Path: utzoo!utgpu!news-server.csri.toronto.edu!rutgers!mcdchg!chinet!les From: les@chinet.chi.il.us (Leslie Mikesell) Newsgroups: comp.mail.uucp Subject: Re: Imminent death of UUCP Zone predicted Message-ID: <1990Jul2.203300.1673@chinet.chi.il.us> Date: 2 Jul 90 20:33:00 GMT References: <2680D75A.2C1F@tct.uucp> Organization: Chinet - Public Access UNIX Lines: 66 In article karl_kleinpaste@cis.ohio-state.edu writes: >I respectfully disagree. Domain-coping mailers have existed for >UUCP-only sites since at least 1985, when smail 2.1 came out. Smail >2.5 hasn't been patched or otherwise updated officially (e.g., via >Horton, Auton, et al) since 1987. Five years is darn well plenty of >time to have expected people to have gotten registered. Perhaps *you* have been doing mail administration for five years, but I suspect most unix sites are a lot newer than that, and their administrators are correspondingly less experienced. >It's an existence proof, and nothing more: You (the editorial "you," >meaning all ".uucp" site admins) haven't yet registered, and you've >had a bloody long time in which to do so; therefore I have no reason >to expect that you ever will unless forced. I have been tempted on >several occasions to stop acknowledging the pseudodomain .uucp much as >I have been tempted to stop acknowledging .bitnet. But in fact, you handle it admirably. Here's the results of some messages sent from Compuserve via the internet gateway: The domain fb.com is actually handled by machine afbf05 which happens to have a map entry curtesy of uunet. Machine afbf01 doesn't have its own map entry but is shown as a node in the map entry for chinet. sent to: >INTERNET: les@fb.com From uunet!compuserve.com!70010.266 From: Les Mikesell To: The Received: lines show the path through saqqara -> uunet -> afbf05 sent to: >INTERNET: les@afbf05.uucp From uunet!compuserve.com!70010.266 From: Les Mikesell To: There are 2 Received: lines for saqqara, then rutgers ->uunet -> afbf05 sent to: >INTERNET: les@afbf01.uucp From gargoyle!compuserve.com!70010.266 From: Les Mikesell To: There are 2 Received: lines for saqqara, then rutgers ->oddjob.uchicago.edu ->gargoyle->chinet->afbf01 These headers are all replyable due to routing software in the places that need it, although I would prefer to have the To: and From: kept in @ notation. Note that rutgers has no problem finding afbf01.uucp (nor does uunet) even though it does not have its own map entry. >Note that I don't "sabotage" stuff.uucp in the sense you seem to mean. >I do rewrite such things from "somebody@stuff.uucp" to "stuff!somebody." >As far as I can see, the two are semantically equivalent. I simply >refuse to hand "somebody@stuff.uucp" to an SMTP-reached site. There >are a surprisingly large number of them that (correctly) refuse to >acknowledge ".uucp." I send them "stuff!somebody@cis.ohio-state.edu." Hmmm, pretty much kills any chance of replying. Fortunately you don't do the same to the To: address. Note above that other sites do not treat ! and @ addresses alike, semantically equivalent or not. Les Mikesell les@chinet.chi.il.us