Xref: utzoo comp.mail.uucp:2401 comp.mail.misc:1412 Path: utzoo!utgpu!watmath!clyde!att!osu-cis!tut.cis.ohio-state.edu!mailrus!ames!claris!apple!voder!pyramid!prls!mips!sultra!dtynan From: dtynan@sultra.UUCP (Der Tynan) Newsgroups: comp.mail.uucp,comp.mail.misc Subject: Re: Another example why not to re-route Summary: Just a thought... Message-ID: <2692@sultra.UUCP> Date: 30 Nov 88 04:44:35 GMT References: <140@minya.UUCP><1005@asylum.sf.ca.us> Organization: Tynan Computers, Sunnyvale, CA Lines: 22 Just a quick thought on the psychology of active-rerouting... It seems to me, that there are two kinds of rerouters; a) "That's a pretty poor way to route it, I can do better than that" b) "Hmm. I don't want to use that link unless I have to" As for the first case, this is fairly obnoxious, and should be discouraged at all costs. On the other hand, I can think of fairly valid reasons for rerouting in the second case. For example, a site connects to UUNET at 300 baud (yeuch!). It also connects to a big machine on the Internet by local call. In the maps, the site would penalize the UUNET connection. All mail to UUNET would be through the big neighbour. However, if someone wants to cost this particular site a lot of money, they could hand-route a whole pile of large mail directly to UUNET. The 'active' rerouter in this case, would simply insert an extra component in the bang-path, which redirected the mail to the Internet site. Comments? - Der -- dtynan@zorba.Tynan.COM (Dermot Tynan @ Tynan Computers) {apple,mips,pyramid,uunet}!Tynan.COM!dtynan --- If the Law is for the People, then why do we need Lawyers? ---