HDTenEightyP/NetNews huggingface dataset:
From: djk@boombox.apana.org.au (David Keegel)
Newsgroups: comp.mail.uucp,comp.mail.misc
Subject: Re: Mixed format addresses
Date: Mon, 28 Dec 92 10:34:58 +1100
Reply-To: David.Keegel@apana.org.au
Organization: Private site, Melbourne, Australia.

In <Bzx014.yL@wimsey.bc.ca> sl@wimsey.bc.ca (Stuart Lynne) writes:
>In article <8lbPrA9ABh107h@boombox.apana.org.au> David.Keegel@apana.org.au writes:
>>but some sites cannot, and this is A Good Thing.  Because that way
>>there is an incentive for people to get out of the .UUCP domain so we
>>may not need to support it (for global routing) in five years time.

>But we said that five years ago! (No smiley either.)

I don't have statistics to hand about the size of the UUCP maps, or
the .UUCP "domain" or the .US domain, but here are some stats from the
last 300 postings I have (about one week's worth) to comp.bbs.waffle,
where this thread originated and which probably has (one of?) the
largest proportion of small UUCP sites around Usenet (ie: sites most
likely to be in .UUCP).

Top-level domains by posting:
    1 at           89 com
    9 au           50 us
   20 ca           43 edu
   89 com          36 uucp
    3 de           34 org
   43 edu          20 ca
    2 fi            9 au
    1 jp            6 nz
    2 net           3 de
    1 nl            2 fi
    6 nz            2 net
   34 org           2 za
    1 uk            1 at
   50 us            1 jp
   36 uucp          1 nl
    2 za            1 uk

Top-level domains by poster (all posts by the same person counted once):
    1 at           41 com
    4 au           21 us
   11 ca           14 org
   41 com          13 edu
    3 de           12 uucp
   13 edu          11 ca
    2 fi            4 au
    1 jp            3 de
    1 net           3 nz
    1 nl            2 fi
    3 nz            2 za
   14 org           1 at
    1 uk            1 jp
   21 us            1 net
   12 uucp          1 nl
    2 za            1 uk

>This strategy doesn't seem to be working.

Do you have a better one?  Should there be a strategy at all?

-- 
<David.Keegel@apana.org.au>  <werple!tuple!boombox!djk>  Tel: +61 3 593-1460
aka: djk@boombox.apana.org.au, djk@cs.mu.oz.au.  Formerly: djk@bby.com.au.
Newsgroups: comp.mail.uucp,comp.mail.sendmail,comp.unix.sys5.r4,comp.unix.questions
From: larry@gator.use.com (Larry Snyder)
Subject: DNS name servers
Organization: Gator Communications - Feeds-R-Us 219-289-3745 
Date: Sun, 27 Dec 1992 14:33:04 GMT

We are using a cached name server (it works fine, and it appears
that as the machine is up and running for a couple of days, it
really gets faster since I assume the name to IP addresses are
in the cache verses requiring a lookup via the DNS - does anyone
know of a good book that explains how and why this works? and what
would be required to run a complete namesever locally).

-- 
Larry Snyder                                    internet: larry@gator.use.com
keeper of the Gator                                   uucp: uunet!gator!larry
From: nelson@crynwr.com (Russell Nelson)
Newsgroups: comp.mail.uucp
Subject: Mixed format addresses 
Distribution: world
Date: Thu, 31 Dec 92 01:58:21 GMT
Organization: Crynwr Software

In article <BzzGKp.4L5@chinet.chi.il.us> les@chinet.chi.il.us writes:

   In article <BzxvDC.CoK.2@cs.cmu.edu> Karl_Kleinpaste@cs.cmu.edu writes:
   
   >There is far too much ad hoc support for .uucp out there, with
   >the result that there has been no real incentive offered. 

   Perhaps not everyone shares the opinion that there is only one email system
   and that users within it have no reason to want to connect to anyone
   outside of it.

There *is* only one email system.  Check out advertisements in
computer journals.  IF they list an email address, it is their FQDN.

.UUCP sucks because implies that a particular transport is being
used.  Names, addresses, routes, and transports are all distinct
characteristics.

-russ <nelson@crynwr.com> What canst *thou* say?
Crynwr Software           Crynwr Software sells packet driver support.
11 Grant St.              315-268-1925 Voice  |  LPF member - ask me about
Potsdam, NY 13676         315-268-9201 FAX    |  the harm software patents do.
Xref: sparky comp.mail.uucp:2439 news.answers:4752
From: les@chinet.chi.il.us (Leslie Mikesell)
Subject: Re: Mixed format addresses
Organization: Chinet - Public Access UNIX
Date: Mon, 28 Dec 1992 18:55:37 GMT

In article <BzxvDC.CoK.2@cs.cmu.edu> Karl_Kleinpaste@cs.cmu.edu writes:

>There is far too much ad hoc support for .uucp out there, with
>the result that there has been no real incentive offered. 

Perhaps not everyone shares the opinion that there is only one email system
and that users within it have no reason to want to connect to anyone
outside of it.

Les Mikesell
  les@chinet.chi.il.us
Xref: sparky comp.mail.uucp:2465 comp.mail.misc:4146
From: dawson@willard.UUCP (Willard Dawson)
Newsgroups: comp.mail.uucp,comp.mail.misc
Subject: Re: Mixed format addresses
Date: 30 Dec 92 03:35:50 GMT
Organization: Willard's House BBS, Atlanta, GA -- +1 (404) 664 8814

barrett@daisy.ee.und.ac.za (Alan P Barrett) writes:

> [Redirecting away from comp.bbs.waffle]
> 
> In article <e539VB6w165w@willard.UUCP>,
> dawson@willard.UUCP (Willard Dawson) writes:
> > For what it's worth, I've come across the same problem, mailer software
> > querying DNS on host.UUCP, on several "Internet" hosts.  If we accept
> > the statement (from more than one participant on these newsgroups) that
> > .UUCP is INVALID (typically shouted, as if that would make it somehow
> > more logical), the Internet hosts surely have no business in querying
> > DNS for that domain, yes?
> 
> An Internet host cannot *know* that .UUCP in invalid unless it either
>     queries the DNS and gets back an error indication
> or  has special-case information somehow installed in its configuration.

Except that .UUCP is not a valid top-level domain (is it?).  I don't have
all the RFC's, so I don't know from personal knowledge, but I've been
told that.

> A good argument can be made for avoiding special-case information, and
> Internet hosts that believe such an argument have every right to query
> the DNS for *everything*, including .UUCP sites.

If .UUCP is not a part of the Internet, and if DNS only applies to intra-
domain routing, what sense does it make to query DNS for site.UUCP?

> They will, of course,
> get back an error indication, which will tell them that the domain is
> invalid, and they will accordingly bounce the improperly addressed mail.

Which is inconsistent, given that other sites on the Internet can send to
site.UUCP.

> > We likely all agree on that one.
> 
> Apparently not.

Yes, I apparently spoke too soon.

-- 
dawson@willard.UUCP (Willard Dawson)
gatech!vdbsan!willard!dawson
emory!uumind!willard!dawson
Willard's House BBS, Atlanta, GA -- +1 (404) 664 8814
Newsgroups: comp.mail.uucp
From: ipacs@solomon.technet.sg (IPACS PTE LTD)
Subject: HongKong
X-Newsreader: TIN [version 1.1 PL8]
Date: Fri, 25 Dec 1992 20:30:19 GMT

I'm looking for ANYONE in HONGKONG who has InterNet access.

Sorry, but this is the only place I know of where I'd have a decent chance
of getting a response.

If you are from HK or know anyone from HK, please email me asap.

Thanx.
From: steve@jack.sns.com (J. Steven Harrison)
Newsgroups: comp.mail.uucp
Subject: Re: The UUCP network hasn't a tree structure (for some strange unexplained reason, was Re: Mixed format addresses)
Date: 2 Jan 93 05:58:18 GMT
Organization: Systems'n'Software

In article <1992Dec28.024259.14707@blilly.UUCP> lilb@sony.compuserve.com (Bruce Lilly) writes:
>In article <KEQPrAmGBh107h@boombox.apana.org.au> David.Keegel@apana.org.au wrote:
>>  Personally, I don't want to update a file every time
>>my feed adds another site, I just want to send everything to my feed.
>>If they don't recognise it, they do the same (as long as there is a
>>"tree" structure, and each node knows all the sites "below" it).
>
>What makes you think the UUCP network has a tree structure?
>
>-- 
>	Bruce Lilly		blilly!bruce@Broadcast.Sony.COM
>					...uunet!sonyusa!sonyd1!blilly!bruce

Come on now Bruce have you ever heard of DNS?


-- 
J. Steven Harrison, PhD.	steve@jack.sns.com
45034 Imnaha Court		Voice:	(510)623-8651
Fremont, CA   94539-6669	Data:	(510)623-8652
Systems'n'Software            	FAX:	(510)623-8656 
Xref: sparky comp.mail.uucp:2444 comp.mail.sendmail:3074 comp.unix.sys5.r4:1029 comp.unix.questions:14997
From: aej@manyjars.WPI.EDU (Allan E Johannesen)
Newsgroups: comp.mail.uucp,comp.mail.sendmail,comp.unix.sys5.r4,comp.unix.questions
Subject: Re: DNS name servers
Date: 28 Dec 92 16:04:08 GMT
	<Bzz5rF.Huq@news.iastate.edu>
Organization: Worcester Polytechnic Institute, Worcester, MA 01609-2280
NNTP-Posting-Host: manyjars.wpi.edu
In-reply-to: john@iastate.edu's message of Mon, 28 Dec 1992 15:02:03 GMT

>>>>> On Mon, 28 Dec 1992 15:02:03 GMT, john@iastate.edu (John Hascall) said:

john> True enough, however, it is possible to eat up mucho RAM.  For
john> example:

john> USER       PID %CPU %MEM    SZ  RSS TT STAT   TIME COMMAND
john> root      7882  0.0 30.3 13320 4384 ?  S      0:09 /etc/named

john> (because we are a large site and have Hesiod we have lots of
john> nameserver data)

Actually, it may be because there are mucho memory leaks in named
concerning hesiod.  Primaries and secondaries do not grow, but slaves
grow steadily.  You should be able to observe the growth after a
simple 'ls -l' (i.e. after hesiod is forced to look up a bunch of
names).

Due to this, our mail/news server has to be a secondary; making it a
slave exhausts VM pretty quickly.
Newsgroups: comp.mail.uucp,comp.mail.misc
From: sl@wimsey.bc.ca (Stuart Lynne)
Subject: Re: Mixed format addresses
Organization: Wimsey Information Services
Date: Sun, 27 Dec 1992 11:03:04 GMT

In article <8lbPrA9ABh107h@boombox.apana.org.au> David.Keegel@apana.org.au writes:
>In <1hbmn9INNgrk@daisy.ee.und.ac.za> barrett@daisy.ee.und.ac.za (Alan P Barrett) writes:
>>In article <e539VB6w165w@willard.UUCP>,
>>dawson@willard.UUCP (Willard Dawson) writes:
>but some sites cannot, and this is A Good Thing.  Because that way
>there is an incentive for people to get out of the .UUCP domain so we
>may not need to support it (for global routing) in five years time.

But we said that five years ago! (No smiley either.)

This strategy doesn't seem to be working.


-- 
Stuart Lynne <sl@wimsey.com> ......................... UNIX Facsimile Software
Wimsey Information Technologies ................... moderator biz.sco.binaries
uucp login:nuucp passwd:nuucp .................... ftp.wimsey.com:~ftp/ls-lR.Z
PD Software for SCO UNIX .................... ftp.wimsey.com:~ftp/pub/wimseypd
From: jgeorge@willard.UUCP (Joe George)
Newsgroups: comp.mail.uucp
Subject: Newuser Stupid Questions
Date: Sat, 26 Dec 92 17:00:29 EST
Organization: Willard's House BBS, Atlanta, GA -- +1 (404) 664 8814

Hello everyone... It's been more than a few years since I've had the 
opportunity to wade in the Unix-world pool, and unfortunately I've never 
really had the glorious opportunity of having to get UUCP to work until 
now.  What I have is Linux 0.98, with Taylor UUCP (1.1? I think so). I 
have edited the config files in /usr/lib/uucp/* but I can _not_ seem to 
get uucico to connect. It looks like I have my login script wrong, but 
I've tried every type of combination I can think of (including all of the 
examples in the Systems file.   I can get uucico to dial the phone once, 
then the script times out, and from then on I can't get the phone to even 
dial anymore without doing a shutdown and a power off.  Does anyone have 
any suggestions? How should I set up /etc/inittab to tell there's a modem 
on the port?
 
  An Email request would be greatly appreciated, but not necessary.
 
  Joe George
  gatech!willard!jgeorge

-- 
jgeorge@willard.UUCP (Joe George)
gatech!vdbsan!willard!jgeorge
emory!uumind!willard!jgeorge
Willard's House BBS, Atlanta, GA -- +1 (404) 664 8814
Newsgroups: comp.mail.uucp
From: bruce@blilly.UUCP (Bruce Lilly)
Subject: Re: The UUCP network hasn't a tree structure (for some strange unexplained reason, was Re: Mixed format addresses)
Organization: Bruce Lilly
Date: Sat, 2 Jan 93 00:26:04 GMT
Reply-To: lilb@sony.compuserve.com (Bruce Lilly)

In article <1944@frackit.UUCP> (posted to comp.mail.uucp) dave@frackit.UUCP (Dave Ratcliffe) wrote:
>
> In article <1992Dec28.024259.14707@blilly.UUCP>, bruce@blilly.UUCP (Bruce Lilly) writes:
> >In article <KEQPrAmGBh107h@boombox.apana.org.au> David.Keegel@apana.org.au wrote:
> >>"tree" structure, and each node knows all the sites "below" it).
> >
> >What makes you think the UUCP network has a tree structure?
>
>Well, we DO have 'leaf' sites... :)

The existence of leaves does not imply a tree structure.

Repeat after me: All crows are black...

-- 
	Bruce Lilly		blilly!bruce@Broadcast.Sony.COM
					...uunet!sonyusa!sonyd1!blilly!bruce
From: fenner@postscript.cs.psu.edu (Bill Fenner)
Newsgroups: comp.mail.uucp
Subject: Re: Mixed format addresses
Date: 21 Dec 92 19:49:00 GMT
Organization: Penn State Computer Science

In article <xTkMrA9DBh107h@boombox.apana.org.au> djk@boombox.apana.org.au writes:
|In <e80RVB2w165w@1776.COM> bob@1776.COM (Robert Coe) writes:
|>barr@pop.psu.edu (David Barr) writes:
|>> Unfortunately, in DNS, having a wildcard MX ... will mean that ALL mail to 
|>> *.UUCP will go to the one site.
|
|Nobody said it has to be *one* site.  But let's not argue about that.

The DNS design allows for several same-preference MX'ers to be listed, however,
most implementations will use them in listed order.  This means, that in
practice, it will be *one* site.

  Bill
Xref: sparky comp.mail.uucp:2490 comp.bbs.waffle:5792
From: andrea@hydra.unm.edu (V.K.)
Subject: Help !! (How do i send mail from my .edu account to .com account??
Date: Tue, 29 Dec 92 15:54:06 GMT
Organization: University of New Mexico, Albuquerque




I am desperately trying to contact a person at at&t with his email address ending with att.com. I am able to send mail to other accounts not on the uucp network. The account I am trying to send to ends with att.com. How can i send email from my account to other commercial accounts? Is there a gateway i need to go through before sending email ????

	Any replies would be greatly appreciated...........!!


-Thanks


vik
andrea@carina.unm.edu
andrea@hydra.unm.edu
From: mirsky@hal.gnu.ai.mit.edu (David Joshua Mirsky)
Newsgroups: comp.mail.uucp
Subject: UUSEND help needed
Date: 22 Dec 92 23:00:49 GMT
Organization: MIT Artificial Intelligence Lab
NNTP-Posting-Host: hal.gnu.ai.mit.edu



I read my host computer's on-line manual for help with uusend and uucode/
decode, but found it void of specific examples.
 
If I want to send a file to a friend who is at a remote host, how would I
use uusend to do it? DO i need to know more than just my friend's email
address?
 
Could someone please post specific example of such a situation. I would like
to learn how to send binary files via email using uusend, uucode and uudecode.
 
Thanks in advance
David

Also, if this is not the proper newsgroup for this question, could someone
please tell me one that is?
From: pbh@prjup.mi.org (Patrick B. Haggood)
Newsgroups: comp.mail.uucp
Subject: FSUUCP eating newsgroups?
Date: Tue, 22 Dec 92 00:07:58 EST
News-Software: FSUUCP 1.3r1
X-pizza-toppings: extra cheese and mushrooms
X-gripe: ignorance and hate
Reply-To: pbh@prjup.mi.org (Patrick B. Haggood)
Distribution: world
Organization: Project: Jupiter Scientific Software

Finally receiving Usenet news.  Now I seem to have another
problem with FSUUCP.

It appears that everytime I edit the ACTIVE file to include

comp.os.ms-windows.programmer.misc
comp.os.ms-windows.programmer.win32

that it reports the right number of articles in
.win32, but then it deletes that newsgroup from
the ACTIVE file!

Does it just not like this group or what?  It seems
that comp.mail.uucp is also drifting in and out of
my ACTIVE file, although ACTMAKE believes everyone
exists.

--
-------------------------------------------------------------------------
Patrick B. Haggood                    | pbh@prjup.mi.org
Project: JUPITER Scientific Software  | REDUCE COMPLEXITY - RECYCLE CODE
From: cahuja@twerp.ease.arco.com (Chander Ahuja)
Newsgroups: comp.mail.uucp
Subject: cant uucp across machines
Date: 23 Dec 92 17:36:00 GMT
Reply-To: cahuja@twerp.ease.arco.com (Chander Ahuja)
Distribution: world
Organization: Atlantic Richfield Company, Dallas , TX


I tried posting this before but either it didnt get out or i didnt see the reply
so here goes::;

connexion looks like this:

 me (SUN) - neighbour (SUN) - remote (DEC)

From me i want to get a file sitting on remote so i do:

 uux neighbour!uux (remote!uusend) ((file-i-want)) ((neighbour!me!~/))

neighbour fails sending me a 'access denied to me!me!myname'  (note double 'me')

Of course this one fails miserably since the neighbour optimizes (?) to get
my machine to do the copy directly...

 uucp  neighbour!uucp remote!file-i-want me!~/


permissions on neighbour and me are ALL, so am i doing something wrong:

basically i want to sit on 'me' and ask for a file from 'remote' to be
brought down...whats the best way ?

-chander
PS>> SUN runs HDB and DEC runs BNU version...
PPS>> I can sit on 'remote' and send a file to 'me' - no problem

pleh!


Newsgroups: comp.mail.uucp,comp.mail.sendmail,comp.unix.sys5.r4,comp.unix.questions
From: john@iastate.edu (John Hascall)
Subject: Re: DNS name servers
Organization: Iowa State University, Ames, IA
Date: Mon, 28 Dec 1992 15:02:03 GMT

jgreco@solaria.mil.wi.us (Joe Greco) writes:
    ...
}Since you're using a nameserver with a cache, it saves all requests that it
}has had to resolve to the cache.  Resolving a name is an "expensive"
}operation, often involving several other servers.  The savings in time
}offered by the cache is great compared to the relatively tiny overhead of
}RAM and time to cache it.

True enough, however, it is possible to eat up mucho RAM.  For example:

USER       PID %CPU %MEM    SZ  RSS TT STAT   TIME COMMAND
root      7882  0.0 30.3 13320 4384 ?  S      0:09 /etc/named
                         \________/
                          in KBytes

(because we are a large site and have Hesiod we have lots of nameserver data)

John
-- 
John Hascall                   ``An ill-chosen word is the fool's messenger.''
Systems Software Engineer
Project Vincent
Iowa State University Computation Center  +  Ames, IA  50011  +  515/294-9551
Xref: sparky comp.mail.uucp:2449 comp.mail.sendmail:3078 comp.unix.sys5.r4:1036 comp.unix.questions:15007
From: pbh@mi.org (Patrick B. Haggood)
Newsgroups: comp.mail.uucp,comp.mail.sendmail,comp.unix.sys5.r4,comp.unix.questions
Subject: RN for Waffle (couldn't get FSUUCP to behave)
Date: Sun, 27 Dec 92 21:09:46 PST
Organization: Project: JUPITER Scientific Software

larry@gator.use.com (Larry Snyder) writes:

> We are using a cached name server (it works fine, and it appears
> that as the machine is up and running for a couple of days, it
> really gets faster since I assume the name to IP addresses are
> in the cache verses requiring a lookup via the DNS - does anyone
> know of a good book that explains how and why this works? and what
> would be required to run a complete namesever locally).
> 
> -- 
> Larry Snyder                                    internet: larry@gator.use.com
> keeper of the Gator                                   uucp: uunet!gator!larry

Xref: sparky comp.mail.uucp:2442 comp.bbs.waffle:5604
From: bruce@blilly.UUCP (Bruce Lilly)
Newsgroups: comp.mail.uucp,comp.bbs.waffle
Subject: The UUCP network hasn't a tree structure (for some strange unexplained reason, was Re: Mixed format addresses)
Date: 28 Dec 92 02:42:59 GMT
Reply-To: lilb@sony.compuserve.com (Bruce Lilly)
Followup-To: comp.mail.uucp
Organization: Bruce Lilly

In article <KEQPrAmGBh107h@boombox.apana.org.au> David.Keegel@apana.org.au wrote:
>  Personally, I don't want to update a file every time
>my feed adds another site, I just want to send everything to my feed.
>If they don't recognise it, they do the same (as long as there is a
>"tree" structure, and each node knows all the sites "below" it).

What makes you think the UUCP network has a tree structure?

-- 
	Bruce Lilly		blilly!bruce@Broadcast.Sony.COM
					...uunet!sonyusa!sonyd1!blilly!bruce
From: djk@boombox.apana.org.au (David Keegel)
Newsgroups: comp.mail.uucp
Subject: Re: Mixed format addresses
Summary: discussion of .PIGEON domain
Date: Sat, 2 Jan 93 10:28:44 +1100
Reply-To: David.Keegel@apana.org.au
Organization: Private site, Melbourne, Australia.

In <725768036snx@crynwr.com> nelson@crynwr.com (Russell Nelson) writes:
] I don't
] CARE how you get your email.  You could get it via carrier pigeon
] for all I care.  Would you advocate registering the .PIGEON domain if
] you did?

Is this officially sanctioned in RFC 1149?  From the RFC index:

>1149  Waitzman, D.  Standard for the transmission of IP datagrams on avian 
>      carriers.  1990 April 1; 2 p. (Format: TXT=3329 bytes)

I propose that we make this domain more general by calling it .AVIAN.

PS: :-)

-- 
<David.Keegel@apana.org.au>  <werple!tuple!boombox!djk>  Tel: +61 3 593-1460
aka: djk@boombox.apana.org.au, djk@cs.mu.oz.au.  Formerly: djk@bby.com.au.
Xref: sparky comp.mail.uucp:2386 comp.unix.questions:14868
From: ian@airs.com (Ian Lance Taylor)
Newsgroups: comp.mail.uucp,comp.unix.questions
Subject: Re: uucp requests from a unix system to a fido system runnning fredmail
Date: 21 Dec 92 05:50:43 GMT
Followup-To: comp.mail.uucp
Organization: Infinity Development, Waltham, MA

jay@gdx.UUCP (Jay Snyder) writes:

>When I type:

>uucp mdtnbbs!t:/pd/uploads/270-211.arc

>uucp things that I want
>/usr/spool/uucppublic/t:/pd/uploads/270-211.arc from mdtnbbs.

Most versions of uucp will automatically prepend the current directory
to any path name that does not start with either a '/' or a '~'.

You didn't say which version of UUCP you were running, but the first
thing to try is the -W flag which means to not prepend the directory.
However, I believe that very few UUCP packages support -W (the only
ones that I know for sure support it are Taylor UUCP and Ultrix UUCP)
(I forgot to put in the man page for Taylor UUCP, but it does work).

If that doesn't work, you will have to find some way to refer to the
file using a path name that starts with '/' or '~'.  Since this most
be a common problem, it may be that the FIDO system provides some
mechanism.
-- 
Ian Lance Taylor                ian@airs.com         uunet!cygint!airs!ian
First person to identify this quote wins a free e-mail message:
``That is a fine analogy.  Its only fault is its unintelligibility.''
Newsgroups: comp.mail.uucp,biz.sco.general,twg.sco-list