molnar@gpu.utcs.utoronto.ca (Tom Molnar) (05/16/89)
In article <1989May14.191801.18773@tmsoft.uucp> mason@tmsoft.UUCP (Dave Mason) writes:
# >2) I thought UofT also talks to uunet. If the waterloo connection is so
# > good, why bother?
# My understanding is that UofT does not want to be the local mail hub
# any more than they already are.
Correct. I'm sure you can appreciate why. On average, utgpu handles
~3000 message a day. One evening I decided to poke through the logs to
see what the traffic pattern was. I was surprised to see that for that
particular day, only 20% of the traffic was either to or from a UofT mailbox,
the rest was gatewayed mail. Naturally that covered only a single 24 hour
period, but the discovery was interesting nonetheless.
Tom Molnar
--
Tom Molnar
Unix Systems Group, University of Toronto Computing Services.chk@dciem.dciem.dnd.ca (C. Harald Koch) (05/16/89)
In article <1989May15.234059.29449@gpu.utcs.utoronto.ca> molnar@gpu.utcs.UUCP (Tom Molnar) writes: >I was surprised to see that for that >particular day, only 20% of the traffic was either to or from a UofT mailbox, >the rest was gatewayed mail. It would be illuminating to see how much of that traffic was entirely local and how much involved the Internet or long distance. I know that I often route mail from here through UofT to other local sites (utgpu!geac, utcsri!alias) because it ends up being faster. Maybe you do your job too well? :-) -- C. Harald Koch NTT Systems, Inc., Toronto, ON Canada chk@dretor.dciem.dnd.ca, chk@gpu.utcs.toronto.edu, chk@chkent.UUCP
henry@utzoo.uucp (Henry Spencer) (05/16/89)
In article <1989May15.234059.29449@gpu.utcs.utoronto.ca> molnar@gpu.utcs.UUCP (Tom Molnar) writes: ># My understanding is that UofT does not want to be the local mail hub ># any more than they already are. > >Correct. I'm sure you can appreciate why... Incidentally, if anyone has ever wondered why utzoo adamantly refuses to automatically reroute mail, it's the same reason: we don't want to encourage people to use us as a router. -- Subversion, n: a superset | Henry Spencer at U of Toronto Zoology of a subset. --J.J. Horning | uunet!attcan!utzoo!henry henry@zoo.toronto.edu
clewis@eci386.uucp (Chris Lewis) (05/17/89)
In article <1989May15.234059.29449@gpu.utcs.utoronto.ca> molnar@gpu.utcs.UUCP (Tom Molnar) writes: >In article <1989May14.191801.18773@tmsoft.uucp> mason@tmsoft.UUCP (Dave Mason) writes: > ># >2) I thought UofT also talks to uunet. If the waterloo connection is so ># > good, why bother? ># My understanding is that UofT does not want to be the local mail hub ># any more than they already are. > >Correct. I'm sure you can appreciate why. On average, utgpu handles >~3000 message a day. One evening I decided to poke through the logs to >see what the traffic pattern was. I was surprised to see that for that >particular day, only 20% of the traffic was either to or from a UofT mailbox, >the rest was gatewayed mail. Naturally that covered only a single 24 hour >period, but the discovery was interesting nonetheless. Out of curiousity, I went through the u.can.on.? files looking for uunet connectivity: jtsv16 uunet(HOURLY/2) dptcdc uunet(HOURLY/2) bdofed uunet(DEMAND) attcan uunet(EVENING) mitel uunet(DEMAND) mnetor uunet(DEMAND+HIGH) pantor uunet(DEMAND) paqs1 uunet(DEMAND) simware uunet(DEMAND) watmath uunet(DEDICATED) utai uunet(HOURLY/2) Assigning numeric costs to some of the symbols, we get: DEDICATED 200 DEMAND 300 HOURLY 500 EVENING 1800 This has always confused me, since I thought attcan had graciously expressed willingness to forward mail to and from uunet, and attcan has the worst cost in the list! We've always had watmath declared dead, so we didn't get caught by their change to DEDICATED. Considering how well U of T is connected locally, is it any wonder that U of T ends up forwarding everything? Without extra hacking around with a local path file, almost every entry in our path file has "utai!uunet" in it. Incidentally, most of the DEMAND entries were inserted by uunet personnel. Anyways, I'm going to reinsert attcan uunet(0) into my path.local file and have done with it. -- --------------------------------- Chris Lewis, R.H. Lathwell & Associates: Elegant Communications Inc. UUCP: {uunet!mnetor, utcsri!utzoo}!lsuc!gate!eci386!clewis Phone: (416)-595-5425
rjwhite@watmath.waterloo.edu (RJ White) (05/18/89)
In article <1989May16.175732.4280@eci386.uucp> clewis@eci386.UUCP (Chris Lewis) writes:
....We've always had watmath declared
dead, so we didn't get caught by their change to DEDICATED.
FYI: the watmath entry had the uunet connection marked as EVENING+LOW (2005)
( by me ) a couple of months ago and at that time I noticed that pathalias
was generating weights of DEDICATED (100) no matter what I did. I put a
comment line in our map entry saying so. I guess pathalias was working
ok everywhere else. ( yes, I can reproduce it ). I've been too busy to look
into it. It was also producing alot of 'uunet!utgpu!...' when it thought
we had the same weight to uunet and utgpu.
I just since found out that our map entry had been changed, declaring uunet
as DEDICATED. And thats when everybody started noticing it. sorry.
I've just changed our map entry to what Rayan suggested, pathalias seems
to be generating correct weights now, and I'll send in the new map entry.
-rj