[comp.sources.d] "But _I_ can't FTP..." Re: shared X systems available

xanthian@zorch.SF-Bay.ORG (Kent Paul Dolan) (01/14/91)

In comp.groupware article <151@intrbas.UUCP>
kenn@intrbas.uucp (Kenneth G. Goutal) writes:

> At least one site in this newsgroup -- my guess is that there are
> actually an unholy number of us -- cannot get things via FTP,
> anonymous or otherwise. Could someone undertake to make the sources
> available by some other means? Perhaps in one of the comp...sources
> newsgroups?

One of the better kept secrets on the net appears to be the ability of
_anyone_ who can use email to retrieve stuff from FTP sites.

Princeton University Computer Center runs a pro bono email<->ftp server.
If you have the FTP documentation (available as part of the BSD 4.3
printed manual set, for example, or online as "man" pages in several
Unix systems) so you'll have some idea what to do with the instructions,
then send a message containing the two lines:

HELP
FTPLIST

to bitftp@pucc.princeton.edu, and you will receive a document showing
how to get started with the server, and a list of sites the server knows
how to access by ASCII name (it can probably access _any_ FTP site if
you have the numeric net name of the site).

This is by no means a facile interface, since it seems impossible, for
example, to ask directly for a full directory of a site's ftp archives,
but, especially if posters are careful to specify the full pathname of
archive files, it does provide a means of retrieving files.

Big files are sent in pieces, binary files are sent uuencoded, and so
the usual skills used to deal with large posted archives are also needed
to deal with bitftp emailed files.

The server is bandwidth limited, and services small requests ahead of
large ones, and it would be much nicer if there were several such
servers scattered about the net to lessen the single point email
bottleneck, but it does work.

Clumsy as it is, it beats all hollow pestering the net to do the work
for you.

Of course, this could all be avoided if the sites that provide anonymous
ftp server access provided anonymous UUCP server access to the same
archives, since the latter does not require a direct link, merely any
link at all.

Kent, the man from xanth.
<xanthian@Zorch.SF-Bay.ORG> <xanthian@well.sf.ca.us>

neideck@kaputt.enet.dec.com (Burkhard Neidecker-Lutz) (01/15/91)

And again, in this particular case of groupware, just write a request
to shx@nestvx.enet.dec.com and we will send it via mail. Putting up
a UUCP mail server can conflict with corporate security strategies
(as it would in this case)...

			Burkhard Neidecker-Lutz, CEC Karlsruhe

kevinc@cs.athabascau.ca (Kevin Crocker) (01/16/91)

xanthian@zorch.SF-Bay.ORG (Kent Paul Dolan) writes:

>In comp.groupware article <151@intrbas.UUCP>
>kenn@intrbas.uucp (Kenneth G. Goutal) writes:

>One of the better kept secrets on the net appears to be the ability of
>_anyone_ who can use email to retrieve stuff from FTP sites.

>Princeton University Computer Center runs a pro bono email<->ftp server.
>to bitftp@pucc.princeton.edu, and you will receive a document showing

Kent, many of us do kn ow about the bitftp servers.  We also know that
several sites have sent very nasty notes about the use of these servers
because from a UUCP site the e-mail has to come back through a UUCP
site which is usually a gateway.  The gateway at the University of
Toronto (which is one of the major gateways for Canada) has sent out
little hints that it can no longer support this type of usage of their
equipment.  they indicated that they were processing approximately
14,000 transfers a day and that a large protion of this is UUCP -
Internet gatewayed traffic with the bulk of that as direct bitftp
traffic.  Since we have not managed to get our ftp system working to
perfection in Canada (totally new hardware and software has been
installed at most of the hubs) our ability to ftp directly is severely
hampered (i.e. DEAD) and thus we tend to use the bitftp server a lot.
I know that there are at least 5 of us at this small site and we try to
coordinate what we ask for but we still seem to be getting about a
megabyte a day.  U of Toronto has politely but firmly told our systems
admins that this has better ease off or they will yank the gateway.

People should be careful to use other sites equipment and links without
a clear understanding that UUCP traffic does
cost real money and there is a correlation between traffic and cost.
Internet traffic the costs tend to be more fixed in terms of equipment
and the variable costs per byte are largely irrelevant until the level
of activity gets high enough to warrant additional links and/or
equipment.

I have received messages from several gateways indicating that they
would like me to ease off my requests.  I test a lot of software.  I
have a local 210Mb disk which fills up just about every week and I
turnover new software every week.  UUCP was not designed to handle this
kind of load.  Internet is.

Kevin
-- 
Kevin "auric" Crocker Athabasca University 
UUCP: ...!{alberta,ncc}!atha!kevinc
Inet: kevinc@cs.AthabascaU.CA

nicb@ctr@italy.eu.net (Nicola Bernardini) (01/16/91)

In article <1991Jan14.075202.13259@zorch.SF-Bay.ORG> xanthian@zorch.SF-Bay.ORG (Kent Paul Dolan) writes:
>In comp.groupware article <151@intrbas.UUCP>
>kenn@intrbas.uucp (Kenneth G. Goutal) writes:
>
>> At least one site in this newsgroup -- my guess is that there are
>> actually an unholy number of us -- cannot get things via FTP,
>> anonymous or otherwise. Could someone undertake to make the sources
>> available by some other means? Perhaps in one of the comp...sources
>> newsgroups?
>
>One of the better kept secrets on the net appears to be the ability of
>_anyone_ who can use email to retrieve stuff from FTP sites.
>
>Princeton University Computer Center runs a pro bono email<->ftp server.
>
>.....
>
>This is by no means a facile interface, since it seems impossible, for
>example, to ask directly for a full directory of a site's ftp archives,
>
>.....
>
>Big files are sent in pieces, binary files are sent uuencoded, and so
>the usual skills used to deal with large posted archives are also needed
>to deal with bitftp emailed files.
>
>The server is bandwidth limited, and services small requests ahead of
>large ones, and it would be much nicer if there were several such
>servers scattered about the net to lessen the single point email
>bottleneck, but it does work.
>
>Clumsy as it is, it beats all hollow pestering the net to do the work
>for you.

The thing is, I tried bitftp@pucc asking for abc (25 files)
and after a month I am still with the two files it sent
me (right away, I must say).

>Of course, this could all be avoided if the sites that provide anonymous
>ftp server access provided anonymous UUCP server access to the same
>archives, since the latter does not require a direct link, merely any
>link at all.

Yes, this would definitely be infinitely better.
------------------------------------------
Nicola Bernardini -  nicb%ctr@italy.eu.net
Centro Tempo Reale
Villa Strozzi
Via Pisana, 77
50143 Firenze
I T A L I A
Tel. ++3955/702444
Fax. ++3955/717712
-- 
------------------------------------------
Nicola Bernardini -  nicb%ctr@italy.eu.net
Centro Tempo Reale
Villa Strozzi

xanthian@zorch.SF-Bay.ORG (Kent Paul Dolan) (01/16/91)

xanthian@zorch.SF-Bay.ORG (Kent Paul Dolan) writes:

> One of the better kept secrets on the net appears to be the ability of
> _anyone_ who can use email to retrieve stuff from FTP sites.

> Princeton University Computer Center runs a pro bono email<->ftp server...
> to bitftp@pucc.princeton.edu, and you will receive a document showing ...

kevinc@cs.athabascau.ca (Kevin Crocker) writes:

> Kent, many of us do know about the bitftp servers. We also know that
> several sites have sent very nasty notes about the use of these
> servers because from a UUCP site the e-mail has to come back through a
> UUCP site which is usually a gateway.

Sure, but since the article I was answering was a request to have the
same data emailed, the pliant about clogging the gateway is a bit on the
irrelevant side; the data is going to go through in either case.

The thing I object to is folks putting the burden of mailing the
software on the originators, who could be better employed writing more
software, rather than putting the burden on the recipients, by far the
more interested and numerous parties, by having the recipients use the
somewhat less facile bitftp mechanism.

That desire to keep people from being boors, not a desire to bring the
world's email gateways to their knees, was the reason for my posting.

Kent, the man from xanth.
<xanthian@Zorch.SF-Bay.ORG> <xanthian@well.sf.ca.us>

woods@eci386.uucp (Greg A. Woods) (01/17/91)

[ I've cross-posted this to can.usrgroup in which this item will be
relevant to a current discussion. ]

In article <601@aupair.cs.athabascau.ca> kevinc@cs.athabascau.ca (Kevin Crocker) writes:

[... Kevin wrote a bunch of words about use and abuse of bitftp by
UUCP only sites (esp. those in Canada which gateway through a very
narrow pipe paid for out of university coffers) which seemed to
indicate that he understood the problem (though only after having been
told he was abusing it) ....]

> I have received messages from several gateways indicating that they
> would like me to ease off my requests.  I test a lot of software.  I
> have a local 210Mb disk which fills up just about every week and I
> turnover new software every week.  UUCP was not designed to handle this
> kind of load. Internet is.

So, Kevin, getting your own 9600bps leased line to uunet next week?

**** That's sarcasm, BTW. ****

If you do agree that UUCP (esp. multi-hop transfer) isn't meant for
this kind of load, can you kindly explain to us why you've been
re-filling a 210Mb disk on a weekly basis by UUCP through a clogged
Internet gateway without paying for it?

Please stop doing this right now!  If you alone are indeed receiving
that much "mail", then your use alone amounts to a significant burden
on the resources.  Resources which are currently insufficient to serve
the paying customers!

Go buy the UUNET archives on tape!  It's only $150.00us for an exabyte
cartridge containing the entire 600 Mb!  Debugging that much stuff
should keep you busy for many years.

Even if you've only been receiving a few (i.e. less than 10) megabytes
per week, I'd say you'd used up your share of this resource for the
next several years.
-- 
							Greg A. Woods
woods@{eci386,gate,robohack,ontmoh,tmsoft}.UUCP		ECI and UniForum Canada
+1-416-443-1734 [h]  +1-416-595-5425 [w]  VE3TCP	Toronto, Ontario CANADA
Political speech and writing are largely the defense of the indefensible-ORWELL