Jim.Thompson@Central.Sun.COM (Jim Thompson) (09/13/90)
This type of information (UUCP paths) doesn't belong in the DNS. It may, however, be time to resurect and update RFC 915. 915 Elvy, M.A.; Nedved, R. Network mail path service. 1984 December; 11 p. (Format: TXT=22262 bytes) Then one (or more) well-connected sites could provide this service. both mailers, and user programs could connect to port 117 (uucp-path) to receive Internet-centric paths to UUCP sites. An example (straight from the RFC): S: (server listens on port 117) U: (user connects to port 117) S: 210-Welcome to the CMU network mail path service. S: 210 Type 'HELP' for help. U: help S: 200-The server currently knows about the following mail worlds: S: 200- BITNET,UUCP,CSNET,.AC.UK,EARNET,JANET,CDNNET S: 200-Use the PATH command with "user@host.world" to get the S: 200 ARPA-Internet mail address. U: path root@inria.uucp S: 220 philabs!mcvax!inria!root@SEISMO.ARPA U: quit S: 211 Bye bye. S: (server closes connection) (Yes, the example is out of date, but the idea isn't.) Jim
kwe@buit13.bu.edu (Kent England) (09/14/90)
In article <900912.234417z.16326.wales@valeria.cs.ucla.edu> wales@CS.UCLA.EDU (Rich Wales) writes: >... >The proposal for a ".UUCP" top-level domain has been raised many times, >but the "powers that be" in charge of the domain naming system are not >willing to accept it. The main reason why not is that the domain hier- >archy isn't supposed to be based on network topologies, but rather on >organizational and/or geographical considerations. Proposals for a top- >level domain ".BITNET" have been rejected for similar reasons. So why hasn't someone tried to get domains like uucp.usenix.org and bitnet.educom.edu? There must be some level of the hierarchy where the "powers that be" are sympathetic. (Don't suggest uucp.bu.edu. :-) --Kent