Relay-Version: version B 2.10 5/3/83; site utzoo.UUCP
Posting-Version: notesnews 0.1 (unido 12/05/84); site unido.UUCP
Path: utzoo!watmath!clyde!bonnie!akgua!whuxlm!harpo!decvax!genrad!panda!talcott!harvard!seismo!mcvax!unido!dfk
From: dfk@unido.UUCP
Newsgroups: net.mail
Subject: Re: Bitnet gateway software?
Message-ID: <11500002@unido.UUCP>
Date: Wed, 21-Aug-85 15:37:00 EDT
Article-I.D.: unido.11500002
Posted: Wed Aug 21 15:37:00 1985
Date-Received: Sun, 25-Aug-85 00:05:58 EDT
References: <861@gatech.UUCP>
Sender: notes@unido.UUCP
Lines: 37
Nf-ID: #R:gatech:-86100:unido:11500002:000:1315
Nf-From: unido!dfk    Aug 21 17:37:00 1985


  > I've never received any response from PSU.  My supervisor also tried,
  > and also failed.  I've heard (indirectly) of another site where they
  > had the same problem, ie. no response from PSU.  If anybody has ever
  > gotten any response from them, I would sure like to know.

Same thing here.
Why don't we start talking to each other about this?
A good start would be to know who is using UREP at the moment and 
what sort of problems they have.

Some things to start with (just off the top of my head):

	- To place received files into the recipient's homedirectory
	  stinks from a security point of view.

	- I'd like to stop messages from UREP with mesg(1) too.


  > My guess is that the authors of UREP are no longer at PSU and that
  > nobody at PSU wants to maintain UREP.  Having had a good look at the
  > source code, I can't say I really blame them.

Agreed !

  > My opinion is that the market is wide open for anybody who might want
  > to write a replacement for UREP.  Furthermore, since IBM is planning
  > to change the protocol that RSCS uses for communication over bisync
  > lines (and a manual describing the protocol is available), it will
  > *have* to be done anyway.

Could you be more specific on that one ?
Which manual?


-Daniel Karrenberg