🚀 go-pugleaf

kcoady@cup.portal.com (Kathleen Ellen Coady) writes:

>I don't see why any other network should accept a file transfer request from
>BITNET if BITNET isn't going to accept any of theirs.  When my system goes
>online, I'm going to bounce all such traffic from any BITNET node that 
>doesn't provide a public login and phone number where the files they ftp
>to other BITNET sites can be had by everyone else for the price of the 
>phone call.

I see. How do you plan to coerce the majority of BITNET sites that
are large IBM mainframes using EBCDIC character sets and NJE to support
your UUCP protocol? Or even xmodem for that matter? (Does anyone out
there know of a port of UUCP to MVS/CMS/??? Just the thought makes
me shudder.)

The BITFTP server runs on a machine that is connected to BOTH the
Internet and BITNET. They pay membership dues to both networks,
and are therefore entitled to make any use they desire (within the
constraints of their respective network contracts) of those network
connections. Since they have decided to stop forwarding to the UUCP
network, you need not fear that their traffic will traverse one
of your connections.

I'm also curious as to how you plan on determining if the originating
site is on BITNET. The only accurate way to do this is to get regular
updates of the BITNET NODES tables and use that to look up each and
every domain address that goes through your system to see if it is
in fact a BITNET host. The trouble is, you can only get copies of that
table from a BITNET host that would be willing to forward the file to
you from BITNET. Since you explicitly disallow that, getting the node
table will be a bit tricky, n'est ce pas?

-- 
    Lyndon Nerenberg  VE6BBM / Computing Services / Athabasca University
           atha!cs.athabascau.ca!lyndon || lyndon@cs.athabascau.ca
                    Packet: ve6bbm@ve6mc.ab.can.noam
        As a math atheist, I should be excused from this.   --Calvin