13 Jun
2001
13 Jun
'01
8:30 a.m.
At 08:30 AM 6/13/01 -0400, Douglas Quebbeman wrote:
You can still use the regular Internet as your transport
and do away with the toll calls, can't you? A sledgehammer
approach would be a VPN.
- John
Since most
vintage machines can't run TCP/IP but CAN run uucp, would
there be any interest in a dialup uucp node for retrieving email, files, etc
specifically geared toward vintage machines?
I've been thnking of this in a bit wider context.
With some of the changes happening on the Internet, it's
not quite as friendly as it used to be. 
13 Jun
13 Jun
10:45 a.m.
--- John Foust <jfoust(a)threedee.com> wrote:
At 08:30 AM 6/13/01 -0400, Douglas Quebbeman wrote:
>> Since most vintage machines can't run TCP/IP but CAN run uucp, would
>> there be any interest in a dialup uucp node for retrieving email, files...
You can still use the regular Internet as your
transport
and do away with the toll calls, can't you?
I did this for months when I moved away from my old ISP and I needed to
keep my old UUCP address live (toll calls from Antarctica to Ohio were
*not* an option). It was on an Amiga; I hacked UUCP to open telnet.device
instead of serial.device (not required on modern UUCP implementations) which
simulated a modem, but opened a TCP port. You "dialed" it with
"ATDTuucp.somewhere.com" instead of a phone number. It was a crufty hack, but
it meant that you didn't have to change apps, whether a terminal program or
something more sophisticated, like UUCP.
HDB UUCP does allow you to fully describe the transport mechanism without
resorting to OS-specific tricks. If the goal is to attach old machines
to each other over the net, it might be handy for each participant to have
an intermediate machine that _could_ reach out over the 'net and aggregate
the local traffic over serial ports.
A 386/486 box, for example, running not much more than UNIX and UUCP, could
be the RS-232<->Ethernet UUCP home gateway, as could an Amiga, should you
happen to have one with a network card lying around doing nothing (given
which is more abundant...) It would only add one bang on each end of the
path.
At least script kiddies aren't running around with wads of exploits for
UUCP daemons hanging on port 540. Security through antiquity?
-ethan
=====
Visit "The Seventh Continent"
http://penguincentral.com/penguincentral.html
__________________________________________________
Do You Yahoo!?
Get personalized email addresses from Yahoo! Mail - only $35
a year! http://personal.mail.yahoo.com/
3:03 p.m.
At least script kiddies aren't running around with
wads of exploits for
UUCP daemons hanging on port 540. Security through antiquity?
-ethan
Damn... now i've got to open up 540 on this box.
uucpd is up... It's tcp wrappered though and I'm not taking
anonymous uucp.
I'll set it up if anyone wants to test connections to me.
Bill
---
Bill Gates is a Persian cat and a monocle away from being a
villain in a James Bond movie -- Dennis Miller
bpechter@shell.monmouth.com|pechter@pechter.dyndns.org
3:33 p.m.
It'll take me a couple weeks but I'll get a box going with uucpd as well and
we'll see what we can see. =) We're gonna have some fun now!
Anthony Clifton
At least
script kiddies aren't running around with wads of exploits for
UUCP daemons hanging on port 540. Security through antiquity?
-ethan
Damn... now i've got to open up 540 on this box.
uucpd is up... It's tcp wrappered though and I'm not taking
anonymous uucp.
I'll set it up if anyone wants to test connections to me.
12:24 p.m.
Well, there's lots of ways to transport data. The fastest is to connect your
Windows or Macintosh to an ISP, download files and write them to a compatible
floppy with some disk conversion software.
Answer 1: But we can already do that! =-D
Answer 2: What fun is that??? =-D
I think what I was thinking of was a way to DIRECTLY get mail, news and
files ON TO antique machines without having to use newer machines as an
intermediary.
In other words, a UUCP network of vintage machines all talking to each
other. Of course, there are SOME isps who still support UUCP but the
number is rapidly decreasing. Probably 99% of ISP folks would say,
"UU whatzit? You mean UUnet? Weren't they bought by WorldCom and
MCI? You want a T1? We can sell you a T1!"
My thought was a loosely connected network of vintage computers
connected by UUCP and bound together by some part-time (midnight)
dialup servers, which would allow you to send files DIRECTLY from
your Kaypro to someone else's CompuPro. Or from your Commodore
to someone's PDP-11.
I'm reasonably certain you can run UUCP not only on about anything
that has a hard disk but even some things that don't.
It also has the advantage of being a) VERY well tested software and
b) not under the control of any monolithic organization.
Anthony Clifton
Des Moines, Iowa
I've been
thnking of this in a bit wider context.
With some of the changes happening on the Internet, it's
not quite as friendly as it used to be.
You can still use the regular Internet as your transport
and do away with the toll calls, can't you? A sledgehammer
approach would be a VPN. 
12:05 p.m.
On Wed, 13 Jun 2001, Anthony Clifton - Retrocomputing.com wrote:
My thought was a loosely connected network of vintage
computers
connected by UUCP and bound together by some part-time (midnight)
dialup servers, which would allow you to send files DIRECTLY from your
Kaypro to someone else's CompuPro. Or from your Commodore to
someone's PDP-11.
That would be cool but it begs the questions:
a) wouldn't the long-distance charges quell enthusiasm for this at some
point?
b) what would it be used for?
Would it just come into being to move useless data around and brag to
girls about it?
Sellam Ismail Vintage Computer Festival
------------------------------------------------------------------------------
International Man of Intrigue and Danger http://www.vintage.org
1:20 p.m.
b) what would it be used for?
Would it just come into being to move useless data around and brag to
girls about it?
It could come in handy in the coming days when non-MS systems
have trouble connecting to MS servers because of the various MS-only
protocals and such.....
Jeff
--
Collector of Classic Microcomputers and Video Game Systems:
Home of the TRS-80 Model 2000 FAQ File
http://www.geocities.com/siliconvalley/lakes/6757
1:22 p.m.
Would it just come into being to move useless data
around and brag to
girls about it?
Can I meet these girls whom I can brag to about it? Most of the ones around
here would still be trying to get their minds about two letter U's in such
close proximity in the same word (the word 'geek' would also come up quickly).
--
----------------------------- personal page: http://www.armory.com/~spectre/ --
Cameron Kaiser, Point Loma Nazarene University * ckaiser(a)stockholm.ptloma.edu
-- Predestination was doomed from the start. ----------------------------------
6:02 p.m.
On Wed, 13 Jun 2001, Mike Ford wrote:
...and don't forget to mention do that you know all about UUCP and all
of the *cool* things that you can do with it, and that you know all
about (file) protection, chat scripts and late night cron jobs. Do
this at your own risk, and ONLY if you really want to turn them all on
and have them scratching their telephone numbers into your car's paint
before you can get away from the parking lot, where they're all
fighting over you and trying to keep you from getting away. :-) :-)
:-)
Ok, getting back on topic, I'm glad that someone's picked up on what I
mentioned a while back about getting back to using UUCP. :-) It
definitely still has some useability, and a UUCP infrastructure is
still a good thing to have around in the event of emergencies... and
would be better yet if packet radio is used with it as well. If one
uses the O'Reilly UUCP book, setting it up and administering UUCP is
not very difficult... and as someone mentioned, it's very portable and
can be used on any machine with a hard drive and modem.
How many list members are within a local telephone call of a UUCP feed?
Security is still someting to definitely keep in mind, however, as there
are tricks that someone using UUCP can play to get inside your system
and poke around.
--
Copyright (C) 2001 R. D. Davis The difference between humans & other animals:
All Rights Reserved an unnatural belief that we're above Nature &
rdd(a)perqlogic.com 410-744-4900 her other creatures, using dogma to justify such
http://www.perqlogic.com beliefs and to justify much human cruelty.
Can I meet
these girls whom I can brag to about it? Most of the ones around
Get a shopping basket at Fry's on Saturday morning, put at least enough
stuff in it for two high end servers, then lurk in the memory area. Babe
city. ;)
14 Jun
14 Jun
1:47 a.m.
How many list members are within a local telephone
call of a UUCP feed?
Me, since stockholm has uucico set up (I just installed it out of curiosity,
but never played with it). It would have to be one of the 7-bit protocols,
though, thanks to the terminal server which requires me to telnet in.
--
----------------------------- personal page: http://www.armory.com/~spectre/ --
Cameron Kaiser, Point Loma Nazarene University * ckaiser(a)stockholm.ptloma.edu
-- The world only beats a path to your door when you're in the bathroom. ------
13 Jun
13 Jun
1:55 p.m.
As far as (a), actually I think you're right. Someone suggested using
cheap 386/486 linux boxes as serial uucp <--> ethernet (or dialup) tcp/ip
gateways. That really piqued my interest.
Instead of convincing people to dial long-distance to transfer data from
vintage machines to other vintage machines, it'd simply be a matter of
convincing folks to turn 'useless' 386 boxes into something fun. Who
would mind that?
As far as (b) goes, "Connectivity is it's own reward." It'd be a way
to transfer files directly from one vintage machine to another without
having to deal with sneaker-net (floppies) or other intermediate steps.
What got me to thinking about it was when Don Maslin sent me a file
via email. Upon receiving it, I scratched my head and wondered how
to most efficiently transfer it from my iMac to my Kaypro.
Then I thought, "Geez, if I could just run UUCP between my vintage
machines and those of others, the file could have just been sent
directly to my machine. Convenient!"
Of course, my ultimate goal is to impress the gals.
Anthony Clifton
> My thought was a loosely connected network of
vintage computers
> connected by UUCP and bound together by some part-time (midnight)
> dialup servers, which would allow you to send files DIRECTLY from your
> Kaypro to someone else's CompuPro. Or from your Commodore to
> someone's PDP-11.
a) wouldn't the long-distance charges quell
enthusiasm for this at some
point?
b) what would it be used for?
Would it just come into being to move useless data around and brag to
girls about it?
5:06 p.m.
On Wed, 13 Jun 2001, Anthony Clifton - Retrocomputing.com wrote:
As far as (b) goes, "Connectivity is it's own
reward." It'd be a way
to transfer files directly from one vintage machine to another without
having to deal with sneaker-net (floppies) or other intermediate
steps.
Yeah, but what for? What good is a bridge if no one is going to cross it?
What got me to thinking about it was when Don Maslin
sent me a file
via email. Upon receiving it, I scratched my head and wondered how
to most efficiently transfer it from my iMac to my Kaypro.
Then I thought, "Geez, if I could just run UUCP between my vintage
machines and those of others, the file could have just been sent
directly to my machine. Convenient!"
I think it would be more trouble finding a UUCP client for the machine
you're trying to transfer the file to. And if Don is sending you a file,
presumably a system disk for the target machine, then it would be assumed
that you haven't been able to boot that machine anyway to run a uucp
client, because Don hasn't sent you the OS disk yet!
Sellam Ismail Vintage Computer Festival
------------------------------------------------------------------------------
International Man of Intrigue and Danger http://www.vintage.org
14 Jun
14 Jun
5:41 a.m.
A non-text attachment was scrubbed...
Name: not available
Type: text
Size: 481 bytes
Desc: not available
Url :
http://www.classiccmp.org/pipermail/cctalk/attachments/20010614/9bede9d4/at…
13 Jun
13 Jun
12:46 p.m.
My thought was a loosely connected network of vintage
computers
connected by UUCP and bound together by some part-time (midnight)
dialup servers, which would allow you to send files DIRECTLY from
your Kaypro to someone else's CompuPro. Or from your Commodore
to someone's PDP-11.
Now this would be quite cool. Cooler even than trying to see
who could call into a BBS with the oldest machine. I held that title
for short bit with one of my Osborne's after a few failed attempts
using an Atari 800 and an Atari 1030 modem....
Jeff
--
Collector of Classic Microcomputers and Video Game Systems:
Home of the TRS-80 Model 2000 FAQ File
http://www.geocities.com/siliconvalley/lakes/6757
7:53 p.m.
New subject: UUCP and Netnews
I think what I was thinking of was a way to DIRECTLY
get mail, news and
files ON TO antique machines without having to use newer machines as an
intermediary.
Sure... Retro-net news... Cnews or Bnews (or Waffle).
We could lose all the spam and idiots with multilevel marketing schemes
and porno.
In other words, a UUCP network of vintage machines all talking to each
other. Of course, there are SOME isps who still support UUCP but the
number is rapidly decreasing. Probably 99% of ISP folks would say,
"UU whatzit? You mean UUnet? Weren't they bought by WorldCom and
MCI? You want a T1? We can sell you a T1!"
Tell me about it... My local ISP founded by some AT&T types
didn't want to deal with it... I was hoping to keep the uucp
connectivity to the house up. But the mapping project was dead and when
I left Fort Monmouth my uucp connectivity was too.
I'm reasonably certain you can run UUCP not only
on about anything
that has a hard disk but even some things that don't.
It also has the advantage of being a) VERY well tested software and
b) not under the control of any monolithic organization.
Anthony Clifton
Des Moines, Iowa
Count me in.
Let's reopen the uucp mapping project and establish new connectivity!
Bill
---
Bill Gates is a Persian cat and a monocle away from being a
villain in a James Bond movie -- Dennis Miller
bpechter@shell.monmouth.com|pechter@pechter.dyndns.org
14 Jun
14 Jun
2:10 a.m.
New subject: UUCP and Netnews
Quoting Bill Pechter <pechter(a)bg-tc-ppp1485.monmouth.com>om>:
Let's reopen the uucp mapping project and
establish new
connectivity!
I'll participate if I can do it without long-distance phone calls. I
believe someone said that it can be tunneled through IP.
--
Jeffrey S. Sharp
jss(a)ou.edu
2:39 a.m.
New subject: UUCP and Netnews
Let's
reopen the uucp mapping project and establish new
connectivity!
I'll participate if I can do it without long-distance phone calls. I
believe someone said that it can be tunneled through IP. 
5:58 a.m.
New subject: UUCP and Netnews
I'd be willing to do it with stockholm if someone
will help me set it up.
Will uucico behave nicely if connected to inetd? (I want it to run through
my custom TCP wrappers so that every script kiddie out there doesn't say,
"ooo! open port!").
If you use uucpd to call uucico it works fine. uucpd's available in any
of the *BSD sources.
Bill
---
Bill Gates is a Persian cat and a monocle away from being a
villain in a James Bond movie -- Dennis Miller
bpechter@shell.monmouth.com|pechter@pechter.dyndns.org
6:26 a.m.
New subject: UUCP and Netnews
I'd be
willing to do it with stockholm if someone will help me set it up.
Will uucico behave nicely if connected to inetd? (I want it to run through
my custom TCP wrappers so that every script kiddie out there doesn't say,
"ooo! open port!").
If you use uucpd to call uucico it works fine. uucpd's available in any
of the *BSD sources. 
18 Jun
18 Jun
1:50 a.m.
New subject: UUCP and Netnews
On Thu, 14 Jun 2001, Cameron Kaiser wrote:
Will uucico behave nicely if connected to inetd? (I
want it to run through
my custom TCP wrappers so that every script kiddie out there doesn't say,
"ooo! open port!").
Yes, but that's one of the advantages. Open port to what?? I would be
against running anonymous UUCP. If we keep control, we can avoid the
zoo that the INTERNET is rapidly becoming.
So what do we call ourselves?? USENET-II is already taken. :-)
bill
--
Bill Gunshannon | de-moc-ra-cy (di mok' ra see) n. Three wolves
bill(a)cs.scranton.edu | and a sheep voting on what's for dinner.
University of Scranton |
Scranton, Pennsylvania | #include <std.disclaimer.h>
2:17 a.m.
New subject: UUCP and Netnews
On Mon, 18 Jun 2001, Bill Gunshannon wrote:
Yes, but that's one of the advantages. Open port
to what?? I would be
against running anonymous UUCP. If we keep control, we can avoid the
zoo that the INTERNET is rapidly becoming.
So what do we call ourselves?? USENET-II is already taken. :-)
YOOSNET
-brian.
2:37 a.m.
New subject: UUCP and Netnews
Will uucico
behave nicely if connected to inetd? (I want it to run through
my custom TCP wrappers so that every script kiddie out there doesn't say,
"ooo! open port!").
Yes, but that's one of the advantages. Open port to what?? I would be
against running anonymous UUCP. 
3:24 a.m.
New subject: UUCP and Netnews
Just did a google search and found 1 entry for my old cbnews entry (I think
cbnews was the default entry in AT&T uucp files. I was still using my
diane.uucp entry as my email address until 2 years ago. It seemed to be
a good spam block but now they look for all sorts of things so I dropped
it.
If we try uucp may I suggest that we tunnel it over ssl or ssh. I think
passwords were plain text (or they were sent encrypted but plain text).
--
Linux Home Automation Neil Cherry ncherry(a)home.net
http://members.home.net/ncherry (Text only)
http://meltingpot.fortunecity.com/lightsey/52 (Graphics)
http://linuxha.sourceforge.net/ (SourceForge)
3:30 a.m.
New subject: UUCP and Netnews
On Mon, 18 Jun 2001, Bill Gunshannon wrote:
So what do we call ourselves?? USENET-II is already
taken. :-)
Why, USENET-Classic, of course :)
Sellam Ismail Vintage Computer Festival
------------------------------------------------------------------------------
International Man of Intrigue and Danger http://www.vintage.org
5:30 a.m.
New subject: UUCP and Netnews
So what do we
call ourselves?? USENET-II is already taken. :-)
Why, USENET-Classic, of course :)
6:29 a.m.
New subject: UUCP and Netnews
On Mon, 18 Jun 2001, Cameron Kaiser wrote:
USENET-0?
Since it's going to be an obscure network running on old hardware we could
call it RECLUSENET.
(har har)
Sellam Ismail Vintage Computer Festival
------------------------------------------------------------------------------
International Man of Intrigue and Danger http://www.vintage.org
So what do we call ourselves?? USENET-II is already
taken. :-)
Why, USENET-Classic, of course :)
20 Jun
20 Jun
9:32 a.m.
New subject: UUCP and Netnews
On Mon, 18 Jun 2001, Sellam Ismail wrote:
Why, USENET-Classic, of course :)
Here's a vote for Sellam's choice of naming! I like it!
--
Copyright (C) 2001 R. D. Davis The difference between humans & other animals:
All Rights Reserved an unnatural belief that we're above Nature &
rdd(a)perqlogic.com 410-744-4900 her other creatures, using dogma to justify such
http://www.perqlogic.com beliefs and to justify much human cruelty.
2:31 p.m.
New subject: UUCP and Netnews
Quoting "R. D. Davis" <rdd(a)smart.net>et>:
On Mon, 18 Jun 2001, Sellam Ismail wrote:
A good suggestion to be sure, but I myself must abandon my own
suggestion (USEfulNET) and go with USENET-0, which someone else
suggested. The reason is twofold: first, the obvious reason that
there is USENET (assumed to have a -1 appended) and a USENET-2
which came after it, so our "classic" USENET can be taken as a
recreation of something *before* -1 and needs to be -0; second,
the smart-ass programmer inside me knows that counting should
begin at 0 instead of 1, so having a -0 would remedy a most
disturbing situation. :-)
--
Jeffrey S. Sharp
jss(a)ou.edu
Why, USENET-Classic, of course :)
Here's a vote for Sellam's choice of naming! I like it!
18 Jun
18 Jun
1:48 a.m.
New subject: UUCP and Netnews
On Thu, 14 Jun 2001, Jeffrey S. Sharp wrote:
Quoting Bill Pechter
<pechter(a)bg-tc-ppp1485.monmouth.com>om>:
At least comp.mail.maps still exists. I just looked, and it appears to be
empty, but we could pring it back. Might be fun. I don't know who is within
calling distance of Scranton, PA or Wilkes-Barre, PA, but I could have UUCP
running both here at work and from my home in just a couple of hours I am
sure. It's been a long time, but I doubt I have forgotten most of it.
We could probably start with mostly UUCP over IP by setting the costs
higher for true dial-up links and then maybe move some of it over as
connectivity builds. Remember, at one time all real Email and USENET
News went this way. It was done once and it can be done again. Maybe
even get a paralel USENET running that will be more tightly controlled
and thus less full of junk and more usefull like it used to be. Sometimes
progress means going back!!
bill
--
Bill Gunshannon | de-moc-ra-cy (di mok' ra see) n. Three wolves
bill(a)cs.scranton.edu | and a sheep voting on what's for dinner.
University of Scranton |
Scranton, Pennsylvania | #include <std.disclaimer.h>
Let's reopen the uucp mapping project and
establish new
connectivity!
I'll participate if I can do it without long-distance phone calls. I
believe someone said that it can be tunneled through IP.
2:15 a.m.
New subject: UUCP and Netnews
On Mon, 18 Jun 2001, Bill Gunshannon wrote:
We could probably start with mostly UUCP over IP by
setting the costs
higher for true dial-up links and then maybe move some of it over as
connectivity builds. Remember, at one time all real Email and USENET
News went this way. It was done once and it can be done again. Maybe
even get a paralel USENET running that will be more tightly controlled
and thus less full of junk and more usefull like it used to be. Sometimes
progress means going back!!
Yeah, maybe it should be like a ham radio license. You have to pass a
test before you're allowed access to it.
-brian.
2:41 a.m.
New subject: UUCP and Netnews
*chuckle* I'm reminded of the User Friendly cartoon titled
"if the net was an amusement park ride". The sign read
"You must be atleast this smart to use the net" The arrow was
between mollusks and baboons, with the ends of the scale being human
and dirt. Don't we all wish it were so.
Yeah, maybe it should be like a ham radio license.
You have to pass a
test before you're allowed access to it.
-brian.
--
Jim Strickland
jim(a)DIESPAMMERSCUMcalico.litterbox.com
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
BeOS Powered!
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
4:44 a.m.
New subject: UUCP and Netnews
*chuckle* I'm reminded of the User Friendly
cartoon titled
"if the net was an amusement park ride". The sign read
"You must be atleast this smart to use the net" The arrow was
between mollusks and baboons, with the ends of the scale being human
and dirt. Don't we all wish it were so.
1) which end was "human"?
2) where is AOL on the scale?
20 Jun
20 Jun
9:50 a.m.
New subject: UUCP and Netnews
On Mon, 18 Jun 2001, Brian Chase wrote:
On Mon, 18 Jun 2001, Bill Gunshannon wrote:
> We could probably start with mostly UUCP over IP by setting the costs
> higher for true dial-up links and then maybe move some of it over as
With 56K modems, and using inexpensive long-distance services, the
costs should be minimal for those that need a long-distance
connection... a lot less than it was back in the days of Trailblazer
modems or earlier. Isn't there some very inexpensive calling plan now
that makes transatlantic calls very inexpensive as well?
> even get a paralel USENET running that will be
more tightly controlled
> and thus less full of junk and more usefull like it used to be.
See, there really was a Usenet Cabal... even though we all know that
there is, and never was, a Cabal. ;-)
Yeah, maybe it should be like a ham radio license.
You have to pass a
test before you're allowed access to it.
Sounds good. Anyone who answers that C-News is a televised newscast,
asks "what's UUCP?," or says "what was wrong with the invasion of the
AOLers?" gets banned from it for life.
--
Copyright (C) 2001 R. D. Davis The difference between humans & other animals:
All Rights Reserved an unnatural belief that we're above Nature &
rdd(a)perqlogic.com 410-744-4900 her other creatures, using dogma to justify such
http://www.perqlogic.com beliefs and to justify much human cruelty.
9:53 a.m.
New subject: UUCP and Netnews
Sounds good. Anyone who answers that C-News is a
televised newscast,
asks "what's UUCP?," or says "what was wrong with the invasion of the
AOLers?" gets banned from it for life.
Let me guess, Jerry Pournelle <sp?>, or anyone with an AOL address is
automatically banned? :^)
Zane
2:39 p.m.
New subject: UUCP and Netnews
Sounds good.
Anyone who answers that C-News is a televised
newscast, asks "what's UUCP?," or says "what was wrong with the
invasion of the AOLers?" gets banned from it for life.
Let me guess, Jerry Pournelle <sp?>, or anyone with an AOL
address is automatically banned? :^)
10:17 a.m.
New subject: UUCP and Netnews
connection... a lot less than it was back in the days
of Trailblazer
modems or earlier. Isn't there some very inexpensive calling plan now
I still have one of the Telebit Trailblazer's around here
somewhere. A T1000 I believe.
Jeff
--
Collector of Classic Microcomputers and Video Game Systems:
Home of the TRS-80 Model 2000 FAQ File
http://www.geocities.com/siliconvalley/lakes/6757
2:11 p.m.
New subject: UUCP and Netnews
connection... a
lot less than it was back in the days of Trailblazer
modems or earlier. Isn't there some very inexpensive calling plan now
I still have one of the Telebit Trailblazer's around here
somewhere. A T1000 I believe.
Jeff
9:32 p.m.
New subject: UUCP and Netnews
I've got a couple of 'em T1000's, T1500,
and a T2500.
They'll do uucp over dixie cups and damp string.
Can't beat that for reliability or flexibility! Too bad you
had to be connected to another Trailblazer to get the more advanced
features.
Jeff
--
Collector of Classic Microcomputers and Video Game Systems:
Home of the TRS-80 Model 2000 FAQ File
http://www.geocities.com/siliconvalley/lakes/6757
5:04 a.m.
New subject: UUCP and Netnews
Mike Ford wrote:
A friend of mine used 2 Dixie cups connected by a string with the
appropriate couplers and was able to send SSTV (Slow Scan TV) images from
one unit to the other over that setup. He got written up in QST for that
one!!!
I've got a couple of 'em T1000's,
T1500, and a T2500.
They'll do uucp over dixie cups and damp string.
Anybody actually try a link using Dixie cups and string (or thread) via
acoustic couplers etc.?
6:28 a.m.
New subject: UUCP and Netnews
On Thu, 21 Jun 2001, Marvin wrote:
A friend of mine used 2 Dixie cups connected by a
string with the
appropriate couplers and was able to send SSTV (Slow Scan TV) images
from one unit to the other over that setup. He got written up in QST
for that one!!!
WOW! COOL!!! I would LOVE to see something like this. Anyone want to
prepare an exhibit like this using modems for VCF East or VCF 5.0?
Sellam Ismail Vintage Computer Festival
------------------------------------------------------------------------------
International Man of Intrigue and Danger http://www.vintage.org
5:25 a.m.
New subject: UUCP and Netnews
If someone does, I wanna watch 8-)
Peace... Sridhar
On Thu, 21 Jun 2001, Mike Ford wrote:
I've got a
couple of 'em T1000's, T1500, and a T2500.
They'll do uucp over dixie cups and damp string.
Anybody actually try a link using Dixie cups and string (or thread) via
acoustic couplers etc.?
11:42 a.m.
New subject: UUCP and Netnews
In message <l03102804b757d61111c7(a)[192.168.1.4]>4]>, Mike Ford writes:
Anybody actually try a link using Dixie cups and string
(or thread) via
acoustic couplers etc.?
I haven't done it myself, but I've seen it done. I don't know
exactly what modem-type devices he was using, but a guy I
knew in college did it to demonstrate the robustness of some
protocol work he did in grad school.
BLS
4:32 a.m.
New subject: UUCP and Netnews
connection... a
lot less than it was back in the days of Trailblazer
modems or earlier. Isn't there some very inexpensive calling plan now
I still have one of the Telebit Trailblazer's around here
somewhere. A T1000 I believe.
18 Jun
18 Jun
3:30 a.m.
New subject: UUCP and Netnews
Quoting Bill Gunshannon <bill(a)cs.scranton.edu>du>:
Maybe even get a paralel USENET running that will be
more tightly
controlled
Yeah, and we can call it 'USEfulNET'. <ba-dum ching!>
I know it would never work, but consider what it would be like if we
moved the entire list over to a newsgroup (or set, even, since we've
got a bit of volume) in our parallel USEfulNET. It would certainly
be spam-free, and hey, setting up a machine to be a part of the UUCP
network would be a rite of passage.
--
Jeffrey S. Sharp
jss(a)ou.edu
6:27 a.m.
New subject: UUCP and Netnews
On Mon, 18 Jun 2001, Jeffrey S. Sharp wrote:
I know it would never work, but consider what it would
be like if we
moved the entire list over to a newsgroup (or set, even, since we've
got a bit of volume) in our parallel USEfulNET. It would certainly be
spam-free, and hey, setting up a machine to be a part of the UUCP
network would be a rite of passage.
That's actually a very cool idea :)
Sellam Ismail Vintage Computer Festival
------------------------------------------------------------------------------
International Man of Intrigue and Danger http://www.vintage.org
8:28 a.m.
New subject: UUCP and Netnews
Quoting Sellam Ismail <foo(a)siconic.com>om>:
On Mon, 18 Jun 2001, Jeffrey S. Sharp wrote:
Thanks! If someone actually began such a thing, I would follow.
--
Jeffrey S. Sharp
jss(a)ou.edu
I know it would never work, but consider what it would be like if we
moved the entire list over to a newsgroup (or set, even, since we've
got a bit of volume) in our parallel USEfulNET. It would certainly be
spam-free, and hey, setting up a machine to be a part of the UUCP
network would be a rite of passage.
That's actually a very cool idea :) 
15 Jun
15 Jun
9:19 a.m.
Anthony Clifton - Retrocomputing.com skrev:
Well, there's lots of ways to transport data. The
fastest is to connect your
Windows or Macintosh to an ISP, download files and write them to a compatible
floppy with some disk conversion software.
Isn't a network much faster?
Answer 1: But we can already do that! =-D
No, we can't. Lack of Windows/Macintosh.
Answer 2: What fun is that??? =-D
Exactly, that would require moving about.
I think what I was thinking of was a way to DIRECTLY
get mail, news and
files ON TO antique machines without having to use newer machines as an
intermediary.
Network.
In other words, a UUCP network of vintage machines all
talking to each
other. Of course, there are SOME isps who still support UUCP but the
number is rapidly decreasing. Probably 99% of ISP folks would say,
"UU whatzit? You mean UUnet? Weren't they bought by WorldCom and
MCI? You want a T1? We can sell you a T1!"
It's good to be on a real ISP. I wonder if they still offer UUCP services.
They did when I first signed up, mostly for sysops.
My thought was a loosely connected network of vintage
computers
connected by UUCP and bound together by some part-time (midnight)
dialup servers, which would allow you to send files DIRECTLY from
your Kaypro to someone else's CompuPro. Or from your Commodore
to someone's PDP-11.
Who cares about the protocol? If you may run NNTP or SMTP somewhere, why not?
If someone prefers Fidonet (which is just as widespread as UUCP), Bluewave or
QWK, why not that as well?
I'm reasonably certain you can run UUCP not only on
about anything
that has a hard disk but even some things that don't.
Hey, Cameron, does the C128 have UUCP?
It also has the advantage of being a) VERY well tested
software and
b) not under the control of any monolithic organization.
VUNIC?
--
En ligne avec Thor 2.6a.
But a graphical client/server model that slices the interface down some
arbitrary middle is like Solomon following through with his child-sharing
strategy. The legs, heart, and left eye end up on the server, the arms and
lungs go to the client, the head is left rolling around on the floor, and
blood spurts everywhere.
Don Hopkins - The Unix hater's handbook; The X-Windows disaster
6:25 p.m.
I'm
reasonably certain you can run UUCP not only on about anything
that has a hard disk but even some things that don't.
Hey, Cameron, does the C128 have UUCP?
8586
days inactive
8594
days old
49 comments
24 participants
participants (24)
-
ard＠p850ug1.demon.co.uk -
bdc＠world.std.com -
bill＠cs.scranton.edu -
blstuart＠bellsouth.net -
cisin＠xenosoft.com -
ethan_dicks＠yahoo.com -
foo＠siconic.com -
healyzh＠aracnet.com -
jfoust＠threedee.com -
jhellige＠earthlink.net -
jim＠calico.litterbox.com -
jss＠ou.edu -
marvin＠rain.org -
mikeford＠socal.rr.com -
ncherry＠home.com -
optimus＠canit.se -
pechter＠bg-tc-ppp1167.monmouth.com -
pechter＠bg-tc-ppp1485.monmouth.com -
pechter＠bg-tc-ppp480.monmouth.com -
pechter＠bg-tc-ppp705.monmouth.com -
rdd＠smart.net -
spectre＠stockholm.ptloma.edu -
vance＠ikickass.org -
vaxcat＠retrocomputing.com