Xref: utzoo news.admin:2462 comp.mail.uucp:1342 Path: utzoo!dciem!nrcaer!scs!spl1!laidbak!att!pacbell!ames!pasteur!ucbvax!bloom-beacon!husc6!ukma!david From: david@ms.uky.edu (David Herron -- One of the vertebrae) Newsgroups: news.admin,comp.mail.uucp Subject: Re: Internet Paths in UUCP Maps -- Can We Stop? Message-ID: <9512@e.ms.uky.edu> Date: 2 Jun 88 01:05:28 GMT Article-I.D.: e.9512 References: <25550@pyramid.pyramid.com> Reply-To: david@ms.uky.edu (David Herron -- One of the vertebrae) Organization: U of Kentucky, Mathematical Sciences Lines: 66 Carl, I have read through this 4 or 5 times and still cannot figure out exactly what you are complaining about. What do you mean by "Internet connections"? In article <25550@pyramid.pyramid.com> csg@pyramid.pyramid.com (Carl S. Gutekunst) writes: >... The problem is that it is getting increasingly difficult for >me to generate meaningful pathalias output. I can twiddle the numbers to make >the paths come out right, but this is becoming tedious. eh? why do you need to twiddle anything? Maybe if you give an example of what sorts of things you're having troubles with? >In this day of domains >and smail, there is simply no good reason for any site to list their Internet >connections on the UUCP Maps; domains handle the routing. Isn't this the whole >reason domains were created, to simplify the maps? Well. That's not the real reason that domains were created, but it *was* the reason we push domains for the uucp world so I'll let it stand as is. >The worst "offenders" for us are Rutgers and Ames; I have discussed this with >their respective administrations and they felt they wanted the map entries >kept as is. But why? Well, I was curious and took a quick look in the map to see what was going on. Do you perhaps mean the section of stuff listed as "TCP/IP" connections? What's your problems with that? If all those connections are anything like the one they have with us it's done with real UUCP over TCP connections across the internet. Regardless of how it's done I'm sure it'd be invisible to you so what's the problem? >I mean, there is this nice bunch of lines in D.top: > > rutgers .uucp > rutgers .arpa, .com, .gov, .mil, .edu, .org, .net, .us > rutgers .de, .no, .nz > rutgers .bitnet > >That tells me everything I need to know about rutgers connections. Given this, >why does any site need to show explicit names in their list of links? how? If you take away all of the explicit names then how are we supposed to generate routes within the net? If I understand what you're suggesting correctly the only thing in the site entry would be the comment section. Now, I do have a problem with rutgers' entries in general. In u.usa.nj.1 they have a number of entries for tiny machines (3b2's). They don't need to do this -- they can easily cause the mail systems on those machines to generate domain type addresses EVEN if the machines are uucp only. smail is wonderful software and does good things. You don't even have to have much of a database on the local machine -- my home machine has ONE entry, the one giving the route to "ukma" the local smart-host. >Comments? Mel? > >-- <---- David Herron -- The E-Mail guy <---- s.k.a.: David le casse\*' {rutgers,uunet}!ukma!david, david@UKMA.BITNET <---- <---- Goodbye RAH.