a concept. It's not possible. There has to be a gateway. I
just gave you an example in which the user does not submit his own
article for injection. The moderator approves the proto article then
submits it for injection. There is a gateway. There are mailing lists
gated to and from Usenet, which is possible thanks to the shared format.

There are mail2news servers; these are literal gateways.

If the proto article travelled some portion of the way to Usenet via
email relays, these are not shown on Path. Path begins with injection.

Since Marco had me reread RFC 1036, I remembered why not-for-mail is
used at all.

LASTRELAY!news2.arglkargh.de!2.eu.feeder.erje.net!feeder.erje.net!newsfeed.bofh.team!srl.newsdeef.eu!news-fra.pugleaf.net!news.tcpreset.net!.POSTED!not-for-mail
LASTRELAY!news2.arglkargh.de!2.eu.feeder.erje.net!feeder.erje.net!news.mb-net.net!open-news-network.org!srl.newsdeef.eu!news-fra.pugleaf.net!news.tcpreset.net!.POSTED!not-for-mail

news.tcpreset.net - injecting server that accepted the post from the user >POSTED - the article originated from a user session, not from a peer. >not-for-mail - it was not injected via email or a mail-to-news gateway.

Wrong. You'd see the News side of the gateway but not the gateway
itself, I think.

Uh, try it yourself? Doesn't dizum still have an associated mail2news
gateway?

It seems to me, an outside observer, that the Path header does not reveal
the user's connection method. I don't see how it can prove or disprove >whether the posting was done via clearnet NNTP, Tor, I2P, VPN, or any other >transport.

I ate a ham sandwich on the same day I posted to Usenet. That's not
revealed on Path either.

Mostly what I was asking about, given that news-fra.pugleaf.net and >srl.newsdeef.eu appear identically in both paths, is whether it is
reasonable to infer that news.tcpreset.net uses a consistent upstream feed >route through these peers when propagating articles toward those >destinations?

I already gave you an answer, which you clearly did not like. I shall
try harder to ignore ou from now on.
--- Synchronet 3.22a-Linux NewsLink 1.2

From Newsgroup: alt.free.newsservers

I shall try harder to ignore ou from now on.

I think the reason you misunderstood what I had said was that I didn't
explain it clearly enough for you to have fully understood it, so I
apologize for not repeating and being doubly clear using simple language.

It was my fault for not being as clear as I needed to have been, given
there is nothing wrong with what I said, which I believe and which I
believe others will concur.

I'm asking for help here, so I need to be very clear that others don't misunderstand, as you did, so I will apologize up front for my mistakes.

I wasn't denying the existence of gateways or moderated injections.
I was only noting that in this specific case, the Path shows
news.tcpreset.net as the injecting server and it shows that the article was
not email-injected.

I agree that earlier stages of a proto-article (moderation, mail2news,
UUCP, etc.) would not appear in the Path. My question was only about the visible upstream peers from the injecting server.

I apologize that you misunderstood that was the question, which is my fault
for not making it extremely clear to everyone as I'm asking for advice.
--- Synchronet 3.22a-Linux NewsLink 1.2

From Newsgroup: alt.free.newsservers

On 6/20/2026 1:30 PM, Some nym wrote:

Anne Frank wrote:

without any credential usage, like paganini and tcpreset?

Testing... testing... 123...

CONTACT!!! Bearing unknown!!

Meow.... :)
--

@~@ Simplicity is Beauty! Remain silent! Drink, Blink, Stretch!
/ v \ May the Force and farces be with you! Live long and prosper!!
/( _ )\ https://sites.google.com/site/changmw/
^ ^ https://github.com/changmw/changmw
--- Synchronet 3.22a-Linux NewsLink 1.2

From Newsgroup: alt.free.newsservers

On 6/21/2026 10:23:34 AM, Mr. Man-wai Chang wrote:

CONTACT!!! Bearing unknown!!

Agree the tcpreset admin is incognito, almost certainly on purpose.
Even the web site has an anonymous registration identity.

https://www.planetusenet.com/groups/news.admin.peering/articles/3917 https://www.virebent.art/nntp.html

Yet, did we ever know who the admin of Netfront was?

Not sure if we even knew of any public-facing admins of neodome, tulanet, wieslauf, news4all either but I haven't checked in a long while.

For Usenet, what are we afraid of if the admin turns out to be a TLA?
--- Synchronet 3.22a-Linux NewsLink 1.2

From Newsgroup: alt.free.newsservers

Speaking of news tcpreset net i would look for an https address with a
domain of the same name like https://news tcpreset net.
I invite you to inform you that everything should be there.

Some nym wrote:

https://www.planetusenet.com/groups/news.admin.peering/articles/3917 https://www.virebent.art/nntp.html

Links taken at random? I expected more from you.

:)

Gabx
--
https://contact.virebent.art
https://www.virebent.art
https://news.tcpreset.net
https://jabber.tcpreset.net
https://virebent.noblogs.org/
https://infosec.exchange/@virebent
--- Synchronet 3.22a-Linux NewsLink 1.2

From Newsgroup: alt.free.newsservers

Gabx <dev@nu.ll> wrote:

Speaking of news tcpreset net i would look for an https address with a >domain of the same name like https://news tcpreset net.
I invite you to inform you that everything should be there.

Some nym wrote:

https://www.planetusenet.com/groups/news.admin.peering/articles/3917
https://www.virebent.art/nntp.html

Links taken at random? I expected more from you.

:)

Why? The complaints were vague and random. I think he should get his
money refunded.
--- Synchronet 3.22a-Linux NewsLink 1.2

From Newsgroup: alt.free.newsservers

Some nym wrote:

On 6/21/2026 10:23:34 AM, Mr. Man-wai Chang wrote:

CONTACT!!! Bearing unknown!!

Agree the tcpreset admin is incognito, almost certainly on purpose.
Even the web site has an anonymous registration identity.

https://www.planetusenet.com/groups/news.admin.peering/articles/3917

This is not my website and has nothing to do with id or contact.
I will explain,
I accidentally posted a promotion for my Usenet infrastructure in NAP,
I've already been insulted and pilloried for this insignificant mistake anyway. I apologized,
what's your problem instead?

https://www.virebent.art/nntp.html

Promotion has never been my strong point and in the end I care little
about being accommodating.

Virebent and Tcpreset are bastions of digital freedom.
We give exactly what we say.


Gabx
--
https://contact.virebent.art
https://www.virebent.art
https://news.tcpreset.net
https://jabber.tcpreset.net
https://virebent.noblogs.org/
https://infosec.exchange/@virebent
--- Synchronet 3.22a-Linux NewsLink 1.2

From Newsgroup: alt.free.newsservers

Gabx <dev@nu.ll> wrote:

Speaking of news tcpreset net i would look for an https address with a >>domain of the same name like https://news tcpreset net.
I invite you to inform you that everything should be there.

Some nym wrote:

https://www.planetusenet.com/groups/news.admin.peering/articles/3917
https://www.virebent.art/nntp.html

Links taken at random? I expected more from you.

:)

Why? The complaints were vague and random. I think he should get his
money refunded.

I apologize that the links I dug up on tcpreset were seemingly random.
I had no desire whatsoever to "pillory" anyone. Not in the least.

There's just not much about tcpreset out there in the usenet archives.
Those links showed that there isn't much about tcpreset that I could find.

I am, in fact, defending the fact that the tcpreset admin is incognito.
My point to the OP is "Why does it matter that we don't know the admin"?

What do we do different on Usenet if we know the server admin's name?
This is Usenet. Even if the admin is a TLA, why does it matter, to us?
--- Synchronet 3.22a-Linux NewsLink 1.2

From Newsgroup: alt.free.newsservers

what's your problem instead?

https://www.virebent.art/nntp.html

I apologize if the only links I could find on tcpreset put you in a bad
light as I don't know you, and I have no desire whatsoever to harm you.

I am defending the right of the tcpadmin to be incognito, much as I would defend anyone's right to be incognito on the internet, including myself.

I admire that web page, which I assume you authored, describing tcpreset.
I used it via the bare newsreader setup, but I'd like to try the others.

It's nice that your description page https://www.virebent.art/nntp.html outlines the basics of clearnet nntps and the use of a tor hidden service.

What would be nice for those like me who are noobs is a set of steps for
using the mail-to-news gateway (which I don't see described on that page).
--- Synchronet 3.22a-Linux NewsLink 1.2

From Newsgroup: alt.free.newsservers

Some nym wrote:

What would be nice for those like me who are noobs is a set of steps for using the mail-to-news gateway (which I don't see described on that page).

Probably the easiest way to use a mail2news gateway, anonymously, is to
use the brand new Mixfit YAMN Remailer Mixnet client for Windows, Linux
and Android. https://github.com/Ch1ffr3punk/Mixfit.

In the To: header you set for example mail2news@dizum.com. Play with
Mixfit a bit in a test group and you will see how easy it is to post anonymously.
--
https://oc2mx.net
--- Synchronet 3.22a-Linux NewsLink 1.2

From Newsgroup: alt.free.newsservers

On 22 Jun 2026, Gabx <victor@virebent.tcpreset> posted some news:111bi23$1suk5$1@news.tcpreset.net:

Some nym wrote:

On 6/21/2026 10:23:34 AM, Mr. Man-wai Chang wrote:

CONTACT!!! Bearing unknown!!

Agree the tcpreset admin is incognito, almost certainly on purpose.
Even the web site has an anonymous registration identity.

https://www.planetusenet.com/groups/news.admin.peering/articles/3917

This is not my website and has nothing to do with id or contact.
I will explain,
I accidentally posted a promotion for my Usenet infrastructure in NAP,
I've already been insulted and pilloried for this insignificant mistake anyway. I apologized,
what's your problem instead?

https://www.virebent.art/nntp.html

Promotion has never been my strong point and in the end I care little
about being accommodating.

Virebent and Tcpreset are bastions of digital freedom.
We give exactly what we say.

Thanks for providing this service!
--- Synchronet 3.22a-Linux NewsLink 1.2

From Newsgroup: alt.free.newsservers

On 20 Jun 2026, "Adam H. Kerman" <ahk@chinet.com> posted some news:1117p8n$hhh8$3@dont-email.me:

Some nym <foo@bar.invalid> wrote:

This addresses an instance in which
not-for-mail appears on path even though the user did not submit his >>>proto article for injection himself.

AFAICT, the Path header only shows that the proto-article was injected
by the server news.tcpreset.net. The presence of the pseudo-sites
POSTED and not-for-mail indicates that the article was posted directly
by a user via NNTP and that no email-based injection was involved.

That's not a concept. It's not possible. There has to be a gateway. I
just gave you an example in which the user does not submit his own
article for injection. The moderator approves the proto article then
submits it for injection. There is a gateway. There are mailing lists
gated to and from Usenet, which is possible thanks to the shared
format.

There are mail2news servers; these are literal gateways.

If the proto article travelled some portion of the way to Usenet via
email relays, these are not shown on Path. Path begins with injection.

Since Marco had me reread RFC 1036, I remembered why not-for-mail is
used at all.

Chuckle...now there's a ruinous source.

LASTRELAY!news2.arglkargh.de!2.eu.feeder.erje.net!feeder.erje.net!newsf >>eed.bofh.team!srl.newsdeef.eu!news-fra.pugleaf.net!news.tcpreset.net!.P >>OSTED!not-for-mail >>LASTRELAY!news2.arglkargh.de!2.eu.feeder.erje.net!feeder.erje.net!news. >>mb-net.net!open-news-network.org!srl.newsdeef.eu!news-fra.pugleaf.net!n >>ews.tcpreset.net!.POSTED!not-for-mail

news.tcpreset.net - injecting server that accepted the post from the
user POSTED - the article originated from a user session, not from a
peer. not-for-mail - it was not injected via email or a mail-to-news >>gateway.

Wrong. You'd see the News side of the gateway but not the gateway
itself, I think.

Uh, try it yourself? Doesn't dizum still have an associated mail2news gateway?

One of the most reliable in Usenet history.

It seems to me, an outside observer, that the Path header does not
reveal the user's connection method. I don't see how it can prove or >>disprove whether the posting was done via clearnet NNTP, Tor, I2P,
VPN, or any other transport.

I ate a ham sandwich on the same day I posted to Usenet. That's not
revealed on Path either.

Mostly what I was asking about, given that news-fra.pugleaf.net and >>srl.newsdeef.eu appear identically in both paths, is whether it is >>reasonable to infer that news.tcpreset.net uses a consistent upstream
feed route through these peers when propagating articles toward those >>destinations?

I already gave you an answer, which you clearly did not like. I shall
try harder to ignore ou from now on.

lol, smh.

--- Synchronet 3.22a-Linux NewsLink 1.2

From Newsgroup: alt.free.newsservers

On Mon, 22 Jun 2026 17:40:25 +0000, Ch1ffr3punk wrote:

Some nym wrote:

What would be nice for those like me who are noobs is a set of steps
for using the mail-to-news gateway (which I don't see described on that
page).

Probably the easiest way to use a mail2news gateway, anonymously, is to
use the brand new Mixfit YAMN Remailer Mixnet client for Windows, Linux
and Android. https://github.com/Ch1ffr3punk/Mixfit.

In the To: header you set for example mail2news@dizum.com. Play with
Mixfit a bit in a test group and you will see how easy it is to post anonymously.

I'd suggest they use news.tcpreset if they want anominity, a number of us (server admins) -but not all, block mail2news gateways because of extreme abuses, the muppets who abused google are finding other methods to flood
us with crap
--- Synchronet 3.22a-Linux NewsLink 1.2

From Newsgroup: alt.free.newsservers

noel wrote:

On Mon, 22 Jun 2026 17:40:25 +0000, Ch1ffr3punk wrote:

Some nym wrote:

What would be nice for those like me who are noobs is a set of steps
for using the mail-to-news gateway (which I don't see described on that page).

Probably the easiest way to use a mail2news gateway, anonymously, is to
use the brand new Mixfit YAMN Remailer Mixnet client for Windows, Linux
and Android. https://github.com/Ch1ffr3punk/Mixfit.

In the To: header you set for example mail2news@dizum.com. Play with
Mixfit a bit in a test group and you will see how easy it is to post anonymously.

I'd suggest they use news.tcpreset if they want anominity, a number of us (server admins) -but not all, block mail2news gateways because of extreme abuses, the muppets who abused google are finding other methods to flood
us with crap

Well, I have never seen mail2news gateway postings been blocked over the decades, as remailer users rely on them. Regarding news.tcpreset.net, he
can use https://n2n.oc2mx.net web interface for Gabx's news server.
--
https://oc2mx.net
--- Synchronet 3.22a-Linux NewsLink 1.2

From Newsgroup: alt.free.newsservers

On Mon, 22 Jun 2026 17:40:25 +0000, Ch1ffr3punk wrote:

Some nym wrote:

What would be nice for those like me who are noobs is a set of steps
for using the mail-to-news gateway (which I don't see described on
that page).

Probably the easiest way to use a mail2news gateway, anonymously, is
to use the brand new Mixfit YAMN Remailer Mixnet client for Windows,
Linux and Android. https://github.com/Ch1ffr3punk/Mixfit.

Mixfit a bit in a test group and you will see how easy it is to post
anonymously.

I'd suggest they use news.tcpreset if they want anominity, a number of
us (server admins) -but not all, block mail2news gateways because of
extreme abuses, the muppets who abused google are finding other
methods to flood us with crap

You mean newshosting and the forging asshole from there?
--- Synchronet 3.22a-Linux NewsLink 1.2

From Newsgroup: alt.free.newsservers

On Wed, 24 Jun 2026 12:26:38 +0000, Ch1ffr3punk wrote:

Well, I have never seen mail2news gateway postings been blocked over the decades, as remailer users rely on them.

become most problematic in recent months, general anti spam filter rules
catch most of it, but the new waves getting past it, so more drastic
action taken, i'm also not the only one doing it, i might relax it in
time to see if the vermin have settled
--- Synchronet 3.22a-Linux NewsLink 1.2