Path: utzoo!attcan!utgpu!jarvis.csri.toronto.edu!rutgers!gatech!ncar!ames!haven!adm!cmcl2!rna!amms4!news From: news@amms4.UUCP (news administration) Newsgroups: comp.mail.misc Subject: Re: Re^2: sigh (was Re: Short-circuiting a route) Message-ID: <558@amms4.UUCP> Date: 14 Jul 89 16:57:38 GMT References: <1062@aber-cs.UUCP> <59767@uunet.UU.NET> <3648@ncar.ucar.edu> <3842@phri.UUCP> <330@capmkt.COM> <14467@bfmny0.UUCP> <626@tiamat.fsc.com> Reply-To: news@amms4.UUCP (news administration) Organization: Eagle Clothes, Inc., New York, NY Lines: 28 In article <626@tiamat.fsc.com> jim@tiamat.fsc.com (Jim O'Connor) writes: >Just out of curiousity, why would you even bother with a one-way uucp link >used for mail purposes? (I understand, and use, one-way anon uucp links for >file pick ups.) Well, as it happens, I have one-way uucp links into amms4. We have no outgoing phone line from amms4, but that is where news lives, and where most mail is originated from. The out-bound link is thru amms2, which is connected to amms4 via 2 dedicated links (uucp, one each way - I know, ethernet is better, but it isn't an option here). As a result of this, I occasionally send mail along the following path, just to clear out the spooling directory: amms4!amms2!some_other_system!amms4!hjg God help me if my mailer were to be smart enough to short-circuit that path. (As to why this is even necessary: at least one of the sites that provides the dual-link [amms2 & amms4] is unwilling to poll amms4 regularly, so if something hangs around for more than a day, I have to prod it - ugh - I'm seriously thinking of dropping said link(s) as being too much trouble - but that's a different story :-). -- Harry Gross | reserved for | something really Internet: hjg@amms4.UUCP (we're working on registering)| clever - any UUCP: {jyacc, rna, bklyncis}!amms4!hjg | suggestions?