Path: utzoo!utgpu!jarvis.csri.toronto.edu!rutgers!tut.cis.ohio-state.edu!ucbvax!agate!shelby!csli!gandalf
From: gandalf@csli.Stanford.EDU (Juergen Wagner)
Newsgroups: comp.mail.sendmail
Subject: Re: pseudo-domains (from an Internet viewpoint)..results
Message-ID: <10241@csli.Stanford.EDU>
Date: 1 Sep 89 04:50:23 GMT
References: <4685@uhccux.uhcc.hawaii.edu> <4710@uhccux.uhcc.hawaii.edu>
Sender: gandalf@csli.Stanford.EDU (Juergen Wagner)
Reply-To: gandalf@csli.stanford.edu (Juergen Wagner)
Organization: Center for the Study of Language and Information, Stanford U.
Lines: 27

In article <4710@uhccux.uhcc.hawaii.edu> bob@kahala.hig.hawaii.edu (Bob Cunningham) writes:
>Thanks to many people, I can now say that the only pseudo-domains really
>worth carrying are for .UUCP and .BITNET (and most domestic BITNET sites
>already have equivalent domain-style addresses).

In fact, these two should be the only two left. Oh, I should also mention
that many Bitnet sites have already Internet domain names.

>CSNET sites ditto (site.cs.net).

Not all sites have names of that form. In fact, only a few have that form.
All sites on CSnet have Internet domain names with MX forwarding on an
appropriate CSnet-Internet gateway. There are lots of hosts in the .jp domain
(Japan), or in .de (West Germany), just to name two. In general, I think, it
is unnecessary to know that a particular site is on CSnet, unless you want to
try ftp or telnet.

>XEROX sites have .xerox.com domain addresses.

That's almost true. They have .xerox.com NAMES. You cannot reach any
arbitrary Xerox host from the Internet. The official mail gateways are
xerox.com, arisia.xerox.com, xait.xerox.com, and maybe a Fuji Xerox host
I don't know of. The mail system is set up in a way such that outside
people do not have to know about Xerox-internal machines.

Juergen Wagner		   			gandalf@csli.stanford.edu
						 wagner@arisia.xerox.com