Relay-Version: version B 2.10 5/3/83; site utzoo.UUCP
Posting-Version: Notesfiles $Revision: 1.7.0.8 $; site ndm20
Path: utzoo!watmath!clyde!burl!ulysses!mhuxr!mhuxn!ihnp4!inuxc!pur-ee!uiucdcs!convex!ndm20!tp
From: tp@ndm20
Newsgroups: net.mail
Subject: Re: Mail Addressing [2 of 4] Semantics
Message-ID: <3700003@ndm20>
Date: Thu, 22-Aug-85 10:32:00 EDT
Article-I.D.: ndm20.3700003
Posted: Thu Aug 22 10:32:00 1985
Date-Received: Sun, 25-Aug-85 05:43:42 EDT
References: <9607@ucbvax.ARPA>
Lines: 41
Nf-ID: #R:ucbvax.ARPA:-960700:ndm20:3700003:000:1917
Nf-From: ndm20!tp    Aug 22 09:32:00 1985


>is to take the position that site X must *not* just forward the mail to
>the domain administrator.  It must ask the domain administrator for the
>routing information, and then use that information *itself*.  This has
.
.
.
>to limit the load on the administering sites.

As somewhat of an add on to Henry's idea, how about this.   If a site
can not route a message, it asks the domain  administrator the proper
route.  This route, through an *automatic* mechanism, is updated into
the requestor's database,  so he  will never  have to  ask about that
route again.  This provides an automatic way for routing databases to
be updated.  As I understand the idea of domains,  these routes would
not  automatically  disseminate,  as  the  idea is  to minimalize any
node's knowledge of the full configuration of  the net.   This scheme
allows a node to only keep track of the  sites he  actually mails to.
If the route ever fails, then the node can ask the domain
administrator and get an updated route.  

The problem with this whole line of reasoning is that it requires new
software that is completely different from what is  already in place.
The  mailer  would  have to  know to  ask for  a route,  and hold the
message until it got one.  It should also recieve undeliverable mail,
contact the domain administrator for a new route, and re-send it.  It
could be a long time before someone found out his mail was
undeliverable.  

Unless  the  routes given  out by  the domain  administrator are kept
around, the administrator  will be  plagued by  route requests, which
probably accounts for just as much load (if not  more) as  if it just
forwarded the message.  The catch is that if the are kept around, you
never know when they become invalid.

Terry Poot
Nathan D. Maier Consulting Engineers
(214)739-4741
Usenet: ...!{allegra|ihnp4}!convex!smu!ndm20!tp
CSNET:  ndm20!tp@smu
ARPA:   ndm20!tp%smu@csnet-relay.ARPA