keyles@elbereth.UUCP (02/20/87)
Hi, I've heard that some Fido sysop has a gateway to Unix. Is this true? I would like to do the same for my local Fido's. Any help would be appreciated! Mike ============================================================================ Michael Keyles UUCP : topaz!elbereth!keyles Rutgers University BITNET : 1005106@rutvm1 P.O Box 879 ARPANET: keyles@blue.rutgers.edu Piscataway, NJ 08854 FIDONET: 107/330 (201) 932-3237 SNAIL : 4 Tiger Lilly Court Sayreville, NJ 08872 VOICE : (201) 390-4432
pitaro@savax.UUCP (02/23/87)
There is a FIDO 132/101 which does that. The phone number is (603)888-8179. It's in Nashua, NH. Sorry, I don't remember the SYSOPS's name but I think it's Bob Hartman. Michael Pitaro USMail: Sanders Associates UUCP: decvax!savax!pitaro MER24-1583C PHONE: +1 (603) 885-9036 CS 2034 HOME: 46-D Hampshire Drive Nashua, NH 03063-2034 Nashua, NH 03063
pozar@hoptoad.UUCP (02/25/87)
In article <506@savax.UUCP> pitaro@savax.UUCP (Michael Pitaro) writes: >There is a FIDO 132/101 which does that. The phone number is >(603)888-8179. It's in Nashua, NH. Sorry, I don't remember the >SYSOPS's name but I think it's Bob Hartman. > WARNING! This gateway is unreliable at best! I have never been able to pass mail through it. Use at your own risk! -- Tim Pozar UUCP pozar@hoptoad.UUCP Fido 125/406 USNail KLOK-FM 77 Maiden Lane San Francisco CA 94108 terrorist cryptography DES drugs cipher secret decode NSA CIA NRO IRS coke crack pot LSD russian missile atom nuclear assassinate libyan RSA
rch@spark.UUCP (02/25/87)
> I've heard that some Fido sysop has a gateway to Unix. Is this true? > I would like to do the same for my local Fido's. Any help would be > appreciated! Well, the sun must be shining on you today! I am the Fido Sysop in question, and I do in fact have a gateway running Fido <--> Unix. It was down for a few months recently, and I have just been able to get it back up and running. If anyone would like more information on how to use the gateway, just ask - if I receive enough responses I will post it here. If you want information on how it was created, then send mail directly to me at vaxine!spark!rch. - Bob -
plocher@puff.UUCP (02/25/87)
>>There is a FIDO 132/101 which does that. ... Sysop is Bob Hartman. > WARNING! > This gateway is unreliable at best! I just got a message on the local (madison, wi) FIDO which was mailed from a Unix* system LAST NOVEMBER! (In case you haven't checked lately, this is February, and I still need to send out Christmas Thank-Yous!) I should point out that when a message gets to Bob's system, he ends up calling the destination FIDO. This means that HE has to absorb the long distance phone call costs! Keep an eye out for the uuslave postings here and in comp.*uucp*. This program would allow *ANY* Fido to become a MAIL gateway. John
pozar@hoptoad.UUCP (02/27/87)
In article <524@puff.WISC.EDU> plocher@puff.WISC.EDU (John Plocher) writes: >>>There is a FIDO 132/101 which does that. ... Sysop is Bob Hartman. >> WARNING! >> This gateway is unreliable at best! > >I just got a message on the local (madison, wi) FIDO which was mailed >from a Unix* system LAST NOVEMBER! (In case you haven't checked lately, >this is February, and I still need to send out Christmas Thank-Yous!) >I should point out that when a >message gets to Bob's system, he ends up calling the destination FIDO. >This means that HE has to absorb the long distance phone call costs! > >Keep an eye out for the uuslave postings here and in comp.*uucp*. This >program would allow *ANY* Fido to become a MAIL gateway. > Of which, BTW, we are working on. Currently, I have the code to decompose the fido style mail packets and am in the middle of writing the code to turn it into 822 style mail. We are also debugging uuslave and looking at the feasibility to use it in the gateway. We are in a very early stage of the project. Interest in the project should be sent to: spot-m@hoptoad.UUCP. But be advised that since the project is in an early stage, betas will not be comming out in the next couple of weeks. We will announce the beta release and will be looking for beta sites then. Tim -- Tim Pozar UUCP pozar@hoptoad.UUCP Fido 125/406 USNail KLOK-FM 77 Maiden Lane San Francisco CA 94108 terrorist cryptography DES drugs cipher secret decode NSA CIA NRO IRS coke crack pot LSD russian missile atom nuclear assassinate libyan RSA
wtm@bunker.UUCP (02/28/87)
To the best of my knowledge, there is only one gateway where
mail can be transferred automatically between the FidoNet and the
UUCP network. On the uucp side is "vaxine" (Automatix in Mass.
run by Bob Hartman) and on the FidoNet side is "spark". "vaxine"
polls "spark" daily but due to phone traffic at spark, the connection
is very iffy and may take a long, long time (days? weeks? years?) for your
mail to arrive.
The FidoNet node and number along with the person's name is simply
added to the end of the uucp address. For example,
..!decvax!wanginst!vaxine!spark!123!45!Ronald_Reagan
To use this gateway in reverse, that is, to send mail from FidoNet
to uucp'land, send the mail to the gateway node which is 132/101.
The very first line of the message must be the uucp path and it must
be the only thing on the line with no leading spaces. For example:
wanginst!decvax!bunker!wtm
The other alternative is to find someone who has access to both
uucp and FidoNet. I am the moderator of the Handicap News news
group ("misc.handicap") and all of the articles are posted to
the FidoNet echomail disABLEd conference and vice versa. Doctor
David Dodell, who is the coordinator of the echomail conference,
captures the FidoNet articles, manually transfers them to an uucp
system and mails them to me.
(There is talk of opening another gateway -- If I hear more,
I'll post an article.)
Hope this answers your questions.
Bill McGarry
Bunker Ramo, Shelton, CT
PATH: {philabs, decvax, ittatc}!bunker!wtmroot@spark.UUCP (03/01/87)
In article <1868@hoptoad.uucp>, pozar@hoptoad.uucp (Tim Pozar) writes: > WARNING! > This gateway is unreliable at best! I have never been able to pass mail > through it. Use at your own risk! I agree 100%, and I run the thing! The problem was when I switched versions of software that actually did the mail transferring (I switched from Fido to Opus as the BBS software). I made the switch in early October, and just recently was able to make the gateway function properly. All mail that had built up at each end was then pumped through the gateway, and it is now up and running full time. I now run a Microport System V/AT UNIX on my AT, then copy the files into the DOS partition for transfer to my BBS. It is all working quite nicely now, and all of the hardware/software to run the gateway is now in my control (unless I lose my UUCP connection at some point).