RE: [OT]: UUCP
I've used, (and still do use,) uucp for email for all my domains. The
Taylor uucp which comes standard with Debian, (which has a mailing
list, taylor-uucp@gnu.org,) does work well over tcp/ip to port 540,
(but be advised, if you use it over the Internet, it uses a telnet
like login-as in ASCII login: and password:,) and works well with ssh
tunnels, (from anywhere on the planet to your ISP, or home box,) so
you can use a 10.x.x.x for your remote IP, and gather up mail for
multiple users, accounts, or machines on demand, (and handles Bcc:'s
and Fcc:'s correctly.)
It is perfectly compatible with exim, qmail, and sendmail, for
receiving email for a domain of machines and users, and handles domain
addressing, (as well as "bam" addressing.)
It is a reasonably secure way of handling email for a domain, and is
rock solid-and doesn't require exposing any ports to the I-vandals, or
spammers.
Unfortunately, uucp providers are becoming few and far between.
John
Joris Lambrecht writes:
> Thanks for your corrections, i'm feeling kind of melancholic every time i
> talk/think/read about uucp.
> Maybe i should dig up that uucp manual and start playing around :-)
>
> -----Original Message-----
> From: miquels@cistron-office.nl [mailto:miquels@cistron-office.nl]
> Sent: Tuesday, February 20, 2001 11:51 PM
> To: debian-user@lists.debian.org
> Subject: Re: [OT]: UUCP
>
>
> In article <[🔎] 471B774D9F9BD411B93E00508BB087A644E81B@BE020-EX11>,
> Joris Lambrecht <jlambrec@landis.be> wrote:
> >UUCP stands for Unix-to-Unix-CoPy
> >
> >I've used it nearly 8 yrs ago in a specific situation, even then it was
> >considered out-dated. I figure it's mostly replaced by TCP/IP on all
> >devices. From what i remember (did not use it since then) it's easy (what's
> >in a word) to set up but only support serial/modem lines, hence is rather
> >slow.
>
> Hmm. In fact, UUCP runs fine _over_ TCP/IP. It just needs a transport,
> a serial line will do, a TCP connection will do too.
>
> Actually running UUCP over a serial line is probably a lot faster
> than running PPP over it and TCP/IP on that.
>
> >NFS is also one of the protocols wich started replacing UUCP back then in
> >19993/1994.
>
> NFS relaced UUCP? Hmm. That's like saying the microwave has
> replaced the bicycle.
>
> >I must add this has been a real long time and i'm not up-to-speed with
> >eventual current UUCP features/implementations but i suggest you take a
> look
> >at it from an historical point of view :-)
>
> UUCP still has it's merits, even today. The only problem is that
> people _view_ it as outdated and forget about it. So there's not
> much expertise around, unfortunately.
>
> Mike.
> --
> I live the way I type; fast, with a lot of mistakes.
>
>
> --
> To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-user-request@lists.debian.org
> with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact
> listmaster@lists.debian.org
>
>
> --
> To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-user-request@lists.debian.org
> with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact listmaster@lists.debian.org
--
John Conover Tel. 408.370.2688 conover@rahul.net
631 Lamont Ct. Cel. 408.772.7733 http://www.johncon.com/
Campbell, CA 95008 Fax. 408.379.9602
Reply to: