Path: utzoo!utgpu!jarvis.csri.toronto.edu!mailrus!tut.cis.ohio-state.edu!cheops.cis.ohio-state.edu!karl From: karl@cheops.cis.ohio-state.edu (Karl Kleinpaste) Newsgroups: comp.protocols.tcp-ip Subject: Re: New Host-Requirement RFCs Message-ID: Date: 24 Oct 89 16:41:05 GMT References: <8910201839.AA29376@arcturus.mitre.org> <1989Oct23.173855.1370@utzoo.uucp> Sender: news@tut.cis.ohio-state.edu Organization: OSU Lines: 21 In-reply-to: henry@utzoo.uucp's message of 23 Oct 89 17:38:55 GMT I have to disagree, Henry. If the problem is reaching unregistered sites, the solution is to register them - somewhere - I'm not sure I care where. NIC-registered domains are fine, comp.mail.maps UUCP registration is nearly as fine in a practical sense; other registries exist, but those are the two I deal with most. This is not a "join our network" coercion technique, either. CompuServe has not "joined" the Internet by any stretch of the imagination. But they are registered (in both registries; I registered compuserve.com before I even told CServe what I was building), and mail gets there as seamlessly as it gets anywhere else. I considered the RFCs not to be inconvenient, but to provide the standard against which to implement. Since the first time that email has been able to get between CServe and The Greater Out Here, no % hack (or other ill-advised routing nonsense) has ever been necessary. Getting registered is easy. Building a gateway is easy. They're both too easy to go to the effort of avoiding the issue with things like % hacks. --Karl