FUDforum: comp.lang.php » checking for audio playing ???

Home » Imported messages » comp.lang.php » checking for audio playing ???

Show: Today's Messages :: Polls :: Message Navigator

Re: cr [message #183633 is a reply to message #183630]

Sun, 03 November 2013 20:18

Richard Damon
Messages: 58
Registered: August 2011

Karma:

Member

On 11/3/13, 9:29 AM, Thomas 'PointedEars' Lahn wrote:
> Richard Damon wrote:

> It rather shows that you are trolling since you are at least vaguely aware
> how Cancel messages work, and what they mean, and not only reply regardless
> but also deny their significance.
>
>> Cancel messages are purely advisory,
>
> Cancel messages are control messages. A news server may ignore them at own
> risk. That does not make them “purely advisory”.
>
> <http://tools.ietf.org/html/rfc5536#section-3.2.3> pp.

Note that RFC5537 which defines the cancel message, describes it as a
request, and that serving agents may elect to honor them or not. It is
NOT "ignore at your own risk"
>
>> and routinely ignored by the backbone
>
> There is no “backbone”; Usenet is explicitly decentralized. Each news
> server administrator can set their own rules regarding to which messages to
> accept from which peers, which to keep, and which to distribute to which
> peers.
>

Having a backbone and being decentralized are NOT contradictory states.
There is a backbone of "Tier 1" servers that handle most of the "long
haul" connections. These then peer with Tier 2 servers, and down the
line. Better lower tier servers will connect with multiple upstream
peers for redundancy.

>> because they are not authenticated.
>
> Some news servers now require Cancel messages to be authenticated before
> executed, that is, to match the lock-signature of the posting to be
> canceled; others (like the one I am using since about 10 years) do not.
>
>> It has been decades since one could expect a cancel to work.
>
> Utter nonsense. That a Cancel message works was the general idea. It was
> only after some people abused this feature that some servers decided to
> ignore cancels or require authentication.
>
And this abuse happened decades ago, my experience is that cancels did
not work in the mid 90's (which is about 2 decades ago). My experience
is that MOST servers ignore cancels, as they have for decades.

> The Internet draft for lock-signing messages, and cancel messages to match
> that signature, is a lot younger than that. And it has expired even though
> it is implemented.
>
> <http://wiki.killfile.org/projects/usenet/faqs/cancel/>
> <https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Control_message>
> <http://tools.ietf.org/html/draft-ietf-usefor-cancel-lock-01>
> <http://individual.net/faq.php#1.12>
>

An expired draft RFC does not establish rules to run the internet. The
fact that it IS an expired draft indicates that there were likely
problems in implementing it. There may be a few servers which implement
this, but that hardly makes it something to be counted on. Plus, since
your message didn't have the needed headers to begin with, this is
irrevelent.

> So much for *your* “understanding of Usenet and the applicability of RFCs”.
> It is also exemplified by the way you changed the Subject header field
> value.

That was purely accidental. A feline felt they were being ignore and
pushed some keys, as I was getting ready to send.

> F'up2 poster
Follow up ignored.
>

Report message to a moderator

[Message index]

		checking for audio playing ??? By: Mr Oldies on Sun, 27 October 2013 14:58
		Re: checking for audio playing ??? By: Christoph Michael Bec on Sun, 27 October 2013 15:45
		Re: checking for audio playing ??? By: Mr Oldies on Sun, 27 October 2013 16:01
		Re: checking for audio playing ??? By: Denis McMahon on Sun, 27 October 2013 17:53
		Re: checking for audio playing ??? By: Mr Oldies on Sun, 27 October 2013 18:24
		Re: checking for audio playing ??? By: Doug Miller on Sun, 27 October 2013 18:38
		Re: checking for audio playing ??? By: Richard Damon on Sun, 27 October 2013 18:43
		Re: checking for audio playing ??? By: Thomas 'PointedEars' on Mon, 28 October 2013 02:22
		Re: checking for audio playing ??? By: Jerry Stuckle on Mon, 28 October 2013 09:49
		Re: checking for audio playing ??? By: Richard Damon on Mon, 28 October 2013 12:11
		Re: checking for audio playing ??? By: Thomas 'PointedEars' on Mon, 28 October 2013 13:37
		Re: checking for audio playing ??? By: Jerry Stuckle on Mon, 28 October 2013 14:01
		Re: checking for audio playing ??? By: Arno Welzel on Tue, 29 October 2013 19:10
		server-side vs.client-side (was: checking for audio playing ???) By: Christoph Michael Bec on Tue, 29 October 2013 20:45
		Re: server-side vs.client-side By: Jerry Stuckle on Wed, 30 October 2013 00:54
		Re: server-side vs.client-side By: Christoph Michael Bec on Wed, 30 October 2013 02:18
		Re: server-side vs.client-side By: Jerry Stuckle on Wed, 30 October 2013 02:31
		Re: server-side vs.client-side By: Arno Welzel on Wed, 30 October 2013 08:20
		Re: server-side vs.client-side By: Christoph Michael Bec on Wed, 30 October 2013 18:04
		Re: server-side vs.client-side By: Jerry Stuckle on Wed, 30 October 2013 18:58
		Re: server-side vs.client-side By: Christoph Michael Bec on Wed, 30 October 2013 19:54
		Re: server-side vs.client-side By: Jerry Stuckle on Wed, 30 October 2013 20:21
		Re: server-side vs.client-side By: Christoph Michael Bec on Wed, 30 October 2013 20:55
		Re: server-side vs.client-side By: Jerry Stuckle on Wed, 30 October 2013 21:07
		Re: server-side vs.client-side By: Arno Welzel on Thu, 31 October 2013 08:40
		Re: server-side vs.client-side By: Christoph Michael Bec on Thu, 31 October 2013 22:03
		Re: server-side vs.client-side By: Jerry Stuckle on Fri, 01 November 2013 00:38
		Re: server-side vs.client-side By: Thomas 'PointedEars' on Sat, 02 November 2013 16:57
		Re: server-side vs.client-side By: Arno Welzel on Sat, 02 November 2013 18:36
		Re: server-side vs.client-side By: The Natural Philosoph on Sat, 02 November 2013 18:44
		Re: server-side vs.client-side By: Denis McMahon on Sun, 03 November 2013 00:28
		Re: server-side vs.client-side By: Doug Miller on Sat, 02 November 2013 19:01
		Re: server-side vs.client-side By: Jerry Stuckle on Sun, 03 November 2013 01:40
		Re: server-side vs.client-side By: Michael Vilain on Fri, 01 November 2013 16:53
		Re: server-side vs.client-side By: Jerry Stuckle on Fri, 01 November 2013 17:53
		Re: server-side vs.client-side By: Tim Streater on Fri, 01 November 2013 21:10
		Re: server-side vs.client-side By: The Natural Philosoph on Fri, 01 November 2013 22:25
		Re: server-side vs.client-side By: Tim Streater on Fri, 01 November 2013 22:29
		Re: server-side vs.client-side By: Jerry Stuckle on Sat, 02 November 2013 00:37
		Re: server-side vs.client-side By: Arno Welzel on Sat, 02 November 2013 00:26
		Re: server-side vs.client-side By: The Natural Philosoph on Fri, 01 November 2013 18:37
		Re: server-side vs.client-side By: Stefan+Usenet on Fri, 01 November 2013 19:19
		Re: server-side vs.client-side By: Arno Welzel on Sat, 02 November 2013 00:24
		Re: server-side vs.client-side By: Thomas 'PointedEars' on Sat, 02 November 2013 16:46
		Re: server-side vs.client-side By: Richard Damon on Sat, 02 November 2013 19:41
		Re: server-side vs.client-side By: Tim Streater on Sat, 02 November 2013 21:37
		Re: server-side vs.client-side By: Arno Welzel on Sun, 03 November 2013 09:48
		Re: server-side vs.client-side By: Tim Streater on Sun, 03 November 2013 10:28
		Re: server-side vs.client-side By: Arno Welzel on Tue, 05 November 2013 10:15
		Re: server-side vs.client-side By: Tim Streater on Tue, 05 November 2013 12:47
		Re: server-side vs.client-side By: Thomas 'PointedEars' on Sun, 03 November 2013 13:16
		Re: server-side vs.client-side By: Tim Streater on Sun, 03 November 2013 16:00
		Re: server-side vs.client-side By: Chuck Anderson on Sun, 03 November 2013 21:52
		Re: server-side vs.client-side By: Chuck Anderson on Mon, 04 November 2013 06:19
		Re: server-side vs.client-side By: Tim Streater on Mon, 04 November 2013 18:02
		Re: server-side vs.client-side By: Arno Welzel on Wed, 30 October 2013 08:09
		Re: checking for audio playing ??? By: Denis McMahon on Mon, 28 October 2013 15:23
		Re: checking for audio playing ??? By: The Natural Philosoph on Mon, 28 October 2013 16:56
		Re: checking for audio playing ??? By: Doug Miller on Sun, 27 October 2013 18:22
		Re: checking for audio playing ??? By: Beauregard T. Shagnas on Mon, 28 October 2013 13:49
		Re: checking for audio playing ??? By: Scott Johnson on Mon, 28 October 2013 18:36
		Re: checking for audio playing ??? By: Arno Welzel on Mon, 28 October 2013 19:02
		Re: checking for audio playing ??? By: Richard Damon on Tue, 29 October 2013 01:29
		Re: checking for audio playing ??? By: Thomas 'PointedEars' on Tue, 29 October 2013 11:18
		cr By: Richard Damon on Fri, 01 November 2013 03:21
		Re: cr By: Thomas 'PointedEars' on Sun, 03 November 2013 14:29
		Re: cr By: Jerry Stuckle on Sun, 03 November 2013 14:34
		Re: cr By: Richard Damon on Sun, 03 November 2013 20:18
		Re: checking for audio playing ??? By: Arno Welzel on Tue, 29 October 2013 19:12
		Re: checking for audio playing ??? By: Doug Miller on Tue, 29 October 2013 20:21

Previous Topic:	There is some confusion on my site I should clear up
Next Topic:	accessing nested unknown unserialized objects

Goto Forum:

-=] Back to Top [=-

[ Syndicate this forum (XML) ] [

]

Current Time: Thu Nov 28 22:47:03 GMT 2024

Total time taken to generate the page: 0.25143 seconds