From Newsgroup: news.admin.peering

I am trying out INN2. I suppose I should begin by explaining exactly what I want to do.

I need to configure INN so that:

A. by default nothing is synced unless I manually add a newsgroup to the configuration,

B. so that by adding a newsgroup to the configuration, that newsgroup will be synced with all peers,

C. and finally so that only the entry of a newsgroup name into the configuration will result in syncronization, rather than entire hierarchies.

If I add alt.nobody to the configuration then the group alt.nobody will be synced with all the configured peers, and not the alt.* hierarchy. If I later add the group alt.everybody to the configuration then both groups will be synced with all peers. If I remove a group name from the configuration then that group will no longer syncronize with any peers.

How can I do this in a way that does not require updating the configuration for each individual peer, so that the list of groups will automatically be the same for all peers?

--- Synchronet 3.21a-Linux NewsLink 1.2

From Newsgroup: news.admin.peering

On 19.07.25 04:35, Anonymous wrote:

I am trying out INN2. I suppose I should begin by explaining exactly what I want to do.

I need to configure INN so that:

A. by default nothing is synced unless I manually add a newsgroup to the configuration,

B. so that by adding a newsgroup to the configuration, that newsgroup will be synced with all peers,

C. and finally so that only the entry of a newsgroup name into the configuration will result in syncronization, rather than entire hierarchies.

If I add alt.nobody to the configuration then the group alt.nobody will be synced with all the configured peers, and not the alt.* hierarchy. If I later add the group alt.everybody to the configuration then both groups will be synced with all peers. If I remove a group name from the configuration then that group will no longer syncronize with any peers.

How can I do this in a way that does not require updating the configuration for each individual peer, so that the list of groups will automatically be the same for all peers?

Usually you get told from your peer what you send them.
And you tell your peers what you want.
Means you set their configuration what they want on your side.
If a peer requests a change you just set it regardless
if you carry the group at the moment or not.
inn can run in modes / has flags that accept articles without
even having an active file populated and distribution is done via one of
those :Ap,Tm,< flags. Aj accept Junk, etc.
read manualpages for newsfeeds.

The newsfeeds file configures what innd does with incoming accepted
articles.

The file /etc/news/newsfeeds specifies how incoming articles
should be distributed to other programs and files on the server.
^ this "to other programs" is distribution via innfeed to other peers

example: If we want to peer together
i'd give you the config lines that i want for your newsfeeds file.
so you will send only articles to me that match (or not) the variables
in /etc/news/newsfeeds and you tell the other peer what you want them to
put in their newsfeeds so that you won't receive groups you don't want.

example from https://newsdeef.eu

/etc/news/newsfeeds

$NEWSDEEFDEFAULT=\
!control,!control.*,\
!junk,!junk.*,\
!local,!local.*,\
!ka.*,!gmane.*,!gwene.*

$NEWSDEEFNOBINARY=\
@a.b.*,@ab.alt.*,@ab.mom,@alt.b.*,@alt.*sex*,\
@dk.b.*,@*alt-bin*,@*alt.bin*,\
@*alt.dvd*,@*alt.hdtv*,@*dvdnordic*,\
@*nairies*,@*naries*,@*.bain*,@*.banar*,@*.banir*,\
@*.biana*,@*.bianr*,@*.biin*,@*.binar*,@*.binai*,\
@*.binaer*,@*.bineri*,@*.biniar*,@*.binira*,\
@*.binrie*,@*.biya*,@*.boneles*,@*cd.image*,\
@*dateien*,@*files.images*,@*music.bin*,\
@*nzb*,@*mp3*,@*ictures*,@*iktures*,\
@*erotic*,@*porno*,@*pedo*,@*paedo*,@*xxx*,@*warez*,@unidata.*

# LAV
srv.newsdeef.eu\
:*,$NEWSDEEFDEFAULT,$NEWSDEEFNOBINARY/!local\
:Ap,Tm,<262144:innfeed!

# LUX
srl.newsdeef.eu\
:*,$NEWSDEEFDEFAULT,$NEWSDEEFNOBINARY/!local\
:Ap,Tm,<262144:innfeed!


# YGG **
#ygg-lux.newsdeef.eu/lux-feed1.newsdeef.eu\
# :*,$NEWSDEEFDEFAULT,$NEWSDEEFNOBINARY/!local\
# :Ap,Tm,<262144:innfeed!


The incoming.conf file configures from which remote peers innd accepts
NNTP feeds.
/etc/news/incoming.conf
# LAV
peer srv.newsdeef.eu {
hostname: srv.newsdeef.eu
max-connections: 5
}

# LUX
peer srl.newsdeef.eu {
hostname: srl.newsdeef.eu
max-connections: 5
}

# YGG **
#peer ygg-lux.newsdeef.eu {
# hostname: ygg-lux.newsdeef.eu
# max-connections: 5
#}



The innfeed.conf file configures to which remote peers innfeed sends
NNTP feeds.
/etc/news/innfeed.conf
# LAV
peer srv.newsdeef.eu {
ip-name: srv.newsdeef.eu
#force-ipv4: true
port-number: 433
max-connections: 5
}

# LUX
peer srl.newsdeef.eu {
ip-name: srl.newsdeef.eu
#force-ipv4: true
port-number: 433
max-connections: 5
}


# YGG **
#peer ygg-lux.newsdeef.eu {
# ip-name: ygg-lux.newsdeef.eu
# port-number: 433
# max-connections: 5
#}
--
.......
Billy G. (go-while)

--- Synchronet 3.21a-Linux NewsLink 1.2

From Newsgroup: news.admin.peering

On Sat, 19 Jul 2025 14:06:05 +0200
"Billy G. (go-while)" <no-reply@no.spam> wrote:

On 19.07.25 04:35, Anonymous wrote:

I am trying out INN2. I suppose I should begin by explaining exactly what I want to do.

I need to configure INN so that:

A. by default nothing is synced unless I manually add a newsgroup to the configuration,

B. so that by adding a newsgroup to the configuration, that newsgroup will be synced with all peers,

C. and finally so that only the entry of a newsgroup name into the configuration will result in syncronization, rather than entire hierarchies.

If I add alt.nobody to the configuration then the group alt.nobody will be synced with all the configured peers, and not the alt.* hierarchy. If I later add the group alt.everybody to the configuration then both groups will be synced with all peers. If I remove a group name from the configuration then that group will no longer syncronize with any peers.

How can I do this in a way that does not require updating the configuration for each individual peer, so that the list of groups will automatically be the same for all peers?

Usually you get told from your peer what you send them.
And you tell your peers what you want.
Means you set their configuration what they want on your side.
If a peer requests a change you just set it regardless
if you carry the group at the moment or not.
inn can run in modes / has flags that accept articles without
even having an active file populated and distribution is done via one of those :Ap,Tm,< flags. Aj accept Junk, etc.
read manualpages for newsfeeds.

The newsfeeds file configures what innd does with incoming accepted articles.

The file /etc/news/newsfeeds specifies how incoming articles
should be distributed to other programs and files on the server.
^ this "to other programs" is distribution via innfeed to other peers

example: If we want to peer together
i'd give you the config lines that i want for your newsfeeds file.
so you will send only articles to me that match (or not) the variables
in /etc/news/newsfeeds and you tell the other peer what you want them to
put in their newsfeeds so that you won't receive groups you don't want.

example from https://newsdeef.eu

/etc/news/newsfeeds

$NEWSDEEFDEFAULT=\
!control,!control.*,\
!junk,!junk.*,\
!local,!local.*,\
!ka.*,!gmane.*,!gwene.*

$NEWSDEEFNOBINARY=\
@a.b.*,@ab.alt.*,@ab.mom,@alt.b.*,@alt.*sex*,\
@dk.b.*,@*alt-bin*,@*alt.bin*,\
@*alt.dvd*,@*alt.hdtv*,@*dvdnordic*,\
@*nairies*,@*naries*,@*.bain*,@*.banar*,@*.banir*,\
@*.biana*,@*.bianr*,@*.biin*,@*.binar*,@*.binai*,\
@*.binaer*,@*.bineri*,@*.biniar*,@*.binira*,\
@*.binrie*,@*.biya*,@*.boneles*,@*cd.image*,\
@*dateien*,@*files.images*,@*music.bin*,\
@*nzb*,@*mp3*,@*ictures*,@*iktures*,\
@*erotic*,@*porno*,@*pedo*,@*paedo*,@*xxx*,@*warez*,@unidata.*

# LAV
srv.newsdeef.eu\
:*,$NEWSDEEFDEFAULT,$NEWSDEEFNOBINARY/!local\
:Ap,Tm,<262144:innfeed!

# LUX
srl.newsdeef.eu\
:*,$NEWSDEEFDEFAULT,$NEWSDEEFNOBINARY/!local\
:Ap,Tm,<262144:innfeed!

# YGG **
#ygg-lux.newsdeef.eu/lux-feed1.newsdeef.eu\
# :*,$NEWSDEEFDEFAULT,$NEWSDEEFNOBINARY/!local\
# :Ap,Tm,<262144:innfeed!

The incoming.conf file configures from which remote peers innd accepts
NNTP feeds.
/etc/news/incoming.conf
# LAV
peer srv.newsdeef.eu {
hostname: srv.newsdeef.eu
max-connections: 5
}

# LUX
peer srl.newsdeef.eu {
hostname: srl.newsdeef.eu
max-connections: 5
}

# YGG **
#peer ygg-lux.newsdeef.eu {
# hostname: ygg-lux.newsdeef.eu
# max-connections: 5
#}

The innfeed.conf file configures to which remote peers innfeed sends
NNTP feeds.
/etc/news/innfeed.conf
# LAV
peer srv.newsdeef.eu {
ip-name: srv.newsdeef.eu
#force-ipv4: true
port-number: 433
max-connections: 5
}

# LUX
peer srl.newsdeef.eu {
ip-name: srl.newsdeef.eu
#force-ipv4: true
port-number: 433
max-connections: 5
}

# YGG **
#peer ygg-lux.newsdeef.eu {
# ip-name: ygg-lux.newsdeef.eu
# port-number: 433
# max-connections: 5
#}

--
.......
Billy G. (go-while)

This does help me better understand what is under the hood. Yet it leaves me with more questions.

So far it looks to me like a peer can send anything it wants to my node, and I have to filter everything to accept and store only the groups I want. A bad configuration on another peer could chuck a lot of unwanted bandwidth down my pipe. Or am I missing something?

I was hoping to have a set it and forget it so that when I add any new peer then my peer will only offer and pull the groups in my list of desired groups. But then I see my peer needs to honor the configuration requested by the remote peer.

Is it possible to configure a INN2 peering in a reader mode configuration so it connects to a remote peer and requests articles? I think that would solve any potential bandwidth problems if it is possible.

--- Synchronet 3.21a-Linux NewsLink 1.2

From Newsgroup: news.admin.peering

In article <105hcf0$11k3k$1@paganini.bofh.team>,
Anonymous <anon@anon.anon> wrote:

On Sat, 19 Jul 2025 14:06:05 +0200
"Billy G. (go-while)" <no-reply@no.spam> wrote:

On 19.07.25 04:35, Anonymous wrote:

I am trying out INN2. I suppose I should begin by explaining exactly

what I want to do.

I need to configure INN so that:

A. by default nothing is synced unless I manually add a newsgroup to

the configuration,

B. so that by adding a newsgroup to the configuration, that

newsgroup will be synced with all peers,

C. and finally so that only the entry of a newsgroup name into the >configuration will result in syncronization, rather than entire

hierarchies.

If I add alt.nobody to the configuration then the group alt.nobody

will be synced with all the configured peers, and not the alt.*
hierarchy. If I later add the group alt.everybody to the configuration
then both groups will be synced with all peers. If I remove a group name
from the configuration then that group will no longer syncronize with
any peers.

How can I do this in a way that does not require updating the >configuration for each individual peer, so that the list of groups will >automatically be the same for all peers?

Usually you get told from your peer what you send them.
And you tell your peers what you want.
Means you set their configuration what they want on your side.
If a peer requests a change you just set it regardless
if you carry the group at the moment or not.
inn can run in modes / has flags that accept articles without
even having an active file populated and distribution is done via one of
those :Ap,Tm,< flags. Aj accept Junk, etc.
read manualpages for newsfeeds.

The newsfeeds file configures what innd does with incoming accepted
articles.

The file /etc/news/newsfeeds specifies how incoming articles
should be distributed to other programs and files on the server.
^ this "to other programs" is distribution via innfeed to other peers

example: If we want to peer together
i'd give you the config lines that i want for your newsfeeds file.
so you will send only articles to me that match (or not) the variables
in /etc/news/newsfeeds and you tell the other peer what you want them to
put in their newsfeeds so that you won't receive groups you don't want.

example from https://newsdeef.eu

/etc/news/newsfeeds

$NEWSDEEFDEFAULT=\
!control,!control.*,\
!junk,!junk.*,\
!local,!local.*,\
!ka.*,!gmane.*,!gwene.*

$NEWSDEEFNOBINARY=\
@a.b.*,@ab.alt.*,@ab.mom,@alt.b.*,@alt.*sex*,\
@dk.b.*,@*alt-bin*,@*alt.bin*,\
@*alt.dvd*,@*alt.hdtv*,@*dvdnordic*,\
@*nairies*,@*naries*,@*.bain*,@*.banar*,@*.banir*,\
@*.biana*,@*.bianr*,@*.biin*,@*.binar*,@*.binai*,\
@*.binaer*,@*.bineri*,@*.biniar*,@*.binira*,\
@*.binrie*,@*.biya*,@*.boneles*,@*cd.image*,\
@*dateien*,@*files.images*,@*music.bin*,\
@*nzb*,@*mp3*,@*ictures*,@*iktures*,\
@*erotic*,@*porno*,@*pedo*,@*paedo*,@*xxx*,@*warez*,@unidata.*

# LAV
srv.newsdeef.eu\
:*,$NEWSDEEFDEFAULT,$NEWSDEEFNOBINARY/!local\
:Ap,Tm,<262144:innfeed!

# LUX
srl.newsdeef.eu\
:*,$NEWSDEEFDEFAULT,$NEWSDEEFNOBINARY/!local\
:Ap,Tm,<262144:innfeed!


# YGG **
#ygg-lux.newsdeef.eu/lux-feed1.newsdeef.eu\
# :*,$NEWSDEEFDEFAULT,$NEWSDEEFNOBINARY/!local\
# :Ap,Tm,<262144:innfeed!


The incoming.conf file configures from which remote peers innd accepts
NNTP feeds.
/etc/news/incoming.conf
# LAV
peer srv.newsdeef.eu {
hostname: srv.newsdeef.eu
max-connections: 5
}

# LUX
peer srl.newsdeef.eu {
hostname: srl.newsdeef.eu
max-connections: 5
}

# YGG **
#peer ygg-lux.newsdeef.eu {
# hostname: ygg-lux.newsdeef.eu
# max-connections: 5
#}



The innfeed.conf file configures to which remote peers innfeed sends
NNTP feeds.
/etc/news/innfeed.conf
# LAV
peer srv.newsdeef.eu {
ip-name: srv.newsdeef.eu
#force-ipv4: true
port-number: 433
max-connections: 5
}

# LUX
peer srl.newsdeef.eu {
ip-name: srl.newsdeef.eu
#force-ipv4: true
port-number: 433
max-connections: 5
}


# YGG **
#peer ygg-lux.newsdeef.eu {
# ip-name: ygg-lux.newsdeef.eu
# port-number: 433
# max-connections: 5
#}





--
.......
Billy G. (go-while)

This does help me better understand what is under the hood. Yet it
leaves me with more questions.

So far it looks to me like a peer can send anything it wants to my node,
and I have to filter everything to accept and store only the groups I
want. A bad configuration on another peer could chuck a lot of unwanted >bandwidth down my pipe. Or am I missing something?

I was hoping to have a set it and forget it so that when I add any new
peer then my peer will only offer and pull the groups in my list of
desired groups. But then I see my peer needs to honor the configuration >requested by the remote peer.

Is it possible to configure a INN2 peering in a reader mode
configuration so it connects to a remote peer and requests articles? I
think that would solve any potential bandwidth problems if it is
possible.

Good to put in the inn fAQ.
--
Member - Liberal International This is doctor@nk.ca Ici doctor@nk.ca
Yahweh, King & country!Never Satan President Republic!Beware AntiChrist rising! Look at Psalms 14 and 53 on Atheism ;
All I want to hear from JEsus Christ is WEll done Good and Faithful servant
--- Synchronet 3.21a-Linux NewsLink 1.2

From Newsgroup: news.admin.peering


On 20.07.25, Anonymous wrote:

This does help me better understand what is under the hood. Yet it

leaves me with more questions.

So far it looks to me like a peer can send anything it wants to my

node, and I have to filter everything to accept and store only the
groups I want. A bad configuration on another peer could chuck a lot of unwanted bandwidth down my pipe. Or am I missing something?

I was hoping to have a set it and forget it so that when I add any

new peer then my peer will only offer and pull the groups in my list of desired groups. But then I see my peer needs to honor the configuration requested by the remote peer.


??? I dont understand your way of thinking... ???

Is it possible to configure a INN2 peering in a reader mode

configuration so it connects to a remote peer and requests articles? I
think that would solve any potential bandwidth problems if it is possible.


you can use "sucknews?"

Peering is a form of trust but you are right.
A peer can send you shit and you filter what peers send you anyways.
You'd have to run filters with sucknews too.

A server needs monitoring. Setup and forget will result in exitus.

You are heavily overthinking this: 'a lot of unwanted bandwidth'
sure... but what is your definition of 'a lot'?

Daily usenet text traffic is about +- 30 Megabyte per day.
Or that's what i get. 1 Gig per month...
Why you have panic with bandwidth?

how many teRRRRabytes you think you need for active peering?
I repeat: 1 GB in a full month. We're only peering text.
Every mobile prepaid data tarif can handle this.

Some carry binary groups but if you don't want them
Nobody will send them to you. as long as you behave :D
Would not make sense anyways if you setup cleanfeed defaults.

But another question is: why should anyone do this?
there is no gain in putting your server down as long as you behave :D
If your filters are setup right it just declines and that's it.

If you receive garbage from your peers...
You can just depeer your peer...

If you choose your peers right i don't see this problem.
You can always post here if you have problems with a peer.

Peers (other servers) don't ask or pull groups.
They just send whats set in their rules that you defined before.

I run my feeders with whooping 1 GB storage for articles
and that holds about a month of small articles less than 16K...
another 1GB buffer for articles between 64-128K is at 18% (182 MBytes)
and another with 1GB for articles 128-256K is only at 13% (137 MBytes)
I guess most phones have 128 GB by default today...

If you want some test I can just setup peering with you and you can try?

Don't think tooo much.

It's all much easier when you are connected and see messages coming in!
--
.......
Billy G. (go-while)
--- Synchronet 3.21a-Linux NewsLink 1.2

From Newsgroup: news.admin.peering

Anonymous <anon@anon.anon> writes:

So far it looks to me like a peer can send anything it wants to my
node, and I have to filter everything to accept and store only the
groups I want. A bad configuration on another peer could chuck a lot
of unwanted bandwidth down my pipe. Or am I missing something?

ThatrCOs correct.

IMO itrCOs a weakness in NNTP. Peers should be able to automatically
negotiate what is sent to them.
--
https://www.greenend.org.uk/rjk/
--- Synchronet 3.21a-Linux NewsLink 1.2

From Newsgroup: news.admin.peering

In Richard Kettlewell <invalid@invalid.invalid> wrote:

IMO itrCOs a weakness in NNTP. Peers should be able to automatically negotiate what is sent to them.

<https://github.com/rfc1036/gup> <https://datatracker.ietf.org/doc/html/rfc4707>
--- Synchronet 3.21a-Linux NewsLink 1.2

From Newsgroup: news.admin.peering

This message is in MIME format. The first part should be readable text,
while the remaining parts are likely unreadable without MIME-aware tools.

--168465920-952399743-1753007192=:13619
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=utf-8; format=flowed Content-Transfer-Encoding: QUOTED-PRINTABLE



On Sun, 20 Jul 2025, Richard Kettlewell wrote:

Anonymous <anon@anon.anon> writes:

So far it looks to me like a peer can send anything it wants to my
node, and I have to filter everything to accept and store only the
groups I want. A bad configuration on another peer could chuck a lot
of unwanted bandwidth down my pipe. Or am I missing something?

That=E2=80=99s correct.

That's wrong

IMO it=E2=80=99s a weakness in NNTP. Peers should be able to automaticall=

y

negotiate what is sent to them.

Not NNTP's weakness at all. It might be a weakness with your daemon.

You can do this with IHAVE feeding in dnews, I'd be rather surprised if=20
you cant do this in INN as well.

But if you're not taking a full feed, and want to on-the-fly choose and=20 change without annoying the peers, for simplicity use pull/suck.

--168465920-952399743-1753007192=:13619--
--- Synchronet 3.21a-Linux NewsLink 1.2

From Newsgroup: news.admin.peering

Hi The Doctor,

Is it possible to configure a INN2 peering in a reader mode
configuration so it connects to a remote peer and requests articles? I
think that would solve any potential bandwidth problems if it is
possible.

Good to put in the inn fAQ.

This use case is already mentioned in the FAQ:

%%%
6.7. Use INN without a direct news feed

This configuration is generally called a "suck" feed, because rather
than having news fed directly to your server, you pull it down or "suck"
it from another news server, and because possibly the first and one of
the most widely used packages for doing this is named suck.

INN comes with a program named pullnews to pull down articles from
another server and to feed articles to another server using either POST
like a news reader or peer-to-peer commands. See the pullnews manual
page for more information.
%%%

https://www.eyrie.org/~eagle/software/inn/docs/pullnews.html
--
Julien |eLIE

-2-arCo Je suis Acidenitrix, le bras droit de S|-gr|-gationnix, le chef du
quartier droit du village voisin.
rCo Et mon pied gauche, tu l'as vu-a?rCa-a-+ (Ast|-rix)

--- Synchronet 3.21a-Linux NewsLink 1.2

From Newsgroup: news.admin.peering

Urs Jan|fen <urs@tin.org> writes:

<https://datatracker.ietf.org/doc/html/rfc4707>

I donrCOt see a mention of peering config in there but itrCOs a 50-page RFC, what have I missed?

Is there an implementation?
--
https://www.greenend.org.uk/rjk/
--- Synchronet 3.21a-Linux NewsLink 1.2