Hi all,
I don't suppose there is anybody here who has `Lotus cc:Mail Router Release
5.1' ?
/Tomas
On Thu, 21 Jan 2021 18:09:25 +0100, Sergio Pedraja wrote:
> In my company we were using cc:Mail version 4 around 1994. I
> installed that one, plus cc:mail for UUCP previously around 1993 in
> one of our departments.
Ok, thanks.
On Thu, 21 Jan 2021 16:48:38 +0100, Tomas By via cct
In my company we were using cc:Mail version 4 around 1994. I installed that
one, plus cc:mail for UUCP previously around 1993 in one of our departments.
Regards
Sergio
El jue., 21 ene. 2021 16:42, Tomas By via cctalk
escribió:
> People,
>
> I'm trying to wrap my head around cc:Mai
> > CC:Mail used to have "Versions" in the 80's if I recall. "Releases"
> > came when Lotus bought them.
>
> Ok, so 1,2,3 happened quickly?
At least from Lotus' point of view ...
(scnr)
--
personal: http://www.
On Thu, 21 Jan 2021 16:59:25 +0100, Chris Zach via cctalk wrote:
> [...] Easy to corrupt, big pain in the rear. [...]
> still needed constant compacting and purging [...]
Well, what I am at looking at is having one single user, and running
it emulated, so I think it seems like a good solution
On Thu, 21 Jan 2021 17:00:42 +0100, Chris Zach via cctalk wrote:
> CC:Mail used to have "Versions" in the 80's if I recall. "Releases"
> came when Lotus bought them.
Ok, so 1,2,3 happened quickly? Or did they start at 2 or 3?
/Tomas
CC:Mail used to have "Versions" in the 80's if I recall. "Releases" came
when Lotus bought them.
C
On 1/21/2021 10:48 AM, Tomas By via cctalk wrote:
R3 1992 also
On Thu, 21 Jan 2021 16:42:32 +0100, Tomas By wrote:
Release Database Appeared in
1??
I was using CC:Mail at Westinghouse in 1988. Very small mailbox limits,
I remember having to run compacts on the Novell server a lot back then.
The system was using a flat file database on the server, each client
would interact directly with the mail database. Easy to corrupt, big
pain
R3 1992 also
On Thu, 21 Jan 2021 16:42:32 +0100, Tomas By wrote:
> Release Database Appeared in
> 1?? ?
> 2?6? ?
> 3?6? 1992
> 4?6 ?
> 5 6 1995
> 6 8 1996
> 7?8
People,
I'm trying to wrap my head around cc:Mail version numbers.
Various products such as Mobile and Gateways have their own separate
series of numbers, but the main products seem to be as follows.
Release Database Appeared in
1?? ?
2?6? ?
3
On Tue, 12 Jan 2021 14:16:20 +0100, Tomas By wrote:
> On Tue, 12 Jan 2021 14:13:35 +0100, Sergio Pedraja wrote:
> > Client or Server?
>
> Server. `Database error'
?
/Tomas
On Tue, 12 Jan 2021 14:13:35 +0100, Sergio Pedraja wrote:
> Client or Server?
Server. `Database error'
/Tomas
Client or Server?
El mar., 12 ene. 2021 12:49, Tomas By via cctalk
escribió:
> Hi all,
>
> Does anybody here know what cc:Mail error code 3075 means?
>
> (Haha, I thought not)
>
> /Tomas
>
Hi all,
Does anybody here know what cc:Mail error code 3075 means?
(Haha, I thought not)
/Tomas
Hello everybody,
Does anybody have any early versions of cc:Mail that they can share?
I have v. 6 (1996) and 8 (1997).
Am looking for versions from 1994/5.
/Tomas
AIL\Router\NTROUTER.EXE C:\CCDATA COM1 MODEM/PBX
| cc:Mail NT ROUTER Version 6.10.00.4
| Copyright (c) 1986, 1997 by cc:Mail, Inc., a wholly owned subsidiary of
| Lotus Development Corporation. All rights reserved. This software is subject
| to the Lotus Software Agreement, Restricted Rights for
Hi all,
I'm using a HP 200LX to connect to a cc:Mail installation, with a null
modem cable. It has worked better before, but now I don't seem to be
able to connect at all. This is the output from the router, when
trying to connect from the 200LX:
| C:\CCMAIL\Router>C:\CCMAIL\Router\NTROUTER.
Administrator.
Have searched the cc:Mail documentation I have access to for
"interactive" without finding anything.
What are these conditions?
/Tomas
On Sat, 19 Dec 2020 02:43:50 +0100, Tomas By via cctalk wrote:
> Everybody,
>
> Am experimenting with a HP 200LX and cc:Mail v.
On Sat, 19 Dec 2020 03:04:06 +0100, Bill Degnan wrote:
> Do you have a functioning Novell network set up with networking hardware?
Eh, no? I am using a direct `null modem' connection.
/Tomas
On Fri, Dec 18, 2020 at 8:44 PM Tomas By via cctalk
wrote:
> Everybody,
>
> Am experimenting with a HP 200LX and cc:Mail v. 8.1, and would like to
> know more about `interactive mode.' There is a choice when connecting
> between `copy & disconnect' and `interactive.' When
Everybody,
Am experimenting with a HP 200LX and cc:Mail v. 8.1, and would like to
know more about `interactive mode.' There is a choice when connecting
between `copy & disconnect' and `interactive.' When I try the latter I
get a pop-up window saying
The version of Router you are
connec
agreement about functionality and that we're down
to terminology applied to the various functions.
It's in ROM on the 200LX. When I select Help/About in the app, it
says "cc:Mail mobile". I cannot find anything in the manual, but
I am sure I have read it elsewhere also. I cannot remem
nt products. In your terms (I believe), the upper bit is part of
the PO and the lower one is "mobile".
(There may have been some evolution, so that in earlier versions the
dialling-in server was a separate thing.)
> [...] What software were you running on the 200LX? [...]
> My
NLMs. That worked pretty well, and I used
that at Science from 2000-2013 or so.
Interesting.
Now WordPerfect Office is on my to mess with list at some point.
cc:Mail has been on it. That particular itch is being scratched now.
But it still had the SMTP NLM.
:-)
CC:Mail was very parsnic
. That worked pretty well, and I used
that at Science from 2000-2013 or so.
But it still had the SMTP NLM.
Why were you loathe to support cc:Mail? Did Microsoft Mail and / or the
WordPerfect Office thing produce more income?
CC:Mail was very parsnickity and blew up a lot. Likewise the SMTP
gateway
On 10/7/20 6:57 PM, Tomas By wrote:
Well, both? According to the "about" window in the client on the 200LX,
it is indeed "cc:Mail mobile", but I believe I also need to set up a
"normal" post office. (The 200LX manual does not say anything specific
about version
On Thu, 08 Oct 2020 02:13:22 +0200, Grant Taylor via cctalk wrote:
> I've done some more reading on cc:Mail. It seems that you're talking
> about cc:Mail /Mobile/, and not cc:Mail (proper).
Well, both? According to the "about" window in the client on the
200LX, it is indeed
On 10/7/20 5:50 PM, Chris Zach via cctalk wrote:
CC:Mail could run in two ways. For the longest time it was just a shared
file on a network server that all the clients pointed to. Well, a
directory, and this is part of the reason it got corrupted as hell.
Rebuilding CC:Mail usually required
On 10/7/20 2:10 PM, Tomas By wrote:
Well, we are talking past each other. When I say client/server I
mean the connection over serial port/modem between the mobile client,
not on the same LAN as the PO, and the PO.
You've piqued my interest.
I've done some more reading on cc:Mail. It seems
CC:Mail could run in two ways. For the longest time it was just a shared
file on a network server that all the clients pointed to. Well, a
directory, and this is part of the reason it got corrupted as hell.
Rebuilding CC:Mail usually required shutting down the PO (writing a file
that told
On Wed, 07 Oct 2020 22:28:19 +0200, Gavin Scott via cctalk wrote:
> P.S. As far as I can recall I never connected my 200LX up to our
> cc:Mail even though I carried a 95/100/200 around with me pretty much
> all the time in those days.
I never had a cc:Mail account, but I used the 200
On 10/7/20 2:10 PM, Tomas By wrote:
Well, we are talking past each other.
That's entirely possible. That's why I elaborated on what I meant,
explicitly to give you an opportunity to confirm or refute.
When I say client/server I mean the connection over serial port/modem
between the mobile
P.S. As far as I can recall I never connected my 200LX up to our
cc:Mail even though I carried a 95/100/200 around with me pretty much
all the time in those days.
On Wed, Oct 7, 2020 at 3:13 PM Gavin Scott wrote:
>
> My recollection of the cc:Mail SMTP Gateway (that now sounds like the
&
My recollection of the cc:Mail SMTP Gateway (that now sounds like the
right name to me) was that it was definitely bidirectional with
respect to SMTP/internet traffic. There were differences in that
inbound and outbound processing were rather different internally IIRC,
but that was pretty much
etween the mobile client, not
on the same LAN as the PO, and the PO.
> Maybe I'm wrong. [...]
> Is the serial port for communications between the cc:Mail client and
> the cc:Mail P.O.?
Yes.
> I don't know. The MS-Mail SMTP gateway that I messed with was both
> inbound from t
On 10/7/20 1:57 PM, Grant Taylor via cctalk wrote:
I don't see how you can avoid the P.O.'s file / directory structure.
This isn't the whole truth and nothing but the truth.
I can see a hypothetical case where a program could leverage something
like a Filesystem in User SpacE (a.k.a. FUSE)
ived on a common network drive.
It does not need to anything other than get the mails and talk to
the client
But, based on my understanding, the cc:Mail client doesn't talk to a
server. It reads / writes files directly. Hence the need to have
something else, e.g. the gateway, communicate bet
On Wed, 07 Oct 2020 21:35:13 +0200, Grant Taylor via cctalk wrote:
> I don't see how that would work. If all the client knows how to do is
> talk to a cc:Mail Post Office, then I think the Post Office is going
> to be /required/.
Well, theoretically, you could have another program that
On 10/7/20 1:17 PM, Tomas By wrote:
Well, in theory it could possibly be directly between 200LX and
Internet, without any PO, but realistically: yes.
I don't see how that would work. If all the client knows how to do is
talk to a cc:Mail Post Office, then I think the Post Office is going
On 10/7/20 12:55 PM, Grant Taylor via cctalk wrote:
I'll take a look in my pile of Lotus disks.
Much of what I have is more Notes / Domino specific. But I do have a
cc:Mail documentation CD-ROM that's from '95.
Email me directly if you want to know more details about what's
On Wed, 07 Oct 2020 20:55:23 +0200, Grant Taylor via cctalk wrote:
> Translation / regurgitation: You're wondering about the possibility
> of connecting a cc:Mail Post Office to the Internet email
> (SMTP/POP3/IMAP) ecosystem somehow. Is that correct?
Well, in theory it could
Back in the 1990s, a company I used to work for offered email services
to people running cc:Mail, Lotus Notes, MSMAIL, Pegasus Mail and various
other oddball mail servers (X.400 even) using PMDF on VMS. PMDF is still
a commercial product but a hobbyist license is available. PMDF is also
On 10/7/20 8:03 AM, Tomas By via cctalk wrote:
Am wondering about the possibility of setting up an interface between
modern Unix email and the embedded client for cc:Mail on the HP 200LX.
Translation / regurgitation: You're wondering about the possibility of
connecting a cc:Mail Post Office
Oh this brings back memories. Back in the 1980's I worked with
Westinghouse/IRD and we used CC:Mail. When we partnered with Macro
systems we tied the two together using a CC:Mail gateway package that
ran over dialup modems.
Moving into the 90's, the IEEE Computer Society was on CC:Mail
r 2020 16:22
> To: Tomas By ; General Discussion: On-Topic and Off-
> Topic Posts
> Subject: Re: cc:Mail
>
> These may all be dead short-circuited neurons, but IIRC there was a cc:Mail
> Gateway or Internet Gateway special product you needed to buy that would
> run on a dedica
Hi,
Yes, this sounds plausible. You don't happen to remember if it was
a Lotus/cc:Mail or a third party product?
I managed something like this for MS mail at one point.
/Tomas
On Wed, 07 Oct 2020 17:22:27 +0200, Gavin Scott wrote:
> These may all be dead short-circuited neurons, but I
These may all be dead short-circuited neurons, but IIRC there was a
cc:Mail Gateway or Internet Gateway special product you needed to buy
that would run on a dedicated PC box (under DOS?) and would talk in
turn to your cc:Mail post office server and the 'net to exchange email
messages in and out
And one more thing,
Am wondering about the possibility of setting up an interface between
modern Unix email and the embedded client for cc:Mail on the HP 200LX.
Various versions of cc:Mail are available from archive.org and
vetusware.com, but the missing link seems to be the "client&
48 matches
Mail list logo
