From owner-freebsd-chat Sun Aug 10 05:10:08 1997 Return-Path: Received: (from root@localhost) by hub.freebsd.org (8.8.5/8.8.5) id FAA18247 for chat-outgoing; Sun, 10 Aug 1997 05:10:08 -0700 (PDT) Received: from bitbox.follo.net (eivind@bitbox.follo.net [194.198.43.36]) by hub.freebsd.org (8.8.5/8.8.5) with ESMTP id FAA18242 for ; Sun, 10 Aug 1997 05:10:05 -0700 (PDT) Received: (from eivind@localhost) by bitbox.follo.net (8.8.5/8.7.3) id OAA04516; Sun, 10 Aug 1997 14:08:33 +0200 (CEST) Date: Sun, 10 Aug 1997 14:08:33 +0200 (CEST) Message-Id: <199708101208.OAA04516@bitbox.follo.net> From: Eivind Eklund To: Adrian Chadd CC: chat@FreeBSD.ORG In-reply-to: Adrian Chadd's message of Sun, 10 Aug 1997 16:58:13 +0800 (WST) Subject: Re: uunet vs. internet References: <199708100610.CAA03240@ethanol.gnu.ai.mit.edu> Sender: owner-freebsd-chat@FreeBSD.ORG X-Loop: FreeBSD.org Precedence: bulk > > On Sun, 10 Aug 1997, Joel Ray Holveck wrote: > > > Well, the Internet has changed from its humble beginnings as the > > old UUCP net, and ARPANET. Used to it was ham radio, then BBS's, then > > the net. What bastions for hobbyists are there now, something where > > the popularity doesn't make me sick after fifteen minutes of use? > > Being someone who entered the BBS scene around Oct '95, I watched the > whole BBS thing in Western Australia shrivel up and die. Which was a sad > thing, cause I liked BBS's. > > I was actually tossing up whether to setup an IPv6 tunnel network between > local Perth ISPs, then linking the "network" to somewhere in the eastern > states. Anyone else on here game? Even an IPIP tunnel with our own network > would be really funky. Any reason to go for these instead of PPP over TCP/IP, which we already have support for? PPP over TCP over SSH, and you have a VPN there and then. (Well, perhaps you'd want to add name-resolving...) The process of booting a separate Usenet has started. Perhaps it is the time for a new Internet? :-) Eivind.