I'm combining my replies into one message to avoid spamming the mailing
list.
Thank you all for intriguing responses. :-)
On 7/5/19 3:28 PM, Dennis Boone via cctalk wrote:
· FidoNet (FTN)
As long as we're being silly, this isn't really one protocol.
There are a number of different ones, which can probably mostly be
characterized as thin wrappers (FTS-0001, Yoohoo(/2u2), etc) around
common file transfer protocols (zmodem, xmodem, and others).
Fair enough.
On 7/5/19 3:40 PM, Bill Gunshannon via cctalk wrote:
Well, if the idea is to get that silly, UUCP isn't one protocol either.
And, technically. it isn't for moving email at all. Like FTP it is
for moving files. It is what happens after the files have been moved
that makes email, email.
Also fair enough.
On 7/5/19 4:06 PM, Peter Coghlan via cctalk wrote:
It's not a holiday in most of the world, including where I am, however...
;-)
BITNET isn't really a protocol. Perhaps you mean NJE which was the
protocol used to implement the BITNET and related networks?
Uh … Ya! I meant NJE. ;-)
Although I think BSMTP (batch SMTP) was usually used to transfer
mail over NJE networks.
$ReadingList++
(Speaking of which, anyone want to join an NJE network?)
Where can I find out more?
I have no idea what this one is. "Mail spool" could mean mean all
sorts of different things on all sorts of different systems.
I was thinking an MUA accessing files in the mail spool (traditionally
/var/spool/mail as far as I know) and not using an intermediate protocol
(POP3 / IMAP / etc.).
Another one was the coloured book protocol used between academic
establishments over X.25 networks in the UK and Ireland and probably
elsewhere, Grey maybe, I forget which, probably for the best.
$ReadingList++
Then there is DECnet and/or Mail-11…
I don't know how I missed that.
…depending on what level of protocol you are talking about.
Valid question. I don't have a distinction at the moment.
And phonenet which I often heard about but never saw.
I think I have a term collision in my head. I /think/ I'm thinking of
Home Phoneline Networking Alliance.
I worked for an email provider for about 15 years. We used just
about every protocol you can think of to transfer mail to customers,
including those already listed plus Kermit / X/Y/Zmodem / Blast (a file
transfer package few seem to have heard of) wrapped up in protocols
we came up with ourselves which often also used stuff like Zip to
compress the data for transmission. We used them to feed mail into all
sorts of email systems long since come and gone, for example CCmail,
Microsoft Mail and Pegasus Mail, to name but three from the 1990s.
Intriguing.
I think that CCmail / Microsoft Mail / Pegasus Mail were email
technologies that used shared access to a common "Post Office"
(directory structure).
On 7/5/19 5:27 PM, Peter Corlett via cctalk wrote:
I use rsync (over ssh) for transferring between a couple of my mail servers.
Hum.
I'm curious to know more. Are you transferring / synchronizing mail
boxes? Or are you using rsync as an intermediate transport between and
outgoing spool on one system and an incoming spool on another system?
On 7/5/19 5:40 PM, Jason T via cctalk wrote:
I have vague memories of batch email transfer utilities from the
BBS world. They were readers and/or transfer agents, but I imagine
some had their own transfer protocols and file formats. The only two
I can recall at the moment were QWK and Blue Wave. This probably
has some tie-in to FIDOnet as well.
I've heard of QWK and "BinkP" is coming to mind for some reason.
On 7/6/19 12:57 PM, Paul Koning via cctalk wrote:
There's the MAIL-11 protocol (end to end, no MTAs) and the DECmail
protocol which may be some OSI-like thing, I'm not sure anymore.
I guess I don't know enough about MAIL-11 to understand why you say
end-to-end / no MTA.
Was DECmail the OSI X.400 email implementation that DEC produced (I
think) in the '90s?
For real strangeness there is the PLATO mail protocol, which involves
writing the mail into files, which are then extracted from PLATO into
the OS file system by a periodic batch job, then sent to another system
via file transfer (FTP or a predecessor), then pushed into the PLATO
file system, then picked up by a mail agent at that end. Ugh.
$ReadingList++
On 7/6/19 1:33 PM, Chuck Guzis via cctalk wrote:
Those who quibble about the ftp being a separate entity from mail
protocol would do well to look at RFC 524 from 1973. There, the MAIL
command is implemented within the ftp structure (that is, it is an
ftp command).
Yep.
--
Grant. . . .
unix || die
