On 10.7.2012 23:39, Dave McGuire wrote:
On 07/10/2012 04:37 PM, Kari Uusim ki wrote:
Well, there used to be big plans about X.400 to become the global
standard of messaging...
*shudder*
:)
I understand you feeling; X.400 is complicated compared to SMTP. But that's partly because even the definition describes the point: _Simple_ Mail Transfer Protocol.
If you think of the situation in the 80's when X.400 was planned and there were no standard way of transferring messages between different vendor systems. It was at least an effort to create a standard. I know it's not the best one, but probably more thoroughly planned than SMTP.
Kari
On 2012-07-10 22:16, Bob Armstrong wrote:
X.400? Well that's kinda amusing as of itself, no?
Ok, I'll confess - I'd never heard of x.400 until now. Like everything
else in the universe, it's in Wikipedia
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/X.400
"G=Bob;S=Armstrong;O=SpareTimeGizmos;P=SpareTimeGizmos;C=us" ?????
Give me "bob at jfcl.com" any day :-)
X.400 is/was horrible. But it smalls an awful lot like ldap... Now, let me tell you what I think of ldap... :-)
Johnny
Yeah, the current nodelist has about 4,000 entries.
Mostly uses IP as a transport.
Sampsa
On 10 Jul 2012, at 23:59, Dave McGuire wrote:
On 07/10/2012 04:53 PM, Sampsa Laine wrote:
Ironically I built a MAIL-11 - Fidonet gateway called FIDOGW for HECnet, it actually works, but I think the VM is down.
Neat! Umm...are there any pieces of Fidonet still operational? Jeeze
the last time I even thought about Fidonet was 25 years ago. My best
friend ran a node on Fidonet, in New Hope, PA (on a Franklin Ace 1000 I
think?). I ran an RCP/M machine at the time.
-Dave
--
Dave McGuire, AK4HZ
New Kensington, PA
On 10.7.2012 23:42, Bob Armstrong wrote:
However, nobody has expressed any interest.
The problem is that everybody on this list, by definition, already has
SMTP Internet mail. A MAIL-11 gateway, nifty as it might be, just doesn't
add anything.
Bob
.
Quite so, but if someone wants to send mail to an Internet recipient from a DECnet-only system (on HECnet) without TCP/IP or SMTP, that won't succeed without a gateway.
It might be that everyone has the needed gateways already, though.
Kari
On 07/10/2012 04:53 PM, Sampsa Laine wrote:
Ironically I built a MAIL-11 - Fidonet gateway called FIDOGW for HECnet, it actually works, but I think the VM is down.
Neat! Umm...are there any pieces of Fidonet still operational? Jeeze
the last time I even thought about Fidonet was 25 years ago. My best
friend ran a node on Fidonet, in New Hope, PA (on a Franklin Ace 1000 I
think?). I ran an RCP/M machine at the time.
-Dave
--
Dave McGuire, AK4HZ
New Kensington, PA
But what if we wanna send a Telex from HECnet? WHAT THEN?
Same company used to also have a telex gateway but it was retired before I
started there. I don't recall if it was implemented through PMDF or locally
written software.
I think if anyone wants to send a telex, they may have to look hard for someone
that wants to receive it.
Regards,
Peter Coghlan.
Ironically I built a MAIL-11 - Fidonet gateway called FIDOGW for HECnet, it actually works, but I think the VM is down.
Sampsa
On 10 Jul 2012, at 23:52, Dave McGuire wrote:
On 07/10/2012 04:42 PM, Bob Armstrong wrote:
However, nobody has expressed any interest.
The problem is that everybody on this list, by definition, already has
SMTP Internet mail. A MAIL-11 gateway, nifty as it might be, just doesn't
add anything.
In terms of functionality, you're right of course, but there's a
certain "warm fuzzy" just knowing... ;)
-Dave
--
Dave McGuire, AK4HZ
New Kensington, PA
On 07/10/2012 04:42 PM, Bob Armstrong wrote:
However, nobody has expressed any interest.
The problem is that everybody on this list, by definition, already has
SMTP Internet mail. A MAIL-11 gateway, nifty as it might be, just doesn't
add anything.
In terms of functionality, you're right of course, but there's a
certain "warm fuzzy" just knowing... ;)
-Dave
--
Dave McGuire, AK4HZ
New Kensington, PA
But what if we wanna send a Telex from HECnet? WHAT THEN?
Sampsa
On 10 Jul 2012, at 23:42, Peter Coghlan wrote:
Well, there used to be big plans about X.400 to become the global
standard of messaging...
I used to work for a company that used PMDF to interconnect various X.400
systems that could not otherwise interoperate.
It made a fair bit of income for the company but I would prefer not to
end up working with X.400 again and I certainly won't be going near it
for a hobby!
Regards,
Peter Coghlan.
Well, there used to be big plans about X.400 to become the global
standard of messaging...
I used to work for a company that used PMDF to interconnect various X.400
systems that could not otherwise interoperate.
It made a fair bit of income for the company but I would prefer not to
end up working with X.400 again and I certainly won't be going near it
for a hobby!
Regards,
Peter Coghlan.
