Path: utzoo!attcan!uunet!cs.utexas.edu!tut.cis.ohio-state.edu!ucbvax!UCONNVM.BITNET!SEWALL From: SEWALL@UCONNVM.BITNET (Murph Sewall) Newsgroups: comp.sys.apple Subject: Re: APPLE2-L brownvm.BITNET!listserv Message-ID: <8906101533.aa05864@SMOKE.BRL.MIL> Date: 10 Jun 89 20:17:37 GMT References: Sender: daemon@ucbvax.BERKELEY.EDU Organization: The Internet Lines: 72 >Some time ago I was able to access some files from this listserv. Remarkable, so far as I know UUCP confuses LISTSERV's to the point of uniform failure to reply properly to email requests. >However, for the last couple of months, there has been no response (AT ALL). >No file transfers... No bounce messages... NOTHING. > >This is also true of kermsrv@CUVMA and netserv@BITNIC. Three different servers, written (and supported) by three different people (ergo, not some LISTSERV idiosyncracy). The problem is UUCP which generally fails to send bounced mail messages to anyone (individual nodes MAY bounce mail that reaches them but OFTEN the return path isn't legal and the bounce simply bounces back). Postmaster@PSUVAX1.UUCP/BITNET (the gateway) doesn't answer anyone's mail (even if addressed by name to his personal account -- found in the BITNET nodentry files) - even mail from other postmasters. PSUVAX1 has MANY peculiarities (better than no gateway at all, I suppose) -- munging mail from LISTSERV's being only one of them. A substantail fraction of mail from UUCP sites arrives at BITNET with an illegal return address. LISTSERV (and the other robots) haven't a chance in such instances. There is hope: New LISTSERV software is coming this summer (perhaps it'll be 'smarter' and answer at least some UUCP mail requests) Some BITNET sites are beta-testing 'smarter' gateway software that should greatly reduce the occurance of 'unknown host' errors (that one's 'vaporware' because I've been hearing "coming soon" for nearly a year now). > I mail with the command; 'mail -v uunet\!brownvm.BITNET\!listserv' > The mailer informs me that thhe message was sent ok. Brown is in the process of opening their own Internet gateway. There's a chance that the combination of upgraded LISTSERV software, plus their own gate will permit return mail via uunet.uu.net (never know until you try -- say in September). > Is this a problem with the USENET/BITNET gateway? Problems are LEGION > Destination address on BITNET?? The mail usually will arrive, it's the return address that's a problem > Return Address to USENET??? Often NOT a legal address, and LISTSERV seems to have response problems of its own. > Are there Download limits placed on users? NO > Are there Upload requirements that allow further downloads? NO > > Could the APPLE2-L node post a monthly report regarding access levels > and bounced requests to comp.sys.apple or comp.binaries.apple2? What would be the point? > Is there some other means of knowing whether my requests are lost > before getting to APPLE2-L, or lost on the return trip? > Or simply ignored by the servers?? Lost on the return trip. Murph Sewall Vaporware? ---> [Gary Larson returns 1/1/90] Prof. of Marketing Sewall@UConnVM.BITNET Business School sewall%uconnvm.bitnet@mitvma.mit.edu [INTERNET] U of Connecticut {psuvax1 or mcvax }!UCONNVM.BITNET!SEWALL [UUCP] (203) 486-5246 [FAX] (203) 486-2489 [PHONE] 41 49N 72 15W [ICBM] -+- I don't speak for my employer, though I frequently wish that I could (subject to change without notice; void where prohibited)