ROODE@BIONET-20.ARPA (David Roode) (06/19/87)
When we get mail from JANET sites that is relayed via BITNET, using your host UKACRL.BITNET, reaching us on the Internet, we get a routing through a pseudo host known as AC.UK . This is not a valid Internet host. People have difficulty replying, and we have to tell them how to compose a routing style of message. However, when the JANET mail flows through CS.UCL.AC.UK, we have no problem. Questions: What determines which type of routing a JANET host uses to reach U.S. Internet hosts? Which type of routing is the best use of resources? Is AC.UK a valid BITNET hostname? If so, we would recognize it as such and route appropriately if it displayed as AC.UK.BITNET or AC.UK.EARN . This would not solve the problem for other Internet hosts getting relayed messages from WISCVM.WISC.EDU though. The best thing would be if AC.UK were a valid Internet host name. Many Internet domains register the domain itself as the name of a host. It seems like CS.UCL.AC.UK could be pointed to by AC.UK, registered as a nickname. This would be accomplished by a CNAME record in the domain system and a listing in the NIC host table. know t'r
sjl@eagle.ukc.ac.uk (S.J.Leviseur) (06/22/87)
Summary: Expires: Sender: Followup-To: In article <12311604935.33.ROODE@BIONET-20.ARPA> ROODE@BIONET-20.ARPA (David Roode) writes: >When we get mail from JANET sites that is relayed via BITNET, using >your host UKACRL.BITNET, reaching us on the Internet, we get a routing >through a pseudo host known as AC.UK . This is not a valid Internet >host. People have difficulty replying, and we have to tell them how >to compose a routing style of message. However, when the JANET mail >flows through CS.UCL.AC.UK, we have no problem. > >Questions: > >What determines which type of routing a JANET host uses to reach U.S. >Internet hosts? Which type of routing is the best use of resources? There are three main routes to the U.S. Internet; via CS.UCL.AC.UK directly onto the Internet, via UKC.AC.UK/UKC.UUCP onto UUCP and then onto the Internet, and via UKACRL.BITNET/AC.UK/EARN.RL.AC.UK onto BITNET/EARN and then onto the Internet. The UKACRL (which we see as EARN.RL.AC.UK) route is the only one which is unrestricted and free for academic sites (thank you IBM). The U.K. site needs to be registered to use either of the other routes. To register they must have a valid reason to use the route in the case of UCL, or be prepared to pay to use the route to cover the transport costs in the case of UKC. > >Is AC.UK a valid BITNET hostname? If so, we would recognize it as >such and route appropriately if it displayed as AC.UK.BITNET or >AC.UK.EARN . This would not solve the problem for other >Internet hosts getting relayed messages from WISCVM.WISC.EDU >though. > >The best thing would be if AC.UK were a valid Internet host name. >Many Internet domains register the domain itself as the name >of a host. It seems like CS.UCL.AC.UK could be pointed to by >AC.UK, registered as a nickname. This would be accomplished >by a CNAME record in the domain system and a listing in the NIC >host table. I don't think UCL would be keen on this, UKACRL is not UCL it is an IBM machine at Rutherford Labs at Didcot, EARN.RL.AC.UK. If it was pointed at UCL they would have to find the money to pay for all the BITNET traffic. It doesn't seem to be generally appreciated just how expensive it is to receive mail from the U.S.! >------- sean postmaster@ukc.ac.uk postmaster@ukc.uucp