Path: utzoo!utgpu!jarvis.csri.toronto.edu!mailrus!cs.utexas.edu!usc!apple!limbo!taylor
From: taylor@limbo.Intuitive.Com (Dave Taylor)
Newsgroups: comp.org.usenix
Subject: Re: USENIX Board Studies UUCP
Message-ID: <192@limbo.Intuitive.Com>
Date: 17 Nov 89 08:36:21 GMT
References: <287@usenix.UUCP> <1624@crdos1.crd.ge.COM> <1989Nov16.182104.23746@utzoo.uucp>
Reply-To: taylor@limbo.Intuitive.Com (Dave Taylor)
Organization: Intuitive Systems, Mountain View, CA: +011 (415) 966-1151
Lines: 46

The discussion of the Usenix board studying UUCP has been most
interesting, and I'd like to continue some thoughts that Henry
Spencer (henry@utzoo.uucp) recently posted.

First off, I wholeheartedly agree that the Australian Computer
Science Network (ACSNet) is a much better implementation of a phone-
line based file exchange protocol than UUCP or HDB UUCP.  It has
such features as multiple "channels" so small messages can be 
inserted in the midst of a large 'batch' transfer, for example, as 
well as a much more sophisticated error catching and retransmission
algorithm.

Henry adds that he believes the problem with ACSNet not catching on 
outside of Australia is that it cost money to obtain.  I think he's 
off a bit on this, however, and he points out the problem I believe
it had in the US with his comment that ".. outside of Australia, where 
its ubiquitous presence makes it essentially a necessity if you want to 
communicate..."  If your neighbors are running ACSNet, you have to be
running it also.  Just like UUCP.  Basically, then, you can't successfully 
run a site that has ACSNet on some lines and UUCP on others without 
much difficulty and parallel administration.

ACSNet, however, *can* be a successful replacement for the existing
UUCP packages, even with it costing money.  What would need to happen
would be for the Usenix Association to arrange with the appropriate
schools in Australia the right to add complete UUCP functionality (on
the wire) to the package, all the while continuing to evolve and 
improve the administrative and user interfaces.

Then we'd be able to offer a scenario where those sites that opt to
stick with UUCP are okay, and those that choose to upgrade can, with
a simple field in L.sys/Systems, say, indicate whether the remote is
running ACSNet or one of the UUCP variants.  This would allow a very
graceful migration of larger, then smaller sites to the more sophisticated
package, and then would also allow vendors time to understand and
integrate the technology in with their current offerings.

It would, by the way, be very interesting to investigate having this
research occur in conjunction with the Open Software Foundation 
Research Institute...

						-- Dave Taylor
Intuitive Systems
Mountain View, California

taylor@limbo.intuitive.com    or   {uunet!}{decwrl,apple}!limbo!taylor