werner@ut-ngp.UUCP (Werner Uhrig) (10/13/86)
some folks are trying to convince me that I am unreasonable in my complaints
about addressing problems, ever since this domain-addressing started.
See and have pity ... (BTW, let me repeat: I *LOVE* the concept of domains,
I *HATE* the implementation so far - at least around here, which, from what
I hear, is not dissimilar from what many of you out there also experience)
Here I get this message:
Message 41 (1370 characters):
Posted-Date: Sat, 11 Oct 86 11:11:54 edt
Date: Sat, 11 Oct 86 11:11:54 edt
From: seismo!utcs.ARPA!mnetor!scott@ut-sally.UUCP (Scott Campbell)
To: werner@ut-ngp.UUCP
....
Scott J.M. Campbell
-------------------
Bitnet: SCOTT at UTORONTO
UUCP: {utzoo, ihnp4, cbosgd, mnetor, utcsri}!utcs!scott
arpa/csnet: scott@utcs.toronto.edu
[Note: ut-ngp, when I am not logged in, forwards my mail to another machine,
but that has no bearing here. just in case you wonder about the
TOPS-20 MM-commands used here ...]
R>rep
No such host as "ut-sally.UUCP", address ignored
....
S>to scott@utcs.toronto.edu
?Unrecognized host name "utcs.toronto.edu"
S>to scott@utcs
?Unrecognized host name "utcs"
S>to scott@utcs.arpa
?Unrecognized host name "utcs.arpa"
S>to scott@utcs.csnet
[ so, my machine accepted the last version, which is, of course, no guarantee
that it will do the right thing to get the mail there ....
..... most users on this machine simply would not know enough about the net
to be able to "hand-knit" an address and would scoff at the idea that
they should know.
BTW: note how seismo (I suspect) sneaked "utcs.ARPA" into the return-path.
it probably means that if I'd send the message to:
scott%utcs.ARPA@seismo.css.com
then seismo would know what to do with it. Ahh, but you'd have to
first know that seismo is seismo.css.gov .....
Oh, well ....
I post this, not to make make anyone feel guilty or responsible, only to
demonstrate a case of which I have seen hundreds just like it over the last
couple of months. Aggravating and time-consuming, especially when they
come bouncing back from some other site that can't figure out what to do
with a particular address.
]bzs@bu-cs.BU.EDU (Barry Shein) (10/13/86)
From: werner@ut-ngp.UUCP (Werner Uhrig) >R>rep > No such host as "ut-sally.UUCP", address ignored >.... >S>to scott@utcs.toronto.edu >?Unrecognized host name "utcs.toronto.edu" >S>to scott@utcs >?Unrecognized host name "utcs" >S>to scott@utcs.arpa >?Unrecognized host name "utcs.arpa" >S>to scott@utcs.csnet Werner, I honestly don't understand. Ok, agreed, your MM needs some work or you need a bigger host table on your 20 or you need a name server or something. So what? This is a problem you are having with MM, why are you bothering the rest of us with this, you might mail MRC to see what's the latest and greatest for dealing with this. MM is freeware, tho very good freeware (ie. you have to keep up with updates yourself.) Is the problem that the domain change made your copy of MM obsolete? Why does this surprise you? Who is supposed to keep your system software up to date? Why don't you tell him/her/it? What a strange thing to post on net.mail, maybe try TOPS-20@NIC.SRI.COM or whatever the address is and see who has a fix to distribute. Or are you just opposed to change and the way it tends to obsolete software (consider the 9-digit zip-code...) If so, you're in the wrong business (or are you just hoping one of us will come onto your machine and fix this? I'm honestly confused.) -Barry Shein, Boston University I know, I'll get this long-winded response about the last N months of discussion on this, but please keep replies to exactly what was said in the note I am responding to.
werner@ut-ngp.UUCP (Werner Uhrig) (10/14/86)
> S>to scott@utcs.csnet > > [ so, my machine accepted the last version, which is, of course, no guarantee > that it will do the right thing to get the mail there .... Murphy, Murphy .... my machine came back and complained about that "unknown site", so I remail the message to address "scott%utcs@csnet-sh" which I would have sworn would work (it always did in the past). Seems as if we recently acquired a new HOSTS-table which redefines CSNET-SH to be SH.CS.NET. little good that did me, as the excerpt from the returned mail below shows. As a last attempt, I just culled the numeric Internet-address out of the HOSTS-table. but Scott, if you should be reading this and wondered why you never heard from me again: I'M GIVING UP AFTER THIS ATTEMPT - no matter what! Message failed for the following: scott%utcs@SH.CS.NET.#Internet: 550 (BHST) Unknown host/domain name in "scott%ut cs@SH.CS.NET"