Path: utzoo!utgpu!news-server.csri.toronto.edu!mailrus!iuvax!purdue!mentor.cc.purdue.edu!l.cc.purdue.edu!cik
From: cik@l.cc.purdue.edu (Herman Rubin)
Newsgroups: comp.mail.misc
Subject: Re: Will there be a Great Unified Net?
Summary: There is a good alternative.  It is still avaiable.  Let us use it.
Message-ID: <2204@l.cc.purdue.edu>
Date: 29 May 90 19:27:41 GMT
References: <1024@mpirbn.UUCP> <91734@mamnix.as.sub.org>
Followup-To: comp.mail.misc
Organization: Purdue University Statistics Department
Lines: 23

In article <91734@mamnix.as.sub.org>, box@mamnix.as.sub.org (Fido Daemon) writes:
> 
> A great unified net is almost impossible! Every net uses its own
> software, every net has another mail time. How can it be managed
> to make 10,000 or more BBSes to switch to a new, "Great Unified"
> network from today to tomorrow? This would be so much administra-
> tion work...

I have suggested before that we "solve" the problem by blocking it out
of existence.  We need only have a block which says, "If you are not
already at the site next to this blodk, do not read further.  That site
is responsible for proceeding further.  But transmit the information."

The site next to the blodk then must remove the block and proceed on
whatever net's protocol it finds.  There may be more blocks to cause
more forwarding procedures.

This may not be optimal, but it should be easy to implement.  I have
too much bounced mail, some of which my postmaster is still stuck with.
-- 
Herman Rubin, Dept. of Statistics, Purdue Univ., West Lafayette IN47907
Phone: (317)494-6054
hrubin@l.cc.purdue.edu (Internet, bitnet)	{purdue,pur-ee}!l.cc!cik(UUCP)