next message in archive
next message in thread
previous message in archive
previous message in thread
Index of Subjects
Index of Subjects
On Sun, 18 May 1997, Edward Dyer wrote:
> On Sun, 18 May 1997, Neale Partington wrote:
>
> > There has been some lively discussion in the can-freenet listserv lately
> > about various Free-Nets offering text-only, and graphics-only access.
> > The Great Plains Free-Net has stated in our mission statement that we
> > will provide graphical access. I don't see that happening in the short
> > term, but perhaps in 1 - 2 years. We are also strong believers in
> > continuing to offer text access. Does Chebucto have any plans for giving
> > users or administrators a choice at some point in the future?
>
> Here's one opinion:
>
> The issue for Chebucto Suite is not graphics, per se, as almost
> all functions except origination of messages (mail and news) are done
> through a browser anyway, and mail and news could as well be. Rather, the
> two separate issues are:
>
> (1) security/identification of users for access to personal mail and
> files, as well as IP (information provider) areas, and administrative
> functions. For some functions we use lynx-cgi scripts, which rely on the
> trusted binaries on our host, to enhance security.
>
> (2) dial-in access service.
>
> There has been some discussion of these matters here, but it has not been
> a priority to us at CCN, because we have been able to achieve such great
> deals with our various ISP's on the basis of exclusion of graphical
> dial-ins. We see no big advantage in our local situation with a multitude
> (upwards of a half-dozen, even after the hookup consolidation) of
> commercial services offering ppp, to get in competition with them, rather
> we suggest that those who wish to access CCN via graphics use the
> commercial providers to to so. We would recognize, however, that the same
> would not likely be the case in more rural settings.
>
That's what we have felt all along too, but some of the discussion has
shown that in some areas, commercial ISP's actually encourage the
Free-Net to be ppp, so that they can be a starting ground for the
higher-cost services. I wonder if a survey of your csuite-sites might be
in order?
Some FN's / Community Networks have gone 100% ppp; we would [personal
opinion] like to offer both at some point.
> Nonetheless, consideration has been given to making ppp available on a
> restricted basis, which is that offsite access would be blocked. This
> would be useful to Information Providers to view, and perhaps upload
> pages, and maybe for "off-line" mail access. Such a restricted service
> might allow for development of "enhanced graphical interfaces" to some of
> the administrative functions, although security would become a greater
> concern. (Not that we don't have full graphic support now, its just that
> text is our primary mode and first consideration.)
>
We have been having some discussion lately along the same lines, e.g. the
IP's having Chebucto access, but perhaps a menu option that opens them up
to a ppp session. Just a glimmer at this point, but a real possibility.
Thank you for your well-thought-out, in-depth reply, Ed. Its always good
hearing from you!
--
___
/| / / / Neale Partington
/ | / /__/ Past President, Great Plains Free-Net Inc.,
/ |/ / Regina, Sk., Canada Neale@gpfn.sk.ca
GPFN OFFICE (voice): 306-569-8554 MODEM POOL: 306-569-8555
Members get access to express lines as well.
next message in archive
next message in thread
previous message in archive
previous message in thread
Index of Subjects