perm filename COMPUS[3,2] blob sn#875907 filedate 1989-08-11 generic text, type T, neo UTF8
Subject:      Mail access to CompuServe
Date:         Fri, 14 Jul 89 17:43:38 -0400
From:         Karl Kleinpaste <karl@CIS.OHIO-STATE.EDU>

To clear up some confusion and squash several dozen rumors which have
been floating around since sometime this past Wednesday or
thereabouts, I'm telling people about this now, although more official
(officious? :-) announcements will be forthcoming sometime Real Soon

CompuServe is email-accessible.  The machinery to do so has actually
been in place for some months, but there has been an arbitrarily large
number of reasons why official, live status has not yet been granted
to the gateway.  Technically, this is true, even as I write this.

To reach a CompuServe subscriber account of the form
swap the `,' for `.' and add
This is necessary for RFC compliance.  To reach employees of
CompuServe, they have somewhat more typical usernames inside the subdomain.

CompuServe subscribers can reach people Out Here from CompuServe's
mailers via the specification:
The use of ">stuff:" is CompuServe's general gateway-access syntax; it
does not appear in anything on the Internet side of the gateway, but
rather RFC-compliant headers are generated.

Internet nameservers for are alive and responding, and
pathalias data for a (fictitious) host "compuserve" has been published
since last fall.  Internet mailers must support MX records in order to
reach CompuServe.  The MX host is, a.k.a.
osu-cis.  I understand that there is some magic that must be performed
on BITNET VM hosts in order to get there due to lack of MX support;
details from other BITNETters, not me.

    [That's - Ed.]

Saqqara speaks with CompuServe approximately half-hourly, though this
will probably change as load is observed.

There are NO charges accrued to ANYBODY on either side of the gateway
for its use.  CompuServe subscribers are charged their usual hourly
rates, but there is no gateway-specific surcharge.

The reason for this posting is that the gateway was mentioned rather
casually to, resulting in a rather impressive
flurry of queries, explanations, and test notes through the gateway.
The load has been, ah, remarkable.  There were quite a number of
misconceptions about it (notably regarding charging, there being none
but others claiming that there would be), and I am hoping to prevent
further rumor-mongering.  Vint Cerf presented this on CompuServe's
behalf to FRICC just this past Monday; there is "agreement in
principle" on the gateway's existence, but the formalities of the
situation have yet to be finalized.

Disclaimer: I speak for myself, not CompuServe.

Questions about the gateway =>
Questions about CompuServe  =>

--Karl Kleinpaste
Personification of the Mailer Daemon
Ohio State Computer Science
Instigator of the Internet/CompuServe mail gateway
no longer acting ""