Relay-Version: version B 2.10 5/3/83; site utzoo.UUCP
Path: utzoo!mnetor!seismo!rutgers!ames!ucbcad!ucbvax!decvax!tektronix!uw-beaver!ubc-vision!van-bc!sl
From: sl@van-bc.UUCP (Stuart Lynne)
Newsgroups: comp.mail.uucp
Subject: Re: What domain do private machines belong in?
Message-ID: <278@van-bc.UUCP>
Date: Sat, 10-Jan-87 04:11:29 EST
Article-I.D.: van-bc.278
Posted: Sat Jan 10 04:11:29 1987
Date-Received: Sun, 11-Jan-87 07:43:16 EST
References: <2847@ista.UUCP> <405@dhw68k.UUCP> <979@sigma.UUCP> <485@obelix.UUCP>
Reply-To: sl@van-bc.UUCP (Stuart Lynne)
Organization: Public Access Network, Vancouver, BC.
Lines: 49

>
>I would rather like to call it .PRIV or .PRIVATE.
>This is because there are many good programmers in the homes and
>.HOME sounds so domestic and unproffessional (to me anyway).
>
>And I agre with William Swan that this "domain" will not be static
>and I have thoughts on connecting my machine to the net too.
>

That's the best name I've seen so far (.priv).  It gets my vote. 

I've already got my machine on the net. I provide a public access
point to the net for the Vancouver area. In the very near future
I hope to provide fairly easy access to pc's (personal computers as
in Atari, Amiga, Mac not just IBM) with automated mail access similiar
to in style to uucp. 

The effect of this trend will be to mulitply the number of users coming
into the net. 

Question #1: Should these small single user machines be given individual
node names, or should then simply exist as a name on the larger
machine that provides access to the net?

	eg.  	van-bc!joesmith 	or 	van-bc!mypc!joesmith
		joesmith@van-bc.priv 	or 	joesmith@mypc.priv

Giving them all node names implies providing map entries, domain server
knowledge, and incur's more overhead on the machine's providing them access
and tracking them (name servers).

Allowing them node names would appear to allow them more freedom to move 
around.

This is an important question. The potential number of new "sites" is
enormous. Are the name servers, and service providers willing to address
the order of magnitude increase in the number of sites they must keep
track of to allow the freedom of individual single user sites to more around.

Question #2: Assuming we allow single user sites to have node names and to move
around freely, with the name servers tracking them and directing mail 
appropriately; why are we not allowing individual users the same freedom?


-- 
Stuart Lynne	ihnp4!alberta!ubc-vi!van-bc!sl 	      Vancouver,BC,604-937-7532
Todays feature: Golden Ashes, Freeman Wills Croft, 1940
Inspector French artistically solves the mystery of the missing art critic,
cleaned paintings and melted lead in the burnt out mansion.