Path: utzoo!utgpu!news-server.csri.toronto.edu!rutgers!rochester!uhura.cc.rochester.edu!ub!zaphod.mps.ohio-state.edu!sdd.hp.com!ucsd!nosc!crash!simpact!jeh
From: jeh@dcs.simpact.com
Newsgroups: comp.mail.uucp
Subject: Re: What should a new UUCP protocol do?
Message-ID: <1892.273adbf4@dcs.simpact.com>
Date: 10 Nov 90 00:40:20 GMT
References: <1990Nov07.155516.17815@ism.isc.com> <1990Nov8.033541.1039@grumpy.boston.ma.us>
Distribution: usa
Organization: Simpact Associates, San Diego CA
Lines: 19

In article <1990Nov8.033541.1039@grumpy.boston.ma.us>,
 johna@grumpy.boston.ma.us (John Adams) writes:
>>Tell us what you want, maybe we can put it in.
> 
> We want a protocol which is supported by all callable uucp sites.
> Do you intend to distribute patches for all existing UUCP binaries?
> A new protocol may have merit but only if it's widely distributed.

Please note that all uucps are supposed to negotiate the protocol to be used.
The answerer sends a list of the protocols supported, and the caller sends 
back the selection.  Thus Interactive is free to define a new protocol as 
long as they (a) get the protocol negotiation right, (b) pick a single-letter
protocol identifier that isn't already in use, and (c) continue to support 
'g 'protocol.  

	--- Jamie Hanrahan, Simpact Associates, San Diego CA
Chair, VMSnet [DECUS uucp] and Internals Working Groups, DECUS VAX Systems SIG 
Internet:  jeh@dcs.simpact.com, or if that fails, jeh@crash.cts.com
Uucp:  ...{crash,scubed,decwrl}!simpact!jeh