bill@sigma.UUCP (William Swan) (12/30/86)
In article <405@dhw68k.UUCP> david (David H. Wolfskill) writes: >In article <2847@ista.UUCP>, thomas (Matt Thomas) writes: >>What domain do private machines (such as PCs) belong in? [I would like to >>register ista in a "real" dmoain but as of yet I haven't figured which one >>it belongs in. For now I'm using .UUCP] [...] >Since I have the same problem, I'm offering moral support. Perhaps it >would help to get some idea what the magnitude of the problem is? [...] The magnitude, even if you could figure it out now, will not be static. As more of us acquire machines and the software to connect, this "domain" will grow. (For example, my home system is not on the net yet, but I expect to have it online within a year or so.) Perhaps a new domain called ".HOME" could be created, if this is important. -- William Swan {ihnp4,decvax,allegra,...}!uw-beaver!tikal!sigma!bill chan 'eil Gaidhlig math againn /kha nel' gal'ig' mweh ag0n'/ (we do not speak good Gaelic)
pekka-r@obelix.UUCP (Pekka Akselin) (01/02/87)
In article <979@sigma.UUCP> bill@sigma.UUCP (William Swan) writes: >In article <405@dhw68k.UUCP> david (David H. Wolfskill) writes: >>In article <2847@ista.UUCP>, thomas (Matt Thomas) writes: >>>What domain do private machines (such as PCs) belong in? [I would like to > >The magnitude, even if you could figure it out now, will not be static. >As more of us acquire machines and the software to connect, this "domain" >will grow. (For example, my home system is not on the net yet, but I expect >to have it online within a year or so.) > >Perhaps a new domain called ".HOME" could be created, if this is important. I would rather like to call it .PRIV or .PRIVATE. This is because there are many good programmers in the homes and .HOME sounds so domestic and unproffessional (to me anyway). And I agre with William Swan that this "domain" will not be static and I have thoughts on connecting my machine to the net too. ******************************************************************************* UUCP: pekka-r@obelix.uucp | ...!seismo!enea!liuida!obelix!pekka-r ARPA: pekka-r%obelix.{ida.liu.se,UUCP}@seismo.CSS.GOV Pekka Akselin, Univ. of Linkoping, Sweden (The Land Of The Midnight Hacker :-)) *******************************************************************************
james@bigtex.uucp (James Van Artsdalen) (01/03/87)
IN article <979@sigma.UUCP>, bill@sigma.UUCP (William Swan) wrote: > The magnitude, even if you could figure it out now, will not be static. > As more of us acquire machines and the software to connect, this "domain" > will grow. (For example, my home system is not on the net yet, but I expect > to have it online within a year or so.) > > Perhaps a new domain called ".HOME" could be created, if this is important. I did not start reading this group until recently, but it seems to me that at some point, probably in the not-so-distant future, domains based on geographical distribution will have to be created. For instance, I would guess that within a couple of years, my address will be known as "james@bigtex.austin.tx". One machine in Texas would be the .tx name handler, and it would know machines in Houston, Dallas and Austin that would have databases for those cities. As far as I know this could be done right now, except for the arpa-net people. I would prefer that my address be something that the arpanet people could use exactly like the uucp people use. I know this is a problem with the .COM addresses. -- James R. Van Artsdalen ...!ut-sally!utastro!bigtex!james "Live Free or Die" Voice: (512)-323-2675 Modem: (512)-323-2773 5300B McCandless, Austin TX 78756
sewilco@meccMECC.COM (Scot E. Wilcoxon) (01/03/87)
In article <979@sigma.UUCP> bill@sigma.UUCP (William Swan) writes: >>In article <2847@ista.UUCP>, thomas (Matt Thomas) writes: >>>What domain do private machines (such as PCs) belong in? [I would like to ... >The magnitude, even if you could figure it out now, will not be static. >As more of us acquire machines and the software to connect, this "domain" >will grow. (For example, my home system is not on the net yet, but I expect >to have it online within a year or so.) Yet another use for geographical domains... -- Scot E. Wilcoxon Minn Ed Comp Corp {quest,dayton,meccts}!mecc!sewilco (612)481-3507 sewilco@MECC.COM ihnp4!meccts!mecc!sewilco National Enquirer seers: 4 Reality: 360
sewilco@mecc.MECC.COM (Scot E. Wilcoxon) (01/04/87)
In article <2847@ista.UUCP>, thomas (Matt Thomas) writes: >What domain do private machines (such as PCs) belong in? [I would like to >register ista in a "real" dmoain but as of yet I haven't figured which one >it belongs in. For now I'm using .UUCP] [...] I don't know of any existing organization which can handle hundreds of unrelated machines across the NA continent (Europe does have country domains) except for a few large information services. RFC 920 lists domain requirements. Several of the "initial domains" could be used for "personal" machines: ORG "... any other domains meeting the second level requirements." Countries Multiorganizations Domain requirements: Responsibly managed [a responsible person is named] Robust domain name lookup service Reasonable minimum size [one machine is probably too small] Registered [with NIC] What's needed is at least one gateway to a domain which can handle the personal machines. Maybe information services or common carriers (whatever the distinction is nowadays) can provide them. The grass-roots approach is for a "large enough" cluster of miscellaneous machines to tackle the "domain name lookup service" technical problem so as to have convenient and reliable mail delivery to support the group. A responsible person must be selected who can register the group. If several such clusters of organized groups exist, they might be able to get a single "multiorganizational domain" created to serve their community. -- Scot E. Wilcoxon Minn Ed Comp Corp {quest,dayton,meccts}!mecc!sewilco (612)481-3507 sewilco@MECC.COM ihnp4!meccts!mecc!sewilco National Enquirer seers: 4 Reality: 360
fair@ucbarpa.Berkeley.EDU (Erik E. Fair) (01/05/87)
How many of you out there have ever moved? After getting your stuff safely from A to B, what's the biggest hassle? Could it be changing the mailing address that every one of your correspondents has on file for you? The neat thing about a non-geographical domain name system is that your name does not change if you move. And people move all the time. Erik E. Fair ucbvax!fair fair@ucbarpa.berkeley.edu
scott@utcs.UUCP (01/05/87)
In article <16744@ucbvax.BERKELEY.EDU> fair@ucbarpa.Berkeley.EDU (Erik E. Fair) writes: >How many of you out there have ever moved? >After getting your stuff safely from A to B, what's the biggest hassle? >Could it be changing the mailing address that every one of your >correspondents has on file for you? >The neat thing about a non-geographical domain name system is that your >name does not change if you move. And people move all the time. I don't know but it seems to me that the vast majority of systems on the net are either corporations or universities which have very little prospect of moving anywhere. (University of Toronto anyways has no plans on moving soon) What about if the few people who travel around be put in yet another domain ( .travel or .moving ???) Besides if you pick up your machine and move from New York to Minnesota all the routing to your machine will have to be changed and likely you would need to come under a new subdomain depending on who you connect to (Its likely that you will have different links). The geographical method is best although if it is a truly non-stationary machine then there might be problems which could be solved by the special non-stationary domain. -- "I feel fine..." ...{utzoo, decvax, ihnp4, cbosgd, utcsri, mnetor}!utcs!scott scott%utcs.toronto.edu@csnet-relay.arpa scott@utoronto.bitnet scott@utcs.utoronto.bitnet Disclaimer: The above is not actually the opinion of anyone at all but especially not the administration or staff of this institution.
campbell@maynard.BSW.COM (Larry Campbell) (01/06/87)
In article <1987Jan5.151408.24982@utcs.uucp> scott@utcs.UUCP (Scott Campbell) writes: > >Besides if you pick up your machine and move from New York to Minnesota all >the routing to your machine will have to be changed and likely you would need >to come under a new subdomain depending on who you connect to (Its likely >that you will have different links). ... The whole POINT of domainising the UUCP world is to remove routing information from the user's view. I am "campbell@maynard.BSW.COM", and if I move my machine to the West Coast, I would still be "campbell@maynard.BSW.COM". The pathalias database would change, and perhaps an ARPANET name server would have to be notified, but USERS would still be able to type "campbell@maynard.BSW.COM". For this reason, I think geographic domains are a bad idea. Domains should be administrative entities, not geographic ones (silly European political prejudices notwithstanding...) -- Larry Campbell The Boston Software Works, Inc. Internet: campbell@maynard.uucp 120 Fulton Street, Boston MA 02109 uucp: {alliant,wjh12}!maynard!campbell +1 617 367 6846 ARPA: campbell%maynard.uucp@harvisr.harvard.edu MCI: LCAMPBELL
fair@ucbarpa.Berkeley.EDU (Erik E. Fair) (01/06/87)
In article <1987Jan5.151408.24982@utcs.uucp> scott@utcs.UUCP (Scott Campbell) writes: > >Besides if you pick up your machine and move from New York to Minnesota all >the routing to your machine will have to be changed and likely you would need >to come under a new subdomain depending on who you connect to (Its likely >that you will have different links). The geographical method is best although >if it is a truly non-stationary machine then there might be problems which >could be solved by the special non-stationary domain. In real computer networks, routing is invisible (this is not to say that it does not change; just that you don't notice). Anyway, this misses the whole point: why should my name or address change, just because 1 or more routes to me have changed? They are three separate and distinct things, you know... Erik E. Fair ucbvax!fair fair@ucbarpa.berkeley.edu
mjl@tropix.UUCP (Mike Lutz) (01/06/87)
In article <16744@ucbvax.BERKELEY.EDU> fair@ucbarpa.Berkeley.EDU (Erik E. Fair) writes: >How many of you out there have ever moved? > >After getting your stuff safely from A to B, what's the biggest hassle? > >Could it be changing the mailing address that every one of your >correspondents has on file for you? > >The neat thing about a non-geographical domain name system is that your >name does not change if you move. And people move all the time. How many of you have ever taken a new job? (How many of you have ever had a job :-))? After finding the johns in the new building, what's the biggest hassle? Could it be telling all your correspondents how to get in touch with you (by phone or mail)? This is not to disparage the domain concept, just to point out that changing one's address is not all that uncommon even when geography is ignored. The only way I can think to avoid this is to have your original home domain forward the mail, possibly telling your correspondents when it does so, but this would work every bit as well with geographic domains, no? And from what I've been seeing, our European and Asian friends are using geographical domains, at least to the country level. The perverse British, of course, reverse the domain components (the E-mail equivalent of driving on the left side of the road? :-)). Until we finally sign up with the Big Name Server In The Sky, most of us will be moving around and changing associations, and domains can only partially deal with this. Mike Lutz seismo!rochester!tropix!mjl
gds@sri-spam.istc.sri.com (The lost Bostonian) (01/07/87)
I was under the impression that private machines could register in subdomains under the country domains.
fair@UCBARPA.BERKELEY.EDU (Erik E. Fair) (01/07/87)
In an ideal world, I should have one name with which people can send me mail, call me on the phone, and so on. Never changing, despite me moving my home, or changing jobs, or traveling on vacation. I could probably use my given name, since, as far as I know, there is only one other "Erik Fair" and he writes a column for Hang Gliding magazine in Los Angeles... Sadly, this ideal world does not as yet exist; not only do I have to have a unique login name, I have to attach that to a unique host name, and the two names as a pair as used to get my attention. Now, if I buy a computer (don't own one yet), why should its name change if I leave the state of California? Or the USA? Provided I can get you all to agree that geographic domains are a bad idea, the ideal world described in the previous paragraph will be closer to reality. Another thought, for those of you who are thinking of being part of the registration authority, consider this: the registration authority, under the geographic domain scheme, would have to keep track of the shifting morass of people and corporate entities that we know as the network. This compounds the existing problem, which is merely one of keeping track of routing. Erik E. Fair ucbvax!fair fair@ucbarpa.berkeley.edu
bill@sigma.UUCP (William Swan) (01/07/87)
In article <485@obelix.UUCP> pekka-r@obelix.UUCP (Pekka Akselin) writes: >>>>What domain do private machines (such as PCs) belong in? [...] >>The magnitude, even if you could figure it out now, will not be static. >>[...] >>Perhaps a new domain called ".HOME" could be created, if this is important. > >I would rather like to call it .PRIV or .PRIVATE. >This is because there are many good programmers in the homes and >.HOME sounds so domestic and unproffessional (to me anyway). > >And I agre with William Swan that this "domain" will not be static >and I have thoughts on connecting my machine to the net too. It has been gently pointed out to me that to have such a domain implies that _somebody_ has to keep track of it. Who's going to do that?? "I think I better think it out again." -Fagin (The play "Oliver") -- William Swan {ihnp4,decvax,allegra,...}!uw-beaver!tikal!sigma!bill "..When we look only for evidence of guilt and ignore all contradictory evidence, these are the elements of a witch hunt." -Paul and Shirley Eberle, _The Politics of Child Abuse_
dan@prairie.UUCP (Daniel M. Frank) (01/07/87)
In article <236@tropix.UUCP> mjl@tropix.UUCP (Mike Lutz) writes: >The >perverse British, of course, reverse the domain components (the >E-mail equivalent of driving on the left side of the road? :-)). Actually, the E-mail equivalent of the outside-in name qualification used in programming languages like Ada and Modula-2 (without precisely the same semantics, of course). -- Dan Frank uucp: ... uwvax!prairie!dan arpa: dan%caseus@spool.wisc.edu
gws@cbnap.UUCP (Gary W. Sanders (N8EMR)) (01/08/87)
OK, let see if we go to wide area domain names, I guess I will be gws@gwspc.milkyway.earth.north_america.usa.oh.central.columbus.east_side.att. bell_labs.2nd_floor_east or at home i can be reached at. gws@n8emr.milkyway.earth.north_america.usa.oh.central.columbus.west_side.home. aprtments.apt_B That that should make things easyer? wouldnt it???? -- ================================================================================ Gary W. Sanders ihnp4!cbnap!gws AT&T Bell Labs (Columbus) 72277,1325 (cis) N8EMR @ WB8WGA (packet radio) 614-860-5965 (w) 614-457-4595 (h) ================================================================================
srg@uw-apl.UUCP (Spencer Garrett) (01/08/87)
In article <16744@ucbvax.BERKELEY.EDU>, fair@ucbarpa.Berkeley.EDU (Erik E. Fair) writes: > The neat thing about a non-geographical domain name system is that your > name does not change if you move. And people move all the time. > > Erik E. Fair ucbvax!fair fair@ucbarpa.berkeley.edu Your domain would change if you changed jobs or even machines. The only changes the domain scheme hides are changes in connectivity. I personally think that geographical domains make a great deal of sense.
fair@ucbarpa.Berkeley.EDU (Erik E. Fair) (01/09/87)
In article <116@uw-apl.UUCP> srg@uw-apl.UUCP (Spencer Garrett) writes: > >Your domain would change if you changed jobs or even machines. The only >changes the domain scheme hides are changes in connectivity. I personally >think that geographical domains make a great deal of sense. I've changed jobs three times in the last two years. My address hasn't changed once. I'm still ucbvax!fair and <fair@ucbarpa.berkeley.edu>. However, the topic at hand was private machines. Let's suppose that I buy a Symmetric s/375 tomorrow. I register it as "tzone.org" so my address would be <fair@tzone.org>. Tell me how my name or address changes when I move? I am certainly going to take my new computer with me when I move, whether that be across the street or across the country. The only thing that changes is the routing (and not even that if my current connected neighbors are still willing to call me after I move). Erik E. Fair ucbvax!fair fair@ucbarpa.berkeley.edu
scott@utcs.UUCP (01/09/87)
In article <116@uw-apl.UUCP> srg@uw-apl.UUCP (Spencer Garrett) writes: >In article <16744@ucbvax.BERKELEY.EDU>, fair@ucbarpa.Berkeley.EDU (Erik E. Fair) writes: >> The neat thing about a non-geographical domain name system is that your >> name does not change if you move. And people move all the time. > >Your domain would change if you changed jobs or even machines. The only >changes the domain scheme hides are changes in connectivity. I personally >think that geographical domains make a great deal of sense. It seems to me that geographical domains would be an awful lot easier to implement and maintain. The uucp network is not well known for keeping maps up to date and routing tables up to date or just about anything up to date. A Geographical domain system would be less susceptible to falling apart if some places decide to wait a year or two to update their tables since the mail would be able to get reasonable close before it fails. With a non-geographical system suppose machine a connected to site b in maine moves to california and gets new connections downlink from a machine that hasnt updated its tables lately. Since he has the same address his mail gets to machine c who has no idea where to look for the address and it bounces. with a geographical system the mail would at least get to maine or even closer before it gets lost and there is a greater chance that a nearby machine would know who its for. I know I'm rambling here but basically what I'm trying to say is that a geographical system means a file will get reasonably close to its destination before the specific machine has to be known. This would not hold true for internal organizational networks such as .dec since it has its own internal routing. -- "I feel fine..." ...{utzoo, decvax, ihnp4, cbosgd, utcsri, mnetor}!utcs!scott scott%utcs.toronto.edu@csnet-relay.arpa scott@utoronto.bitnet scott@utcs.utoronto.bitnet Disclaimer: The above is not actually the opinion of anyone at all but especially not the administration or staff of this institution.
jim@cs.strath.ac.uk (Jim Reid) (01/09/87)
In article <216@cbnap.UUCP> gws@cbnap.UUCP (Gary W. Sanders (N8EMR) writes: >OK, let see if we go to wide area domain names, I guess I will be > >gws@gwspc.milkyway.earth.north_america.usa.oh.central.columbus.east_side.att. >bell_labs.2nd_floor_east > >That that should make things easyer? wouldnt it???? Could do if your domain ordering was the right way round! The conventional wisdom is to have the domain scope increasing from left to right: you have it the other way around. Mind you this would be OK in the UK where we do strange things like this (along with driving on a different side of the road)! [Does the density of exclamation marks in this article equal that of an Inmac catalogue? :-)] Jim ARPA: jim%cs.strath.ac.uk@ucl-cs.arpa, jim@cs.strath.ac.uk UUCP: jim@strath-cs.uucp, ...!seismo!mcvax!ukc!strath-cs!jim JANET: jim@uk.ac.strath.cs "JANET domain ordering is swapped around so's there'd be some use for rev(1)!"
rick@seismo.CSS.GOV (Rick Adams) (01/09/87)
Would everyone PLEASE stop confusing the route of the mail with the domain name of the site. They are not necessarily related at all. The worst reason to put personal machines into a geographic domain is to simplify the routing. The Best reason to NOT put home machines into a geographic domain is because people will confuse the route with the machine name. The routing can be and should be independant of the name of the machine. ---rick
sl@van-bc.UUCP (Stuart Lynne) (01/10/87)
In article <798@maynard.BSW.COM> campbell@maynard.UUCP (Larry Campbell) writes: >In article <1987Jan5.151408.24982@utcs.uucp> scott@utcs.UUCP (Scott Campbell) writes: >> >>Besides if you pick up your machine and move from New York to Minnesota all >>the routing to your machine will have to be changed and likely you would need >>to come under a new subdomain depending on who you connect to (Its likely >>that you will have different links). ... > >The whole POINT of domainising the UUCP world is to remove routing >information from the user's view. I am "campbell@maynard.BSW.COM", >and if I move my machine to the West Coast, I would still be >"campbell@maynard.BSW.COM". The pathalias database would change, and >perhaps an ARPANET name server would have to be notified, but USERS >would still be able to type "campbell@maynard.BSW.COM". > >For this reason, I think geographic domains are a bad idea. Domains >should be administrative entities, not geographic ones (silly European >political prejudices notwithstanding...) How about if you move from New York to Vancouver, or better yet Honk Kong or Paris. Are you still going to expect mail at campbell@maynard.BSW.COM? Geographic domains do have some good points. At some point it gets very expensive to access your name server and you wish to set a domain that is cheaper for you to access. Of course this really means that you will set up domains around the cost of your communications channels. For example in Canada using Datapac it is far cheaper for me to communicate with Toronto (4000 miles away) than Prince George (600 miles). Another interesting point is that is cheaper using direct distance dialing to call virtually anywhere in the continental US than in Canada outside of BC. So if most of my communications are via uucp on long distance I don't even want to think of having a separate domain for Canada. -- Stuart Lynne ihnp4!alberta!ubc-vi!van-bc!sl Vancouver,BC,604-937-7532 Todays feature: Golden Ashes, Freeman Wills Croft, 1940 Inspector French artistically solves the mystery of the missing art critic, cleaned paintings and melted lead in the burnt out mansion.
sl@van-bc.UUCP (Stuart Lynne) (01/10/87)
> >I would rather like to call it .PRIV or .PRIVATE. >This is because there are many good programmers in the homes and >.HOME sounds so domestic and unproffessional (to me anyway). > >And I agre with William Swan that this "domain" will not be static >and I have thoughts on connecting my machine to the net too. > That's the best name I've seen so far (.priv). It gets my vote. I've already got my machine on the net. I provide a public access point to the net for the Vancouver area. In the very near future I hope to provide fairly easy access to pc's (personal computers as in Atari, Amiga, Mac not just IBM) with automated mail access similiar to in style to uucp. The effect of this trend will be to mulitply the number of users coming into the net. Question #1: Should these small single user machines be given individual node names, or should then simply exist as a name on the larger machine that provides access to the net? eg. van-bc!joesmith or van-bc!mypc!joesmith joesmith@van-bc.priv or joesmith@mypc.priv Giving them all node names implies providing map entries, domain server knowledge, and incur's more overhead on the machine's providing them access and tracking them (name servers). Allowing them node names would appear to allow them more freedom to move around. This is an important question. The potential number of new "sites" is enormous. Are the name servers, and service providers willing to address the order of magnitude increase in the number of sites they must keep track of to allow the freedom of individual single user sites to more around. Question #2: Assuming we allow single user sites to have node names and to move around freely, with the name servers tracking them and directing mail appropriately; why are we not allowing individual users the same freedom? -- Stuart Lynne ihnp4!alberta!ubc-vi!van-bc!sl Vancouver,BC,604-937-7532 Todays feature: Golden Ashes, Freeman Wills Croft, 1940 Inspector French artistically solves the mystery of the missing art critic, cleaned paintings and melted lead in the burnt out mansion.
sl@van-bc.UUCP (Stuart Lynne) (01/10/87)
> >Besides if you pick up your machine and move from New York to Minnesota all >the routing to your machine will have to be changed and likely you would need >to come under a new subdomain depending on who you connect to (Its likely >that you will have different links). The geographical method is best although >if it is a truly non-stationary machine then there might be problems which >could be solved by the special non-stationary domain. > Actually the whole idea behind domains is that they are independant of the routing. You participate in a domain according to your affiliations, not your connections. Thus .gov for goverment, .edu for educational, .com for companies etc. If you move you and do not change your affiliations then your address will remain the same - which is the reason people like the concept. If you do not "move" but change affiliations then your address will change. Note it is inherently possible for YOU to be a member of more than one domain. For example I exist as: sl@van-bc.uucp (perhaps to become sl@van-bc.priv) slyn@vm.sydney.cdn In this case because I maintain to addresses on the net, one for work related correspondence, and one personal correspondence. -- Stuart Lynne ihnp4!alberta!ubc-vi!van-bc!sl Vancouver,BC,604-937-7532 Todays feature: The Problem of the Green Capsule, John Dickson Carr, 1939 Gideon Fell solves the "Psychologist's Murder Case". Five eye-witnesses, a film and still no one could identify the murder.
paul@devon.UUCP (Paul Sutcliffe Jr.) (01/13/87)
With all the arguing about routing vs. domains, the question in the
Subject: line is still not being answered. I'd kinda like to know
if my one-man/one-computer company is a "domain". Seems like overkill
to register a single machine as such, and go through all kinds of crap
to get a mailer that understands %'s and @'s and what-have-you just so
I can send and receive mail. Us non-source-license sites that don't
(or can't) run sendmail are left a little high and dry here. Yes, I
tried to implement smail as a SYSV/binmail configuration. It caused
more problems than it corrected. Smail apparantly should have sendmail
to work well.
-paul
--
Paul Sutcliffe, Jr. UUCP: {seismo,ihnp4,allegra,rutgers}!cbmvax!devon!paul
Devon Computer Services COMPUSERVE: 76176,502
Allentown, Penna. Sarek: "Any message for your mother, Spock?"
+1 215 398 3776 Spock: "Yes. Tell her 'I feel fine.'"dpz@klinzhai.RUTGERS.EDU (David P. Zimmerman) (01/14/87)
===pray to the almightly lineeater=== >OK, let see if we go to wide area domain names, I guess I will be > >gws@gwspc.milkyway.earth.north_america.usa.oh.central.columbus.east_side.att. >bell_labs.2nd_floor_east > >or at home i can be reached at. > >gws@n8emr.milkyway.earth.north_america.usa.oh.central.columbus.west_side.home. >aprtments.apt_B > >That that should make things easyer? wouldnt it???? Argh, no, no, NO!! Then we have to start pathaliasing domain names! :-) -dpz- -- David P. Zimmerman "When I'm having fun, the world doesn't exist." Arpa: dpz@rutgers.rutgers.edu Uucp: ...{harvard | seismo | pyramid}!rutgers!dpz
edm@tikal.UUCP (01/28/87)
I had the same question. (And still do to some extent.) But for the present
I have been running "smail" on my home machine with UUCP as the "official"
domain for outgoing mail for the last couple weeks with very little touble.
I guess the plan is for the UUCP domain to go away, but in the mean time it
seems to work out. I hand-crafted a /usr/lib/uucp/paths file to ship most
everything verbatim to a known smart host (also running smail). One particular
route that I got by default was defunct so I just added my "known good" route
to my paths file and everything is peachy...
...uw-beaver_____!tikal!edm Ed Morin - Teltone Corporation
.......fluke____/ \_colossus!edm 10801 - 120th Ave. N.E.
Kirkland, WA 98033
(206) 827-9626
--
Ed Morin - Teltone Corporation
...uw-beaver_____!tikal!edm 10801 - 120th Ave. N.E.
.......fluke___/ Kirkland, WA 98033
(206) 827-9626