Xref: utzoo unix-pc.uucp:62 comp.sys.att:4602
Path: utzoo!utgpu!water!watmath!uunet!labrea!rutgers!mit-eddie!uw-beaver!tikal!nwnexus!cjsa!jeff
From: jeff@cjsa.WA.COM (Jeffery Small)
Newsgroups: unix-pc.uucp,comp.sys.att
Subject: problem with (HDB) uucp
Keywords: uucp unix-pc 3B1 HDB BNU
Message-ID: <139@cjsa.WA.COM>
Date: 25 Oct 88 19:54:32 GMT
Organization: C. Jeffery Small and Associates - Woodinville, WA
Lines: 53

This is a summary followup to my previous posting requesting help in getting
HDB uucp to allow multi-hop specifications in the source-file path description.

First of all, thanks to everyone who responded.  The bottom line is:

1: Although this was not directly related to the problem, many people pointed
   out that multi-hop uucp requests are going to fail unless you have permission
   to execute uucp on the remote machines.  It's good to keep this in mind.

2: The manual page for the original uucp distributed with OS 3.51 and earlier
   states that multi-hop specifications are allowed and the Hotline verified
   that this does indeed work.  I point this out for those who thought this
   was impossible or not documented.

3: For those who suggested I RTFM, I must point out that there was no
   documentation supplied with the HDB distribution for the unix-pc.  Since
   there is nothing I would like better, if there is there a kind soul who has
   the HDB man pages and would be willing to send me a (photo or electronic)
   copy, please drop me a note so we could make the appropriate arrangements.
   
4: So, is the HDB uucp behavior a bug or a feature?  I contacted Peter
   Honeyman and his reply was:

>	"this is not a bug, it was a conscious decision on the part of dan,
>	ber, and myself."

   Case closed!  ... well almost.  While I can understand the real-world
   limitations of multi-hop uucp requests and the reasons for the mods during
   the rewrite of uucp, there are some cases where it does make sense to
   allow this behavior.  For example, I have a string of secure unix-pc
   machines, all with rs232 connections to one-another.  Since I allow uucp
   command permission between these machines, it seems reasonable that I
   be able to make requests for file copy from any machine to any other
   machine.  You are now prohibited from doing this [directly].

5: And finally, is there a workaround?  "Use mail" was suggested a number
   of times and a thanks to Brant Cheikes, who offered the following idea:

>	    "I suspect that the proper thing to do is construct a uux command
>	that executes a uucp command on the remote system to uucp the desired
>	file to the local host, and then once that file has arrived, uucp's it
>	on the the desired destination.  It's probably going to look crufty,
>	but it will probably work if all the intervening Permissions are set
>	right (and the remote system includes "uucp" in its COMMANDS line of
>	the Permissions file).


So that's the whole story.  Thanks again to everyone who contributed to my
better understanding of what was going on.
--
Jeffery Small    (206) 485-5596            uw-beaver!uw-nsr!uw-warp
C. Jeffery Small and Associates                                    !cjsa!jeff
19112 152nd Ave NE - Woodinville, WA  98072           uunet!nwnexus