Path: utzoo!utgpu!jarvis.csri.toronto.edu!mailrus!shadooby!samsung!gem.mps.ohio-state.edu!tut.cis.ohio-state.edu!ucbvax!A.ISI.EDU!CERF
From: CERF@A.ISI.EDU
Newsgroups: comp.protocols.tcp-ip
Subject: Re: MXing the world (was RE: New Host-Requirement RFCs)
Message-ID: <[A.ISI.EDU].4-Nov-89.09:18:18.CERF>
Date: 4 Nov 89 14:18:00 GMT
References: <299@dranet.dra.com>
Sender: daemon@ucbvax.BERKELEY.EDU
Organization: The Internet
Lines: 24

Sean,

I don;t disagree with your observation that one can probably
never eliminate source-routing in its entirety. However, as
a long-time user of a broken User Agent (which relied on host
tables), I can say with confidence that it was a pleasure to
move to a user agent which had regular access to DNS information.
I was unable to respond conveniently to about 25% of the messages
that arrived using the older system.

Consequently, I think it would be helpful to pursue the goal of
outfitting as many systems as possible with reliable access to
DNS.

As to source routing specifically, it has always seemed to me
a problem to know which gateways to route through. Figuring
out ab initio how to route to a bitnet user has always been
awkward for me, at any rate. Once I memorized a likely
gateway/relay, they'd retire the darn thing, for instance.
Replying to a message received from a source routing sender
is a little easier, assuming, of course, that the relay is
known to DNS or is in your host table (sigh).

Vint Cerf