Xref: utzoo comp.mail.misc:5463 comp.mail.uucp:6533 Newsgroups: comp.mail.misc,comp.mail.uucp Path: utzoo!utgpu!news-server.csri.toronto.edu!rpi!uupsi!ficc!peter From: peter@ficc.ferranti.com (Peter da Silva) Subject: Re: BITFTP grief! Message-ID: <-=DB8WF@xds13.ferranti.com> Reply-To: peter@ficc.ferranti.com (Peter da Silva) Organization: Xenix Support, FICC References: <1991May16.145758.6817@uu.psi.com> <1991May17.202220.9531@uu.psi.com> Distribution: na Date: Sat, 18 May 91 13:13:59 GMT In article <1991May17.202220.9531@uu.psi.com> schoff@uu.psi.com (Martin Schoffstall) writes: > In article peter@ficc.ferranti.com (Peter da Silva) writes: > >"uux uupsi!rftp sprite.berkeley.edu:~ftp/mx.tar.Z (ficc!~/from-uupsi)" > >I realise this might hurt your flat rate pricing, so you could restrict > Pricing is not an issue at all, actually, the only problems have been > (a) admin overhead of people oriented things, (b) breaking mailers. Neither of which are a problem with my hypothetical rftp program. > >rftp to people with DCS or LAN-DCS access, or impose a surcharge, or > >something. > HOST-DCS and LAN-DCS already support anon ftp and tcp/ip so this > isn't an issue. Sure it is. Anonymous FTP isn't available through UUCP. Some of us out here don't have hardware that easily supports SLIP. In fact most UNIX boxes out here are running V.3.2 and below (in fact, most are running Xenix) and while KA9Q is great it's not well integrated. Of course we could get KA9Q on a PC and do it, but either way it requires we have a human at this end monitoring the transfer in real-time. That's the basic problem with FTP, and why mailservers are so popular. > Obviously you can have dialup Internet access today. Obviously. Does DCS come with a V.4 license? Rhetorical question, of course. > But lets go back to your rftp, what you need to do is create the > code and make it work across 2 dozen platforms and it will be > as explosive as CNews use. Nah, it just needs 2 platforms: what you're running, and what UUNET's running. > Your biggest and most controversial design decision will be to > decide if this works one hop or multiple hops. Since it's to come back via UUCP, it's limited to one hop by the UUCP design unless you want to add spooling. Besides, multihop is a SMOP once the basic system works: echo 'site1\!site2\!site3' > /usr/spool/rftp/C.whatever uux uupsi!rftp site:file /usr/spool/rftp/D.whatever Then have a daemon that looks for a matched pair of C. and D. files (and the D. file will appear when the request gets back) and pass it on to the next site. It would build a new C. file and ship both that and the D. file to the next site. Voila! Reliable uucp forwarding for files. But that's peripheral. The real problem is the lack of a reasonbaly reliable batch FTP via UUCP. That's the thing that's making a niche for mailservers. Scratch that niche and the whole mailserver problem goes away. -- Peter da Silva; Ferranti International Controls Corporation; +1 713 274 5180; Sugar Land, TX 77487-5012; `-_-' "Have you hugged your wolf, today?"