Re: AARNet charges - IMPORTANT!!
Tue, 13 Dec 1994 13:13:06 +1000 (EST)
Matthew Gream wrote this...
> `Jas (Matthew K)' wrote:
> > > Doesn't matter if it happens, it will just make things more interesting
> > > at SoCS when everybody has to amuse themselves rather than playing
> > > pachinko with the Web or dribbling over IRC.
> > looks like IRC _may_ be getting the axe, still not sure.
> erm ... Why (curiously) ?
> So long as "local" IRCSERVERs are used, then there is no generation of
> international traffic either incoming or outgoing so far as UTS is
> concerned. Of course, someone down the line does fund it, who knows
> what will happen there.
> If any "restriction" where to be implemented, then assumedly it would
> be part of a general "restriction" on international traffic only. There
> would be no need for upper layer differentiation ?
there has been concer around a number of universities in australia about
the "IRC" problem (here at UTS the problem is to do with people occupying
terminals not bandwidth or cpus or anything else), so it was raised in one
of the AVCC's meetings.. now it would appear as though it is one of the
VC's bugbears... hence the possibility of it being axed.. (maybe the
origional posting was a bit out of context). the problem with international
IRC is just part of the problem.
Systems Programmer Information Technology Division
University of Technology Sydney Australia
phone: +61 2 330 1390 "Don't murder a man who is about
fax: +61 2 330 1999 to commit suicide."
home: +61 2 416 5722 -- Machiavelli
GCV 2.1 GAT/M/CS d--(-+) H-- s++:-- g+ p? !au a-(?) w+++ v+ C+++$
UVS++++$ P+>+++ L- 3+++ E-(++) N++ K W--- M+ V-- -po+(+) Y+ t+
!5>++ jx R+ G? !tv b+++ D++ B e+ u--(**) h- f+(*) r n- !y