Path: utzoo!attcan!uunet!aocgl!tmanos From: tmanos@aocgl.UUCP (Theodore W. Manos) Newsgroups: news.admin Subject: Re: Cut off AT&T? (Was: The death of USENET) Message-ID: <32.UUL1.3#935@aocgl.UUCP> Date: 24 Jun 88 22:00:17 GMT References: <2761@ttrdc.UUCP> Organization: Alpha Omega Consulting Group, LTD, Roselle, IL Lines: 31 In article <2761@ttrdc.UUCP> levy@ttrdc.UUCP (Daniel R. Levy) writes: > The ONLY THING that AT&T is planning to stop carrying, as best as I have heard > (there has been traffic on internal AT&T groups about this too) is MAIL > BETWEEN TWO NON-AT&T SITES. NETNEWS WILL CONTINUE TO BE CARRIED. The > analogous thing for the net to do would be to decline to carry AT&T's > mail BETWEEN TWO AT&T SITES. (AT&T doesn't, and shouldn't, generate > site-to-site mail with such routings anyhow.) So think about it a while > before you get sore and start planning "revenge." If you had read my prior postings on the subject a little more carefully, you would have seen that this is *EXACTLY* what I (and several others) had proposed. I don't think that *any* of us (certainly not me) had even mentioned cutting off AT&T from news feeds...*just* e-mail pass-through. And there, I *did* mean *any* e-mail pass-through. A lot of effect it would have on AT&T to stop passing through e-mail only between two AT&T sites! :^) If AT&T won't pass our mail (unless it is of some benefit to them to do so), give me a good reason why we (meaning non-AT&T sites) should continue to pass their mail (unless it is of some benefit to us). Also, if you had read my postings without your AT&T blinders on, you would have seen that I am *not* sore at AT&T, nor am I trying to get revenge. For me personally, I doubt *very* seriously that AT&T'd dropping mail pass-through will effect me at all. I have *never* knowingly sent *any* mail through an AT&T site, or expected them to route my mail for me. Not that I have anything against sending mail via an AT&T site. If I need a smart router to do my work for me, I send it via my uunet link, which I pay for, and thus am entitled to use. All I have proposed was that AT&T should expect to get the same treatment from the UUCP networking community at large as it is giving them. If that's being vengeful, and maybe it is but I don't feel that way, then I guess I was "seeking revenge". Ted Manos tmanos@aocgl.{COM,UUCP,UU.NET} or ...!{uunet,mcdchg}!aocgl!tmanos