Path: utzoo!utgpu!water!watmath!clyde!bellcore!rutgers!mailrus!uwmcsd1!ig!bionet!lear
From: lear@NET.BIO.NET (Eliot Lear)
Newsgroups: comp.mail.uucp
Subject: Re: re/routing (was: why you should say "-d ru)
Message-ID: 
Date: 10 Aug 88 08:00:44 GMT
References: <676@bacchus.DEC.COM> <881@vsi1.UUCP>  <3674@palo-alto.DEC.COM>  <891@vsi1.UUCP>  <901@vsi1.UUCP>
Organization: Natl Computer Resource for Mol. Biologists
Lines: 54

For those who don't know, Mel Pleasant just left for a well deserved
vacation in Europe.  While I can, in no way, speak for Mel; I want to
respond to Larry Blair's message.

In article <901@vsi1.UUCP> lmb@vsi1.UUCP (Larry Blair) writes:
> If I understand what you are saying here, you are saying that all sites
> must either: a) hide their local systems; b) register the names of their
> local systems (with _unique_ names); or c) use domain-type names.

Under all circumstances, you have the ability to to (b).  Rutgers
encourages all of the above but (b) is the minimum goal.  As Mel
stated quite clearly, these maps should not be for humans to read.
They should be for machines to interpret so that people don't need to
remember routes.  The thought of losing mail because one is not
registered is a great incentive for (a), (b), or (c).

Larry then goes on to say how rutgers makes the assumption that a host
baz in rutgers!foo!baz... is, in fact, baz.uucp, a host listed in the
UUCP maps.  This has the side effect that some other baz will wonder
where its mail is going, and would, thus, be encouraged to (a), (b),
or (c), which is what we want.

Larry also goes on to dictate what we are entitled to do with headers.
In fact, we are entitled to do whatever we want with addresses in
headers.  [There is one notable exception that nobody has mentioned,
listed in RFC-822, which rutgers does not violate.  Look it up.]

Next, Larry asks the $64,000 question: why do we reroute?

Q: What represents a better route?
	(1) One that is the shortest path.
	(2) One that takes the least time.
	(3) One that is determined by the combined wishes system
	    administrators between me and my destination.

A: Left as an exercise to the reader.

We reroute for a number of reasons, the first of which is to encourage
(a), (b), or (c) [though not necessarily the primary reason].
Furthermore, more often than not, we know a better route than a user
will hand us.

Let me reiterate my position, as stated to Brian Reid some weeks ago.
While there are routes that break, it is important not to throw the
baby out with the bath water, as far as these things go.  If a route
needs fixin, fix it.  If a host needs addin, add it.  And yes, yell at
those who are not registered.

Finally, I want to second Paul Vixie's ``Thank you''.  A very small
group of people rather thanklessly put together the software that we
use.  ``Thank you'' seems all too small of a gesture.
-- 
Eliot Lear
[lear@net.bio.net]