HDTenEightyP/NetNews huggingface dataset:
From: clewis@ferret.ocunix.on.ca (Chris Lewis)
Newsgroups: comp.mail.uucp
Subject: Re: Mail efficiency over UUCP...
Date: 30 Sep 92 22:23:09 GMT
Organization: Elegant Communications Inc., Ottawa, Canada

In article <BvBK9J.6nr@solaria.mil.wi.us> jgreco@solaria.mil.wi.us (Joe Greco) writes:
>In comp.mail.uucp article <Bv9B7p.3y1@jshark.uucp>, joe@jshark.uucp (Joe Sharkey) wrote:
>:In article <1992Sep27.141935.17836@mp.cs.niu.edu> rickert@mp.cs.niu.edu (Neil Rickert) writes:
>:>There are sites (I don't know which) where mail is sent using a batched
>:>SMTP protocol (BSMTP), and a batch of messages is compressed before
>:>transmission.  You need something like BSMTP for batching mail, because
>:>you must keep the envelope information (the equivalent of the 'rmail'
>:>command parameters) associated with the message.

>:It is provided as an example with smail3 (and zmailer?)

I hear rumours that SVR4 mail may be able to do it, and there's a few
add-on packages.

>:I use it - works great over long distance links: also cuts out the
>:silly 'X.' files...

>What does the remote site need to be running?

A compatible debatcher.  This is something you have to negotiate
on a neighbor-by-neighbor basis.  The debatching is relatively
trivial, so it could probably be added on to virtually any
MTA you're using with UUCP with a few short shell scripts.

>I've actually got no idea
>what MU is using on their end as a mail system (smail or sendmail,
>certainly, but which?) ....  but it probably doesn't matter as I doubt
>that we'll ever get to work it out.  The sysadmin at my upstream site is a
>really busy guy.

Then I suggest you forget about it.

>I guess I just remain suprised at how little thought seems to have been
>given to this kind of functionality.  With high speed, data compressing
>modems it's not really a major issue, but 1200 baud modems were common when
>I first got into UNIX, and I'm suprised people didn't find creative (if 
>obvious) solutions to transmission speed limits.  On large uuencoded
>packets, I get a respectable savings when I compress the message in
>question.

Actually, it is far *more* important with high-speed modems than it was
with 1200.  Especially telebits with spoofing on.  It's at these high
speeds that inter-file latencies become expensive.  Especially telebits.

Back in the old days, inter-file latencies were relatively insignificant,
and the low *mail* (as opposed to news) loads made it not worth the
bother.  Then came SMTP ;-)

A seamless batching mechanism is a lot harder than you think.  Ie:
how do you do cancels once the batches are created?  How do you
schedule the batch creations?  Do you decompose the batch if your
poll fails?

Not insurmountable, but at least until recently, not worth the bother
when batched and compressed news usually constitutes most of the bandwidth.

Don't get me wrong, BSMTP would help *me* a fair bit (I moderate
a mailing list, but I don't do news over the paid link), but it's
still not worth the bother.
-- 
Chris Lewis; clewis@ferret.ocunix.on.ca; Phone: Canada 613 832-0541
Psroff 3.0 info: psroff-request@ferret.ocunix.on.ca
Ferret list: ferret-request@ferret.ocunix.on.ca
From: MKK2@psuvm.psu.edu
Newsgroups: comp.mail.uucp
Subject: Feed wanted
Date: 27 Sep 92 18:15:50 GMT
Organization: Penn State University

I need a low volume email and news feed.  Of course, I'll pay the phone bills.
Probably fewer than 20 email messages and 20 newsgroups.

Anybody still living the old style Unix way ? 8-) 8-)

Lee Sailer
814.725.2611
Near Erie PA
Newsgroups: comp.mail.uucp
From: dhesi@cirrus.com (Rahul Dhesi)
Subject: Re: Anyone used uupc AND fsuucp?
Keywords: uucp fsuucp comparison
Organization: Cirrus Logic Inc.
Date: Mon, 5 Oct 1992 20:37:43 GMT

In <1992Oct5.180229.29020@lambda.msfc.nasa.gov>
thigpen@lambda.msfc.nasa.gov (Keith Thigpen) writes:

>I'm trying to settle on one of the PC based uucp packages: either uupc or
>fsuucp. Has anyone used BOTH of these packages that can give me a critique?
>Both seem fairly capable, but I'd like to know how they stand up to real
>use.

FSUUCP gave me some problems.  1.   It did funny things to my video
hardware.  No software should need to touch my video hardware during
the mere operation of calling another system and completing a UUCP
transaction.  This one does.  Probably as a result, it would frequently
hang my system, requiring a reboot.  2.   There were no step-by-step
installation instructions.  There is an installation program, but there
is scant documentation for it too.  3.  The debugging provisions of the
uucico program didn't work, or didn't work very well -- I was not able
to convince it to show me the entire transaction packet by packet.

After three days of struggling I did manage to get it up, but stopped
using it because it always required a reboot after a completed UUCP
transaction.

UUPC is much better behaved.   1. It does come with step-by-step
installation instructions.  Although these instructions are not as good
as they could be, they are much, much better than what FSUUCP
includes.  2.  UUPC does not try to reset my video hardware, so far as
I can tell.  3. Its uucico provides a good amount of debugging
information on request.

It took me about three hours to install UUPC and successfully get UUCP
running.

On the negative side, UUCP fills your screen with many anonnying
copyright messages.

Note that FSUUCP includes a lot of utilities that mimic corresponding
ones on UNIX systems, including news and mail software.  UUPC doesn't
seem to do much news handling (though I didn't really try it -- I
tested only email).  So if FSUUCP works for you, it might do more for
you.

In both cases I was using the latest versions that I could find, as of
a few days ago.

UUPC comes with source code.  FSUUCP does not.

On the whole, I think UUPC wins on quality.  Neither package is what I
would consider to be of quality equivalent to the standard UUCP that
comes with SunOS or to Taylor UUCP for UNIX.
-- 
Rahul Dhesi <dhesi@cirrus.com>
also: dhesi@rahul.net
From: craig@kralizec.zeta.org.au (Craig Dewick)
Newsgroups: comp.mail.uucp
Subject: Re: Any reommendations for MS-DOS uucp?
Keywords: MSDOS MS-DOS uucp
Date: 30 Sep 92 23:35:53 GMT
Organization: Kralizec Dialup Unix Sydney: +61-2-837-1183 V.32

kevinf@tofu.informix.com (Kevin Franden) writes:

>I use UUPC/Extended - shareware from Kendra Electronic Wonderworks.  I like
>it alot.  It has mail and uucp; it'll talk to itself and to a *nix host
>as well.  Source is included.

>I havn't used any others but I`m real happy with UUPC/Extended.

Do you know how difficult it would be to make UUPC work with a non-DOS
system that runs an OS almost like Unix, but not quite? I need to have
a UUCP system to connect my almost-Unix machine to a real Unix machine
for mail and new services, and UUPC seems to be the best bet.
 
Most of the source is in C, and it's shareware.

I'm aware that UUPC itself has no netnews support, but this is not a
problem st this stage.
-- 
Craig Dewick               | Railway Preservation Industries - Working to
craig@kralizec.zeta.org.au | Advance the Preservation of Australian Railways
Newsgroups: comp.mail.uucp
From: bruce@blilly.UUCP (Bruce Lilly)
Subject: Re: uucpname alias (rmail)
Organization: Bruce Lilly
Date: Fri, 2 Oct 92 23:57:54 GMT

In article <1992Oct1.104242.10100@puug.pt> frazao@colombo.puug.pt (Jorge Frazao de Oliveira) wrote:
>** UNDELIVERABLE MAIL sent to first!root, being returned by lv452!uucp **
>rmail: Error # 1 'Unknown system/user' encountered on system lv452
>
>  this is because messages have the address 'first!user' and the
>  system doesn't known 'first' !!!!!

Copying the Systems (or L.sys) entry (on lv452) for the 
neighboring site, with the system name changed to "first",
should cure the problem.

-- 
	Bruce Lilly		blilly!bruce@Broadcast.Sony.COM
					...uunet!sonyusa!sonyd1!blilly!bruce
Newsgroups: comp.mail.uucp
From: frazao@colombo.puug.pt (Jorge Frazao de Oliveira)
Subject: uucpname alias (rmail)
Organization: PUUG - Portuguese Unix Users's Group
Date: Thu, 1 Oct 1992 10:42:42 GMT



Hi,

  I have the following configuration:

  One site ('lv452' -- Targon running SysV3.2) calls periodically other
site ('dec4pt'). This changing its name to 'first' when establish the 
connection. For this it has defined in Permissions:
	MACHINE=dec4pt  MYNAME=first  ....

  Well,
  when machine 'lv452' receive mail from 'dec4pt' the rmail return
the next message:
** UNDELIVERABLE MAIL sent to first!root, being returned by lv452!uucp **
rmail: Error # 1 'Unknown system/user' encountered on system lv452

  this is because messages have the address 'first!user' and the
  system doesn't known 'first' !!!!!


  Anyone have some experience with this situation (alias for uucpname) ??

  Thanks in advance!

  
  frazao
From: pacolley@ember.UUCP (Paul Colley)
Newsgroups: comp.mail.uucp
Subject: Re: Mail efficiency over UUCP...
Date: 29 Sep 92 22:58:52 GMT
Reply-To: pacolley@ember.UUCP (Paul Colley)
Organization: Ember---private system

In article <Bv71qC.I8u@solaria.mil.wi.us> root@solaria.mil.wi.us
(Joe Greco) writes:

>Can somebody suggest why it is that while news can be sent compressed over
>a UUCP link, nobody seems to have done this for mail?

According to my fallible memory, somebody did do it---about two
years ago (?).

>Are people doing this already and I have just never heard of it?  Or is
>there a practical (or obvious) problem with it that I am not seeing?

As I recall, the practical problem from the author's viewpoint was
that UUnet wasn't interested.

Sorry, I can't remember the author, but it had features like:

	- As more mail was queued, it enlarged the existing bundle
	  (rather than creating zillions of little bundles, which
	  wouldn't save you anything)

	- If the bundle sat too long, the individual mail messages
	  would be broken out again so the existing mail system
	  could bounce them ("Unable to reach foo after 3 days,
	  still trying...")

Anyways, ask around (maybe try the sources archives); maybe somebody
remembers who did this or has a copy of the source code.

- Paul Colley
University:  colley@qucis.queensu.ca
Home:        pacolley@ember.uucp   watmath!ember!pacolley  +1 613 545 3807
<Ring> [...] "Sorry, I'm all booked up." "Who was that?" "The library." - B.C.
From: jeh@cmkrnl.com
Newsgroups: comp.mail.uucp
Subject: Re: uucp timing?
Date: 2 Oct 92 12:57:01 PDT
Organization: Kernel Mode Consulting, San Diego, CA

In article <1992Sep29.213141.15005@wixer.cactus.org>, miked@wixer.cactus.org (mike.daugherty) writes:
> 	Is there some timing value involved between command/response
> 	and file transfers?
> For example: the master sends a file down the pipe, when done the
> slave will answer with "CY" to indicate reception. How does the
> slave know file transfer is actualy over, timing?

No.  The sender of a file (whether master or slave, could be either) denotes
the end of file by sending a shortdata packet with a logical length of zero.
In other words, the data packet preceding this packet contains the last bytes
of the file.  

Two timers that do exist:  The data link layer normally has a timer awaiting
ACKs of data packets -- upon timeout, the unack'd packets are retransmitted. 
This timer is normally quite short, on the order of a few seconds.  Also, in
the VMS implementation at least, there is a timer at the "presentation layer"
when awaiting a message or a file data packet from the other system.  this 
timer is on the order of a minute or so, and timeout is reason to assume that
the call has failed.  

	--- Jamie Hanrahan, Kernel Mode Consulting, San Diego CA
uucp 'g' protocol guru and release coordinator, VMSnet (DECUS uucp) W.G., and 
Chair, VMS Programming and Internals Working Group, U.S. DECUS VAX Systems SIG 
Internet:  jeh@cmkrnl.com, hanrahan@eisner.decus.org, or jeh@crash.cts.com
Uucp:  ...{crash,eisner,uunet}!cmkrnl!jeh
From: overlord@megalith.miami.fl.us (Carlos Amezaga [POSTMASTER])
Newsgroups: comp.mail.uucp
Subject: Re: Mail efficiency over UUCP...
Keywords: 
Distribution: world
Date: 28 Sep 92 01:21:04 EST
Organization: Megalith Mail & News Server

Quoted from <...unknown> by root@solaria.mil.wi.us (Joe Greco):
> Can somebody suggest why it is that while news can be sent compressed over
> a UUCP link, nobody seems to have done this for mail?
> 
> I take these occasional "major mail hits" over a very slow link, and it just
> occured to me that mail is not compressed.
> 
> Historical reasons aside, is there a reason that two sites could not agree
> to support compressed mail, and instead of a site piping mail to
> "uux - site2!rmail" (specific options deleted, obviously) one could use
> "compress | uux - site2!crmail" and have a short shell script on the
> receiver's end to the effect of "zcat | rmail"?
> 
> Are people doing this already and I have just never heard of it?  Or is
> there a practical (or obvious) problem with it that I am not seeing?

	On the Amiga using Amiga UUCP, there is a set of additional
programs called BSMTP which allows for compressed mail.  But this
only works if the system connected to you also supports BSMTP.  I
have to run a program  every so often to compress all mail for a
certain systems wishing compressed mail.  I don't use BSMTP, but
I have read the documentation for it.

Carlos
--

%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%
%    __     %  UUCP:  overlord@megalith.miami.fl.us  % I Tried MS-DOS Once %
% __///     %  Fido:  1:135/92                       % But Didn't Inhale.  %
% \\//Amiga %  GEnie: C.Amezaga                      %        --D.Atkins-- %
%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%
Newsgroups: comp.mail.uucp,comp.sys.sun.misc
From: splee@alchemy.tn.cornell.edu (Seng-Poh Lee)
Subject: How to log transfer statistics (bytes/sec) with uucp?
Organization: Alchemy International
X-Newsreader: TIN [version 1.1 PL6]
Date: Sat, 3 Oct 1992 02:51:21 GMT

Greetings,

How does one get uucp (SunOs 4.1.1) to provide transfer statistics in
the log file? Right now, the log files only provide the files
transfered, but not the bytes/sec transfered. If I run uucico manually
with debug level 4, I get the transfer statictics. I tried adding the
-u 4 switch to the uusched call in uudemon.hour, but I STILL don't get
any transfer statistics. Would some Sun/uucp expert please enlighten
me?

Thanks.

--
Seng-Poh Lee    <splee@alchemy.tn.cornell.edu>
Newsgroups: comp.mail.uucp
From: rccarm00@mik.uky.edu (ron c carman)
Subject: UUCP utility suite?
Organization: University Of Kentucky, Dept. of Math Sciences
Date: Wed, 30 Sep 1992 19:17:15 GMT

   Is there a set of utilities available (alone, not as part of a bbs
package) which allow DOS to use UUCP to send/receive USENET feeds and
E-mail?
   Many thanks.

RC Carman

--
/=======================================================================\ 
|     Ron C. Carman          || 'What you want is irrelevant.           |
| rccarm00@mik.uky.edu       ||  What you have chosen is at hand.'      |
 ~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
From: craig@kralizec.zeta.org.au (Craig Dewick)
Newsgroups: comp.mail.uucp
Subject: Re: UUCP utility suite?
Date: 1 Oct 92 08:38:32 GMT
Organization: Kralizec Dialup Unix Sydney: +61-2-837-1183 V.32

rccarm00@mik.uky.edu (ron c carman) writes:


>   Is there a set of utilities available (alone, not as part of a bbs
>package) which allow DOS to use UUCP to send/receive USENET feeds and
>E-mail?

There is. It's UUPC/Extended, which provides complete UUCP and email
support for the DOS environment. Source code is available as well as
straight executables.

For news support, an extra package has to be added. Several are
available, but I know of one called SNEWS which does a reasonable job.

UUPC/Extended is available by ftp from sun.soe.clarkson.edu. All the
useful stuff in in the /pub/uupc directory at this site.
-- 
 Craig Dewick               |      - Railway Preservation Industries P/L -
 Send email to:             |      actively supporting the preservation of
 craig@kralizec.zeta.org.au |           Australia's railway heritage.
From: Rick.Ellis@ofa123.fidonet.org
Newsgroups: comp.mail.uucp
Subject: Re: UUCP on DOS and MS-WINDOWS
X-Sender: newtout 0.02 Sep 21 1992
Date: 27 Sep 92  17:41:54

On <Sep 25 17:41> "Ivan Leong" writes:

 "L> Sorry, couldn't help but think this is a kludge at best. Couldn't the
 "L> uucico simply accept the CD from the mailer and asks for login and 
 "L> password? A can't-be-simpler bypass of the modem answering routine 
 "L> would have done it.

That's essentially how I do it here.  It works quite well.
Newsgroups: comp.mail.uucp
From: thigpen@lambda.msfc.nasa.gov (Keith Thigpen)
Subject: Re: Anyone used uupc AND fsuucp?
Keywords: uucp fsuucp comparison
Organization: NASA/MSFC
Date: Tue, 6 Oct 1992 13:11:31 GMT

I just wanted to follow up on my previous info request. I received five email
responses and have seen three follow-up posts. So far it's unanimous in favor 
of uupc.

Keith

-- 
----------------------------------------------------------------------------
| Keith Thigpen          thigpen@lambda.msfc.nasa.gov      (205)461-4936   |
| New Technology, Inc.   Marshall Space Flight Center     Huntsville, AL   |
----------------------------------------------------------------------------
From: tpa10@ccc.amdahl.com (Thomas P. Anderson)
Newsgroups: comp.mail.uucp
Subject: Re: Feed wanted
Date: 28 Sep 92 14:30:51 GMT
Reply-To: tpa10@JUTS.ccc.amdahl.com (Thomas P. Anderson)
Organization: Amdahl Corporation, Sunnyvale CA

In article <92271.141550MKK2@psuvm.psu.edu> MKK2@psuvm.psu.edu writes:
>I need a low volume email and news feed.  Of course, I'll pay the phone bills.
>Probably fewer than 20 email messages and 20 newsgroups.
>
>Anybody still living the old style Unix way ? 8-) 8-)
>
>Lee Sailer
>814.725.2611
>Near Erie PA

I am also looking for the above.
Tom A.
Daly City CA (415 area code).
From: scasterg@waltham.columbus.oh.us
Newsgroups: comp.mail.uucp
Subject: test
Date: 17 Sep 92 21:17:15 GMT
X-Mailer: rnMac Buggy, I mean Beta, Test Version

Test message.
From: rickert@mp.cs.niu.edu (Neil Rickert)
Newsgroups: comp.mail.uucp
Subject: Re: Mail efficiency over UUCP...
Date: 27 Sep 92 14:19:35 GMT
Article-I.D.: mp.1992Sep27.141935.17836
Organization: Northern Illinois University

In article <Bv71qC.I8u@solaria.mil.wi.us> root@solaria.mil.wi.us (Joe Greco) writes:
>Can somebody suggest why it is that while news can be sent compressed over
>a UUCP link, nobody seems to have done this for mail?

The major difference is that mail deals with single messages, while news
deals with a batch of many messages.  The savings from compressing a
single message are relatively small (sometime negative), unless the
message is large.

>Are people doing this already and I have just never heard of it?  Or is
>there a practical (or obvious) problem with it that I am not seeing?

There are sites (I don't know which) where mail is sent using a batched
SMTP protocol (BSMTP), and a batch of messages is compressed before
transmission.  You need something like BSMTP for batching mail, because
you must keep the envelope information (the equivalent of the 'rmail'
command parameters) associated with the message.
From: gu_jc3@stu.ust.hk (GU)
Newsgroups: comp.mail.uucp
Subject: SCO R3.2.4 UUCP Problems
Date: 6 Oct 1992 01:27:05 -0500
Organization: UTexas Mail-to-News Gateway
NNTP-Posting-Host: cs.utexas.edu

I encountered the following problems with HDB UUCP came with SCO UNIX
R3.2.4:

command executed: "uucp /usr/tmp/test1.txt olisc!~/test1.txt"

uucp olisc  (10/5-20:29:09,963,0) SUCCEEDED (call to olisc )
uucp olisc  (10/5-20:29:12,963,0) OK (startup tty1A)
root olisc oliscN5fb1 (10/5-20:29:12,963,0) REQUEST (hkpcug!/usr/tmp/test1.txt
                                            --> olisc!~/test1.txt (root))
root olisc oliscN5fb1 (10/5-20:29:12,963,1) BAD READ (expected 'S' got FAIL)
root olisc oliscN5fb1 (10/5-20:29:12,963,1) FAILED (conversation complete
                                            tty1A 30)

"uutry -x9 -r olisc" debug logs (Poll only, all queue up messages and files
were being removed before polling!)

mchFind called (olisc)
list (rmail) num = 1
fillFlds: entered
fillFlds: returning
list (/usr/spool/uucppublic) list (/usr/tmp) num = 2
list (/usr/spool/uucppublic) list (/usr/tmp) num = 2
list (rmail) list (rnews) list (uucp) num = 3
_Request (TRUE), _Switch (TRUE), _CallBack (FALSE), _MyName (), _Commands rmail
_Commands rnews
_Commands uucp
chdir(/usr/spool/uucp/olisc)
conn(olisc)
Device Type V22BIS wanted
mlock tty1A succeeded
fixline(5, 19200)
processdev: calling setdevcfg(uucico, V22BIS)
gdial(tbv22bis) called
expect: ("")
got it
sendthem (APAUSE
APAUSE
APAUSE
ATS50=3^M)
expect: (OK)
A^M^JOKgot it
sendthem (ATDT???????^M)
expect: (CONNECT)
^M^J^M^JCONNECTgot it
getto ret 5
expect: ("")
got it
""
sendthem (^M)
expect: (ogin:)
 2400^M^J^M^M^M^Jlogin:got it
sendthem (nuucp^M)
expect: (ssword:)
 nuucp^M^M^JPassword:got it
sendthem (????^M)
ISTRIP cleared
imsg >^M^JUNIX System V/386 Release 3.2^M^Jolisc^M^JCopyright (C) 1984, 1986,
      1987, 1988 AT&T^M^JCopyright (C) 1987, 1988 Microsoft Corp.^M^JAll
      Rights Reserved^M^JLogin last used: Mon Oct  5 21:05:21 1992^M^J^P
      Shere=olisc^@Login Successful: System=olisc
omsg "Shkpcug -Q0 -x9"
imsg >^PROK^@msg-ROK
 Rmtname olisc, Role MASTER,  Ifn - 5, Loginuser - root
rmesg - 'P' imsg >^PPge^@got Pge
wmesg 'U'g
omsg "Ug"
send 73
pkgetpack: Connodata=1
rec h->cntl 77
send 61
state - [INIT code a] (1)
pkgetpack: Connodata=2
rec h->cntl 61
send 53
state - [INIT code a]&[INIT code b] (3)
pkgetpack: Connodata=3
rec h->cntl 57
state - [O.K.] (10)
Proto started g
*** TOP ***  -  role=1, setline - X
gtwvec: dir /usr/spool/uucp/olisc
wmesg 'H'
send 37777777610
rmesg - 'H' pkcget, read failed, errno 2
send 37777777610
ASSERT ERROR (uucico)  pid: 1197 (10/5-21:15:10) PKXSTART ret  (-1) [FILE: pk1.c, LINE: 375]
got FAIL
cntrl - -1
omsg "OOOOOO"
send OO 0,omsg "OOOOOO"
imsg >exit code -1
Conversation Complete: Status FAILED

TM_cnt: 0

Anyone got any idea on what's going wrong?  

Samson Luk (gu_jc3@uxmail.ust.hk)



Newsgroups: comp.mail.uucp,comp.sys.hp