Path: utzoo!attcan!uunet!cs.utexas.edu!csd4.milw.wisc.edu!bionet!lear From: lear@NET.BIO.NET (Eliot Lear) Newsgroups: comp.mail.sendmail Subject: Re: Short-circuiting a route Keywords: sendmail, smail, domain names Message-ID: Date: 29 Jun 89 23:07:11 GMT References: <1039@aber-cs.UUCP> Organization: Natl Computer Resource for Mol. Biology Lines: 39 To: pcg@cs.aber.ac.uk,ncar!woods > Domainization is only a scheme to generate reliably unique names, not > to give routing hints; these should be based on maps. And you should > never try to second guess somebody's else's maps... I'm not sure who is missing the point... If a name is unique, then one should be able to short circuit to it, and then use routing information, as declared SOMEHOW. SOMEHOW can be one of two methods: o If one is not connected to the Internet, one can use the map data. o If one is connected to the Internet, there are a number of standards (rfc974,rfc103[4,5]) to determine what Internet host to deliver a message. I think what Greg Woods is doing is borderline dangerous because there are standards which call for a specific method to determine where to deliver a message based on a domainized name [RFC974]. My belief is that it is not safe to be a forwarder for a domain unless all parties between forwarder and forwardee are agreed on the method. If you want to forward for a site by using the map data, using a different name might not be a bad method (see an article from Charles Hedrick on this and another method). Finally, if you are indeed forwarding to the appropriate fidonet gateways via map data, I would consider it desirable to derive separate zones/forwarders based on the map data, and advertise different MX forwarders based on that information. This would, coincidentally, eliminate the shortcircuiting problem. Of course, it would help if ncar was authoritative for fidonet.org... -- Eliot Lear [lear@net.bio.net]