🚀 go-pugleaf

RetroBBS NetNews Server

Inspired by RockSolid Light RIP Retro Guy

Article View: list.future-l
Article #9

Re: fall of Bitnet

#9
From: Mark Bodenstein
Date: Mon, 26 Feb 1990 21:47
53 lines
2718 bytes
On Sun, 25 Feb 90 17:32:00 CST Rick Kirkham said:
> ...
>I know of no service provided by either Bitnet or UUCP that cannot be
>easily duplicated (and for the most part already is duplicated) on
>the Internet.
>Why deal with the technical headaches of running one protocol over
>another?
>
>None of the recent posting have succeeded in justifying the continued
>existence of Bitnet beyond the time when the forthcoming Edunet is
>fully independent/operational. ...

This discussion has also been going on on the POLICY-L@BITNIC list.
The following is an excerpt from a message I posted there.  Many of
these points have been responded to there, in various ways.  I can only
refer you to the LISTSERV archives at BITNIC for those responses.

Here are the things I can think of that Bitnet currently provides that
the Internet doesn't:

- Low cost connection for institutions that don't already have TCP/IP
  connectivity.

- Connectivity to peer NJE networks in Europe, Canada, Mexico, Japan and
  Scandinavia (and I'm probably forgetting some others.)  Some of these
  places support TCP/IP, but others currently do not.

- Sender-initiated no-recipient-password-required file transfer.

  This allows sending files
     - when the sender wishes to
     - with no write access to recipient disks needed
     - with no recipient password needed.

  It makes possible the file distribution functions of LISTSERV and
  NETSERV, including automatic file distribution.

  Bitnet-style sender-initiated file transfer has been discussed of late
  in the TCP/IP community, but is not provided by any of the standard TCP/IP
  applications.  It may be difficult to make generally available on the
  Internet because it has operating system implications.

- Interactive messages.

  One could consider creating such a service based on UDP, but again this
  is not currently provided on the Internet.

  This allows both human-to-human almost-real-time discussions, and also
  a very nice transport mechanism for user-to-server commands and server-
  to-user responses.  (e.g. TELL LISTSERV AT node SUBSCRIBE ...).

Mark Bodenstein   (mab@cornellc; 607-255-3747)
Cornell University
Technical Details
Message-ID: <90Feb26.195320est.57432@ugw.utcs.utoronto.ca>
Path: arc1-ca.pugleaf.net!utzoo!utgpu!BITNIC!FUTURE-L
References: Message of Sun,

Show Full Headers
Complete Article Headers
Path: arc1-ca.pugleaf.net!utzoo!utgpu!BITNIC!FUTURE-L
Date: Mon, 26 Feb 90 16:47:09 EST
Reply-To: BITNET Futures List <FUTURE-L@BITNIC.bitnet>
Sender: BITNET Futures List <FUTURE-L@BITNIC.bitnet>
From: Mark Bodenstein <MAB@CORNELLC.bitnet>
Subject:      Re: fall of Bitnet
To: UofToronto LAN redistribution <FUTURE-L@UTORGPU.uucp>
References:  Message of Sun,
Message-ID: <90Feb26.195320est.57432@ugw.utcs.utoronto.ca>
Newsgroups: list.future-l
Distribution: ut
Approved: devnull@gpu.utcs.toronto.edu