🚀 go-pugleaf

Roger, I hope your comment about "convincing the powers that be in the
Internet..." is wrong.  (Being a member of the IAB, I can at least speak
for one of those folks.)  BITNET solved/solves a certain class of problems.
So does Internet.  (So does SNA, Netware, DECNet, etc...) Internet was
based upon a set of assumptions about connectivity, cost and community
of interest.  BITNET dealt with the same set of considerations.  Each
came up with different solutions.  It appeears that the Internet
sytel of networking is taking hold in a whole lot of places.  As it
"expands" it will run into "subcommunities" that more closely resemble the
BITNET category and it is our mutual responsibility to ensure that the
services provided to the users are actually useful.
I may be a bit off base here, but I'll venture an "opinion/observation"
to hopefully help the readers understand my leading remarks about
"assumptions".  BITNET has two services that are not present in the
Internet.  THose are : Store and Forward Anonymous file transfer and
Interactive messaging.

Well, BITNET wins hands down on item one, but not on item two.  The Internet
has had "chat" and "talk" (I.e., realtime "terminal-to-terminal"
interaction) for almost 20 years.  It's just that it is not highly used
(and therefor not widely known or even implemented) because (this is
my own "because") its mail protocl is "realtime".  That is, one can
send mail and expect that the recipient will get it in a few minutes.This
 obviates the need for having a "realtime interactive messaging service".

I'm not trying to point out "deficiencies".  (Money is wonderful stuff...)
I'm just trying to point out that good services are good because
they meet a real need.  All of the BITNET services need to be
accomodated in the evolving Internet; maybe not in the identical
manner, but definitely in function,for an agreed upon "price".

Dan


















































-------