Path: utzoo!utgpu!watmath!att!pacbell!ames!indri!xanth!ukma!cwjcc!hal!ncoast!nc386!allbery
From: allbery@nc386.UUCP (Brandon S. Allbery)
Newsgroups: news.admin
Subject: Re: UUCP map for u.fra.0 (from comp.mail.maps)
Message-ID: <1989Aug8.231612.14333@nc386.uucp>
Date: 8 Aug 89 23:16:12 GMT
References: <7106@ki4pv.uucp> <1989Jul17.085440.9421@coms.axis.fr> <1989Aug2.014557.4056@nc386.uucp> <5517@ficc.uu.net>
Sender: allbery@nc386.uucp (Brandon S. Allbery)
Reply-To: allbery@nc386.UUCP (Brandon S. Allbery)
Organization: North Coast Computer Resources, Cleveland, OH
Lines: 39
In-reply-to: karl@ficc.uu.net (karl lehenbauer)

Sometimes I wonder if people deliberately misconstrue net postings just to
start an argument....

In article <5517@ficc.uu.net>, karl@ficc (karl lehenbauer) writes:
+---------------
| In article <1989Aug2.014557.4056@nc386.uucp>, allbery@nc386.UUCP (Brandon S. Allbery) writes:
| > Sigh.  You folks have a rationally organized network, for largely the same
| > reasons that led to the current EUnet/unido "discussion" in other newsgroups.
| > And the U.S. has a haphazard "connect to whoever'll take you" network
| > "structure" which leads to U.S. attacks on EUnet.
| 
| By implication, "our" network is irrationally organized.  While it is true that
| EUnet has a nice hierarchical network, connectivity is correspondingly lower,
| leaving EUnet heavily broken if certain top-level machines were to go down,
| for example, mcvax.
+---------------

I did not say that the U.S. organization was bad, simply that it was not
optimally organized by European standards.  As you pointed out (and as I
pointed out in the part of my posting that you failed to include), the U.S.
method has other advantages.  In any case, my point is that the U.S. cannot
simply hop onto the European bandwagon and expect things to suddenly start
working better; it's far more likely that things would break massively.

Capsule summary:

Europe has a network structure (EUnet) which works for Europe.  The U.S. has a
network structure that works for the U.S.  At the gateway level, the two are
compatible.  So why is each side trying to force the other into its own mold?
It's unnecessary and potentially disastrous.

Now can we get off this silly thread?

++Brandon
-- 
Brandon S. Allbery, moderator of comp.sources.misc	     allbery@NCoast.ORG
uunet!hal.cwru.edu!ncoast!allbery		    ncoast!allbery@hal.cwru.edu
"Why do trans-atlantic transfers take so long?"
"Electrons don't swim very fast."  -john@minster.york.ac.uk and whh@PacBell.COM