From: Dan Cross <firstname.lastname@example.org>
To: Grant Taylor <email@example.com>
Subject: [COFF] Re: [TUHS] Re: the wheel of reincarnation goes sideways
Date: Wed, 2 Aug 2023 17:16:46 -0400 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <CAEoi9W4sW2xCooXoT6N1A1uvKoUBwoMnRwp1aWcqJ7di3G2KTQ@mail.gmail.com> (raw)
On Wed, Aug 2, 2023 at 4:58 PM Grant Taylor via COFF <firstname.lastname@example.org> wrote:
> On 8/2/23 11:07 AM, Dan Cross wrote:
> > Exactly. There are even pre-baked things one could put together
> > that would serve much the same purpose. Going back to gopher et al
> > seem like throwing out the baby with the bathwater. A small HTTP
> > server that serves a little subtree of files on some random port
> > and automatically renders markdown or something into trivial HTML is
> > really all one needs.
> I always wanted something that would re-use the same content between
> multiple services.
> I can make the same file(s) available via:
> - FTP(S)
> - HTTP(S)
> Why can't I make the same file(s) available via Gopher too?
I'm sure you can if that interests you. I just don't see much of a
point, personally. But if that's what you're into, get on down with
> I wondered if it might be possible to do some magic at the file system
> level where the same source file(s) could be used and add wrappers
> around it to integrate said source file(s) into rendered files served up
> via the various protocols.
> Obviously I've not yet been motivated to do anything with Gopher in this
> I'd likely include a BBS interface in this menagerie if I could do so.
> For various $REASONS.
I don't know why that wouldn't be easily doable in a server for each
protocol. I believe that some BBS packages already do this, but I
don't really know.
> > Tell that to the Fidonet people. :-)
> The last time I looked, much of Fidonet (proper) and other FTNs were
> still using the Fido protocol (nomenclature?) to communicate between
> nodes. There were a few offering SMTP gateways.
> Have more of them migrated to SMTP gateways where Fidonet is now more of
> a separate SMTP network?
No. I think most of the actual Fidonet people are either waiting for
the Big One and the collapse of the Internet, or arguing about how
someone dissed them in 1989.
> > I don't see what the protocol has to do with it, but sure.
> I should clarify that I view SMTP as used on the Internet today as a
> very large network of federated email servers speaking a common
> protocol. As such the network is largely interdependent on various
> other parts of the network, e.g. DNS.
> I was hoping that Fidonet (proper) as an FTN was still using Fido
> protocol (nomenclature) such that it was largely independent from the
> aforementioned SMTP network.
> Does the protocol separation make more sense now?
I thought I was rather clear that one could use the SMTP protocol
independently of the existing email network, but sure.
- Dan C.
prev parent reply other threads:[~2023-08-02 21:17 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 24+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
[not found] <CAP6exY+05fStBtpZGd2HeeNf21fNXeKUTwBV0h5-1YczwFemail@example.com>
2023-03-08 19:52 ` [COFF] Re: [TUHS] " Dan Cross
2023-03-08 20:18 ` [COFF] " Tom Ivar Helbekkmo via COFF
2023-03-09 1:22 ` [COFF] Re: [TUHS] " John Cowan
2023-03-09 19:55 ` Dan Cross
2023-03-09 20:09 ` Larry McVoy
2023-03-11 20:32 ` Dan Cross
2023-03-11 23:28 ` Bakul Shah
[not found] ` <ZA+gxAePDMWK6StD@straylight.ringlet.net>
2023-03-13 22:34 ` Dan Cross
2023-07-05 21:48 ` Dan Cross
2023-07-05 23:58 ` Grant Taylor via COFF
2023-07-06 1:02 ` Dave Horsfall
2023-07-06 16:47 ` Grant Taylor via COFF
2023-07-06 2:35 ` Dan Cross
2023-07-06 4:18 ` Robert Stanford via COFF
2023-07-06 16:53 ` Grant Taylor via COFF
2023-07-06 17:54 ` Adam Thornton
2023-07-09 14:55 ` Michael Parson
2023-08-01 9:52 ` Michael Cardell Widerkrantz
2023-08-01 9:49 ` Michael Cardell Widerkrantz
2023-08-01 15:55 ` Dan Cross
2023-08-01 16:27 ` Grant Taylor via COFF
2023-08-02 16:07 ` Dan Cross
2023-08-02 20:58 ` Grant Taylor via COFF
2023-08-02 21:16 ` Dan Cross [this message]
You may reply publicly to this message via plain-text email
using any one of the following methods:
* Save the following mbox file, import it into your mail client,
and reply-to-all from there: mbox
Avoid top-posting and favor interleaved quoting:
* Reply using the --to, --cc, and --in-reply-to
switches of git-send-email(1):
git send-email \
* If your mail client supports setting the In-Reply-To header
via mailto: links, try the mailto: link
Be sure your reply has a Subject: header at the top and a blank line
before the message body.
This is a public inbox, see mirroring instructions
for how to clone and mirror all data and code used for this inbox;
as well as URLs for NNTP newsgroup(s).