Path: utzoo!attcan!uunet!lll-winken!lll-lcc!ames!killer!ssbn!carpet!bill From: bill@carpet.WLK.COM (Bill Kennedy) Newsgroups: comp.mail.uucp Subject: Re: Routing mail through Digital's sites (was Re: Cut off AT&T?) Message-ID: <122@carpet.WLK.COM> Date: 16 Jul 88 06:40:33 GMT References: <651@scovert.sco.COM> <30.UUL1.3#935@aocgl.UUCP> <2761@ttrdc.UUCP> <271@mjbtn.UUCP> <84@holin.ATT.COM> <119@carpet.WLK.COM> <599@bacchus.DEC.COM> <121@carpet.WLK.COM> <606@bacchus.DEC.COM> Reply-To: bill@ssbn.WLK.COM (Bill Kennedy) Followup-To: comp.mail.uucp Distribution: na Organization: W.L. Kennedy Jr. and Associates Lines: 64 In article <606@bacchus.DEC.COM> reid@decwrl.UUCP (Brian Reid) writes: >In article <121@carpet.WLK.COM> bill@ssbn.WLK.COM (Bill Kennedy) writes: >> [ my stuff deleted ] Before I get into following up what Brian says, I must report that I got an email note from the Colorado Springs Digital office I was groaning about. The problem is *not* at decwrl, the problem is withing the way that the network addressing works out (as Brian points out below). I was also told (and on a re-read of my posting, I agree) that I suggested that decwrl doesn't do a thorough job of routing. This needs emphasis, I did *NOT* mean to suggest or imply that. Nor did I mean to suggest or imply that Digital is not 100% behind usenet. The fact that the decwrl machine is a dedicated vax, no other duties other than mail and news is certainly sufficient evidence of Digital's comittment to usenet and I salute them for it. When I used the term "humbly" it was exactly what I meant, no sarcasm. If anyone else got that notion, you wren't reading what I wrote, I meant humbly, 'nuff said. [ Brian points out that decwrl will field and forward not only uucp traffic, but also Internet traffic. He's right, I've seen it, it's awesome. ] >As a participant in Digital's own internal network, decwrl will relay mail >addressed to a computer inside digital, e.g. tsc.dec.com. If we receive a >message addressed to decwrl!tsc.dec.com!pete, we will relay it to TSC::PETE, >which is the internal address for that person on that machine. This is where I tripped. The combinations and permutations of addresses that I had tried had all resolved to an internal address that was not acceptable within Digital's network. Further, the other two sites that tried the same address tried the same combinations. I ASSumed that since three sites all tried the same technique that decwrl was broken, the technique was broken. Had we used something acceptable to the Digital network it probably would have gone through just fine (I'm going to try it :-) [ explanation of "address it wrong" "I send it back" deleted ] >and you cannot use the form "pete@tsc.dec.com". You must instead use the form >"pete%tsc.enet@decwrl.dec.com". If your mailer is not an Internet mailer, but This was spelled out for me, just this way, and I'll bet it will work. Also, I didn't point out that the site that I was complaining about, a non-Digital site that appeared in decwrl's map, no longer appears in their map so I can't grouse about that bouncing either. >resolved by pathalias in ways that we cannot control. I absolutely guarantee >you that if you can cause your mailer to get a piece of mail shipped to >decwrl, with an address of person@node.dec.com, person@node.dec, or >person@node.enet, that we will relay it to that destination for you. I believe it (but I'll have to stick my finger in the wound :-), I will try it and I have as much confidence as Brian does that it will work. >Since I know nothing about your mailer, I recommend that you use the >maximally conservative address decwrl!tsc.dec.com!pete Alas! I can assure you that ^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^ will absolutely not work, that's one of the ones I tried, as did others. No matter, now that we all know about "site.enet@decwrl.dec.com", it's a big win. I hope that my site and the other two weren't the only ones on usenet with the problem. I spent a lot of bandwidth if so. -- Bill Kennedy Internet: bill@ssbn.WLK.COM Usenet: { killer | att | rutgers | uunet!bigtex }!ssbn!bill