Relay-Version: version B 2.10 5/3/83; site utzoo.UUCP
Path: utzoo!watmath!clyde!rutgers!brl-adm!adm!FISHER@rpicicge
From: FISHER%rpicicge@adm.UUCP
Newsgroups: comp.os.cpm
Subject: Wisconsin gateway gripes
Message-ID: <4331@brl-adm.ARPA>
Date: Mon, 9-Feb-87 09:36:18 EST
Article-I.D.: brl-adm.4331
Posted: Mon Feb  9 09:36:18 1987
Date-Received: Tue, 10-Feb-87 04:44:08 EST
Sender: news@brl-adm.ARPA
Lines: 21

In light of the present transitory (I hope) difficulties with the Wisconsin
gateway between BITNET and ARPANET, it seems appropriate to ask:
 
    Are we demanding a little too much from the gateway?
 
I don't know the terms and conditions under which the WISCVM gate operates,
but I assume the improperly coerced "From:" address problem was not done
in malice.  At any rate, the gate is there and works, and generally works
well.  Can we help it work better?
 
How many Info-CPM members are on the BITNET side of Wisconsin?  Just
guessing, I would say I get 50 or so Info-CPM items per week. ...that
times however many of us there are over here I am sure represents a lot
of traffic through the gate.
 
Should we set up a single BITNET host as the redistribution point for all
Info-CPM traffic to BITNET-land?  As maintainer of my host and its mail
services I can offer RPICICGE for that function.  The redistribution
functions already exist; all that is needed is the mailing list....
 
J.S.Fisher       Bitnet:  FISHER@RPICICGE