> On Wed, 17 Jul 1996, Julian Assange wrote: > > > > But surely, the Organisation line is for the (person who posted the > > > article)'s organisation? How will allowing nntpcache to change this > > > benefit anyone? > > > What you say is true, however often the poster doesn't configure the > > news-readers correctly and the Organisational field is not set. > > INN has a compile-time option of over-riding the "Organization" line of > any article posted from the server. This is widely used in Educational > and Business locations that want to put a disclaimer in the Organization > line, and in addition by several commercial ISPs to put a > "Use-Our-Service" or "our-phone-number-is" tag line in the displayed > header of every article that comes from their host. > > The initial patches will insert an Organization header ONLY if one does > not already exist (and then only if the 'artOrganization' variable is > defined in the nntpcached.config file), but I would actually consider > adding code to replace a client-side 'Organization:' line with an > nntpcached configured one. (only for postings originating at this host, > for obvious reasons). > > -abc > > \ Alan B. Clegg > Just because I can \ Network Technologist > does not mean I will. \ gateway.com, inc. Clearly, there's enough interest for allowing nntpcache to include an 'Organization:' header. Whether or not to force replacing a client supplied one seems to be an issue that's got enough interest to warrant an option being available for that. Adding options is relatively easy since Proff wrote the 'confused' program (don't ask about why it's called that, it's a long story), which is precisely the reason he wrote it. Controversy on this list is fun to watch from where I'm sitting though :-). -- Luke Bowker, puke@suburbia.net, puke@deakin.edu.au Suburbia Public Access Network Site Sysadmin "Don't try to understand. Knowing you, I'm probably wrong" - D. Mustaine
