pinard@odyssee.UUCP (Francois Pinard) (06/21/88)
Recently, I received this comment from a nice fellow: P.S. Since <bigsite> doesn't know where odyssee.uucp is, I suggest you add some more info to your signature. and I'm interested in an honest discussion on this. I'm still amazed by the incredible frequency of those huge .signatures, with four, five, six, seven addresses in them. Do people really check seven mailboxes each morning, on X different machines? Why don't we have *one* address each. This gives me the impression that everybody is trying to solve everybodyelse's problems, instead of solving their own. Presume that someone is on BizarreNet (if you are on MyOwnNet, every other net is bizarre, isn't it? :-). Why should everybody include in his/her .signature how guys from all BizarreNets around have to proceed to mail to them? Don't BizarreNet people know how to get out to other nets, including the famous MyOwnNet? Let me reformulate this in my own terms. Since we are on UUCP, this is *my* problem, at least as Postmaster, to know how to get onto Bitnet, Internet, CHUnet and elsewhere, and to automate this as far as possible for my users. I'm not waiting, if someone from Bitnet writes to me, to receive a second address in his/her .signature prefixed by "UUCP:"; simply give me *your* address, I'll use it. Stop taking me by the hand to go to the Post Office, please, I know the way. If I'm not grown up enough to know, I'll ask mom. And that will make everybody's .signature cleaner. Consider Internet sites, in particular, that have domain addressing automated to a high degree. "odyssee" has been duly registered since years. If bigsite does not maintain the uumaps itself, the ".uucp" domain should direct its mailer to rely on a nearby center that maintains them, which will then take the routing in charge. In last resort, UUCP domain mail could be directed to uunet.uu.net. Do Postmasters really agree on this? On the paranoid side, is it possible that there are some sites do maintain uumaps, but exclude Canada or anything not being U.S., without forwarding unresolved mail to a full-fledged uumapped nearby site? (you Americans are sometimes incredible :-) (smile, don't flame!) We have, UUCP wise, a very neighbour that is also an Internet site: larry.mcrcim.mcgill.edu. It is true that it would be better, speedwise and probably moneywise, to have mail going via the Internet to this site, and go UUCP to us only from there, and to have a special "Internet:" entry in our .signatures. But this has several drawbacks, including political issues about ethics of Internet usage, practical problems about Internet dependability (sometimes :-) and the fact that our true address will be slightly obscured. Even more, I prefer to let optimizations and politics be wired into the routers (and their data) instead of spoiling every .signature, including mine. Is'nt that reasonnable? How about the current and future status of site.uucp routing optimization from inside Internet? How is Internet used for uucp to uucp routing optimization? The same questions are equally interesting for other major networks, of course... Keep happy, everybody. -- ------------------- --------- ------------------------------------------ Francois Pinard "Vivement C.P. 886, L'Epiphanie (Qc), Canada J0K 1J0 pinard@odyssee.uucp GNU!" (514)588-4656; Odyssee R.A.: (514)279-0716 ------------------- --------- ------------------------------------------
matt@oddjob.UChicago.EDU (Mr. nEtural) (06/22/88)
These days, if someone doesn't have a domain-style address (and ".uucp" does NOT count as a domain), I just don't write to them. Oh, I'll give it a try if they wrote to me first so I have a probable path in hand, but otherwise no. I put more faith in a giant hostname like exunido.irb.informatik.uni-dortmund.de than I do in a 4-hop uucp path. But hey, I do my bit to advance the domain cause. I handle the internet end of mail to and from domain chi.il.us, which is formed from uucp connections. Go ye forth and do likewise. ________________________________________________________ Matt Crawford matt@oddjob.uchicago.edu
blodtoad@pitt.UUCP (M. Anthony Kapolka 3) (06/22/88)
In article <1217@odyssee.UUCP> pinard@odyssee.UUCP (Francois Pinard) writes: > >and I'm interested in an honest discussion on this. I'm still amazed >by the incredible frequency of those huge .signatures, with four, >five, six, seven addresses in them. Do people really check seven >mailboxes each morning, on X different machines? Why don't we have >*one* address each. This gives me the impression that everybody is >trying to solve everybody else's problems, instead of solving their >own. I think most people have the X-1 machines forwarding mail to the account that they use. Any reason why we shouldn't solve other's problems? I think most people on the net can specify their address more easily then they can keep track of their sites mailer software. >proceed to mail to them? Don't BizarreNet people know how to get out >to other nets, including the famous MyOwnNet? No. I have computer-ignorant friends who have trouble getting from bitnet to uucp. I have a bitnet account. Why cause them hassle? >is *my* problem, at least as Postmaster, to know how to get onto >Bitnet, Internet, CHUnet and elsewhere, and to automate this as far as >possible for my users. I'm not waiting, if someone from Bitnet writes You are a responsible postmaster. Many are too busy with other things to worry about a small percentage of the mail that passes through. >data) instead of spoiling every .signature, including mine. Is'nt >that reasonnable? Spoiling in what sense? Asthetics? The two lines of dashes in *your* .sig certainly aren't cost efficient. No offense intended, but I'd rather see two lines of funny addresses... >------------------- --------- ------------------------------------------ >Francois Pinard "Vivement C.P. 886, L'Epiphanie (Qc), Canada J0K 1J0 >pinard@odyssee.uucp GNU!" (514)588-4656; Odyssee R.A.: (514)279-0716 >------------------- --------- ------------------------------------------ M. Anthony Kapolka III / The Electric Eclectic UNIX Box kapolka@vax.cs.pittsburgh.edu | 1200 Baud, 8-N-1, (412)-431-UNIX anthony@PITTVMS.bitnet | ..{cadre, allegra}!pitt!idis!formtek! ..{cadre, allegra}!pitt!kapolka / ditka!eklektik!anthony
jwalsh@bbn.com (Jamie Walsh) (06/23/88)
Many people work on machines that have system administrators who couldn't care less if the mailer software is only kept up enough to handle company internal mail. I have made repeated inquiries to various system administrators, and so-called wizards to find out why our mailer is the pits, and how to determine what kind of address belongs to what kind of net, but I've gotten nowhere. If anyone would care to direct me on how I could learn about mailers and addresses and paths, and what the hell a domain name is, I would appreciate it. Perhaps a document to be posted to news.announce.newusers is called for. -- jamie (jwalsh@cc6.bbn.com) "There's a seeker born every minute."
root@libove.UUCP (The Super User) (06/23/88)
From article <1217@odyssee.UUCP>, by pinard@odyssee.UUCP (Francois Pinard): > > Recently, I received this comment from a nice fellow: > > P.S. Since <bigsite> doesn't know where odyssee.uucp is, I suggest > you add some more info to your signature. > [ much discussion on why we shouldn't have multiple signatures deleted ] Try to keep in mind that many people (I vote for most) who use all of the networks (BITnet,the DARPA Internet, UUCP, etc...) do *not* know much about networking and gatewaying, and many sites have the networks available at sufference, thus question about getting to another net may not get answered, in the terms of the original poster, mom may not be available to ask. I favor small signatures, mine is in fact larger than I like, but it makes it possible for jsut about anyone, knowing almost nothing about networks, to mail to me; it includes my snail mail address as a last resort. Since the networks are not yet standardized, it seems that the extra line or two in most signatures, expensive though they do indeed add up to be, is worthwhile to make the net a friendlier place for the novice user (please no flames about letting novices learn the hard way like we did, analagously that is how "my father was an alcoholic and beat me, so I'm going to beat my son..." work). -- Jay Libove Internet: libove@cs.cmu.edu libove@andrew.cmu.edu 5313 Ellsworth Avenue formtek!ditka!libove!libove@pt.cs.cmu.edu Pittsburgh, PA 15232 UUCP: cmucspt!formtek!ditka!libove!libove (412) 621-9649 cadre!pitt!darth!libove!libove