On Tue, 24 Jan 1995 13:54:56 EST Will Sadler <[log in to unmask]> said: >This discussion brings up something I have wondered about. Why does >BITNET even still exist? I was under the impression that the >optimizations that LISTSERV can do linking LISTSERV sites together can >be done under BITNET or SMTP. Does LISTSERV require BITNET for this >feature? There are two flavours of LISTSERV: LISTSERV-NJE and LISTSERV-TCP/IP. LISTSERV originated in 1986 as a VM application that required BITNET (at that time the Internet as we know it did not exist, it was a limited project that was mostly restricted to defense sites in the US and a few cooperating universities). In March 94, a TCP/IP version was developed and the old version was renamed to LISTSERV-NJE for clarity. In June 94, this TCP/IP version was ported to VMS and unix. The TCP/IP version can in fact run in NJE compatibility mode if desired, so if you buy LISTSERV today you always get the TCP/IP version. But about 250 sites had gotten the NJE version while it was freely available, so there are many active copies of LISTSERV-NJE. Some are migrating to LISTSERV-TCP/IP on VM, many are migrating from VM to unix or VMS. Most however do not see any need to migrate until their organization's overall plans call for phasing out the mainframe system or dropping the NJE connection. Some of the unix servers for instance jumped from 0 to 220 lists overnight, as they reached the corresponding item on their migration schedule/checklist. The migration policies vary from one organization to another. Some want to make all changes overnight, so that users only complain once :-), while others prefer to migrate one service at a time, due to lack of manpower. It seems most mainframes are going to be phased out this year, either this summer or at Christmas. The ones that will survive into 96 are mostly from places that have no intention of getting rid of their mainframes in the near future. I think about 1/3 to 1/2 of the current VM sites are in that situation. The problem we are having with BITNET is that the core's capacity is having trouble growing at the same rate as the traffic. CREN has a plan to address that problem but before I comment on it I have asked them to provide some sort of official description of the plan as I don't want to misrepresent them or anyone else. Let's just say that I am fully aware of the problems and that I am not sitting here waiting for a miracle to take place. These delays have been mostly tolerable thus far but it is now becoming apparent that we must find a solution that can be implemented say within the next 3 months, as opposed to just letting the slower migration to TCP/IP take care of it. Eric