Path: utzoo!attcan!uunet!cs.utexas.edu!usc!apple!vsi1!daver!lynx!m5 From: m5@lynx.uucp (Mike McNally) Newsgroups: comp.mail.uucp Subject: Re: Imminent death of UUCP Zone predicted Message-ID: <7871@lynx.UUCP> Date: 3 Jul 90 14:58:47 GMT References: <1990Jun28.164938.23367@DSI.COM> <3008.268b1e9a@mccall.com> <26669@ditka.UUCP> Organization: Lynx Real-Time Systems, Inc., Campbell CA Lines: 24 As a relative novice to the strange world of electronic mail management, I'm not quite sure of what the "politically correct" sentiment is towards the maintenance of the pathalias-style maps. Is it a wish of the Illuminati that the map system will vanish when everybody has a registered MX? Correct me with violent sarcastic flames if I'm wrong, but it seems to me that there's something to be said for the flexibility in routing afforded by the current technology of local dialed uucp connections. If, on the other hand, the map system is thought to be a Good Thing, then what difference does it make that one has to poll a not-quite-local or even a long-distance site (like uunet maybe) for an MX, since much (most?) traffic will still be through local uucp neighbors? I know that's true for me; of course, the overwhelming majority of traffic here is either news or junk sent between here and customer sites over direct uucp link. Am I being hopelessly dense or what? I guess I might feel different if I were operating a private machine out of my apartment, but even for a relatively small firm like Lynx the $100 or so a month for uunet service seems manageable. -- Mike McNally Lynx Real-Time Systems uucp: {voder,daver}!lynx!m5 phone: 408 370 2233 Where equal mind and contest equal, go.