Path: utzoo!attcan!utgpu!jarvis.csri.toronto.edu!mailrus!wuarchive!wupost!dranet!sean
From: sean@dranet.dra.com (Sean Donelan)
Newsgroups: comp.protocols.tcp-ip
Subject: MXing the world (was RE: New Host-Requirement RFCs)
Message-ID: <299@dranet.dra.com>
Date: 30 Oct 89 15:17:00 GMT
References: <8910201839.AA29376@arcturus.mitre.org> <1136@odin.SGI.COM> <1156@odin.SGI.COM> <71081@uunet.UU.NET>
Organization: Data Research Associates, St. Louis MO
Lines: 42

In article <71081@uunet.UU.NET>, rick@uunet.UU.NET (Rick Adams) writes:
> 
> I dont know how much more simple you can make it than "leave #4 alone"

Simple don't put #4 on the form.

I think there are several problems with trying to MX-the-world to eliminate
the %-hack and other forms of explicit routing.

1. It is impractical, if not impossible.  One of the readers of this list
has most likely written the definitive routing paper to date (or at least
included it the bibliography of the paper they did write), why routers can't
have universal knowledge of the network.  Trying to minimize when one has
to resort to explicit routing is fine, prohibiting explicit routing is
something else.  Security and other policies will most likely require the
limitation of explicit routing at the cost of lower connectivity.  But that
is the purpose of those security and other policies (to lower connectivity).

2. Politically, and adminstratively the Internet is difficult to deal with
by non-Internet (though possibly gatewayed) networks.  And "acceptable use"
policies make it necessary to route through an "acceptable" route.  The choice
of these two (or more) routes must be determined by the sender based on the
"intent" of the communication.

Currently my company has a half-dozen network addresses, assigned by various
network bodies.  Most are chartered to provide essentially "universal" service,
but the Internet is not.  If, as I believe, the Internet DNS exists to make
life easier for Internet users then registration of non-Internet networks is
merely a matter of convience for the Internet community.  If registration
is a prerequisite for communication between Internet and non-Internet networks
then it becomes a enforcement mechanism. 

3. The "what do you care?" point.  The %-hack is in the local part anyway.
It should only be the concern of the sender and the gateway.  If you're not
a gateway don't worry, if you are a gateway its your job to worry.

-- 
Sean Donelan, Data Research Associates, 1276 N. Warson, St. Louis, MO 63132
Domain: sean@dranet.dra.com, sean%dranet@wupost.wustl.edu
UUCP: ...!wugate!wupost!dranet!sean, Voice: (Work) +1 314-432-1100

   "I don't speak for anyone else, and they don't speak for me."